However, through 'purifying' the construction of a Gothic cathedral by coding its formal arrangements into a coherent set of digital operations, Spuybroek's argument alienates design from the spatial and temporal realities that contribute to its vitality. Fundamental to his position is the assumption that knowledge about the process of how a work was produced does not preclude its sensational affect; that the digital can produce a similar affect to that of hand craft. What does the reproducibility of a work offer us, if only an ideological position?
I would argue the conflation between digital and craft today takes on a new set of relations that aren't accounted for in Spuybroek's argument. The acts of design and construction are not linear as he presents them. In fact, diverse and divergent contingencies contribute to both our understanding of a form and what ultimately shapes its material reality. Participants with varying levels of interest and commitment to the project inform much of what we can't quantify.
Accordingly, the stuff that exists around the building, or more specifically the means of construction is entirely relevant to our understanding. Emblematic would be Neil Denari's HL23 and Gaudi's Sagrada Familia. Both of these projects can describe asynchronous spatial and temporal realities that contribute to their realization. Whether facade panels are fabricated in distant geographic regions, or the building's construction persists through multiple generations, we can understand examples of non-linear, hybrid modes constituting design and construction. Monsters, as Bruno Latour might suggest.
"[T]he north and south curtain walls (produced in Dongguan Province, China) were shipped in mega-panel assemblies allowing for rapid erection and a uniform appearance across the folded surfaces." Accordingly, participants in distant geographic regions feedback on the construction process.
"CAD technology has been used to accelerate construction of the building, which had previously been expected to last for several hundred years, based on building techniques available in the early 20th century.Current technology allows stone to be shaped off-site by a CNC Machine whereas in the 20th century, the stone was carved by hand."
We need not only examine spectacular examples. Ultimately, Spuybroek's argument remains blind to the significance of the "ugly buildings, unbearable DVDs, dissaffected design, and useless printed matter." This moral detritus of modernization is perhaps where we may find greatest convergence between John Ruskin and Charles Babbage--where digital design may find new agency.
No comments:
Post a Comment