method of a review
What does it take to critique a building? Can review of a structure have a method? A series of set rules to stage and sustain a description of how an identified architecture performs in the context it is located in. To write about buildings as a job requires a process standardization a set of things to have, say repeated overtime. Survey perhaps which suggests an image of the building as narrated both in the physical and theoretical context. Publishing of an architecture serves as an update within the industry and those following it the ongoing progress, the latest in trends and ideas. Inspiration may be as a result be summed up between the two factors. Quest for a method should be a process built over time. The first stages are essentially a sample to observe how this delirious mechanization of documentation should materialize.
Assignment from Australian Design Review to locate a residence designed by an architectural practice based in Mumbai is an intimidation to get the idea going. To pick such a practice is to assemble first the database, group of tentative candidates to fit production type locally available. The ideal may be difficult to locate or irregular to argue a situation for, but the unique can be easily found. Such is the case for ArchitectureBrio and their House on the Stream. Validation of the project is a gathering of known references on work by Robert Verrijt and Shefali Balwani and the structure. These background researches prepares the meeting with the architects. Perceptive imposed by the practice is of process primarily in drawing and not building.
Interview over skype is a discussion of the ideas making space. How does someone who has conceived a structure explain their work? What becomes important is that which is unseen, processes to have lead to the structure as to be put on display. The structure is an object to reach its form based on points of interest as seen by its creators. Conversations is limited to conception and all leading to it as its the area of control which the architects have over period of the construction phase. Only to describe a discussion with the architects is for a degree flawed to coherently critiquing the building. The purpose of the text to capture the development process is only limited as a theoretical review a result of a dialogue. The review in essence can limit to this stage as most required ideas to be tapped are coagulated here.
Spatial operations are visible only at the walk around. What does it taken then to relate this presented perceptive a result of conversations on an imagined ideal conception narrative? For the ideal there is a required pursuit to establish the theory on the site where its said to locate. Photography of the building is its unfolding, to a degree at-least. Time designated for the shoot is one of the worst parts of Mumbai year in the thick of monsoons. With construction nearing completion the site cannot be stated as ideal to capture its essence. Pouring rain and incomplete landscaping are the core problems to deal with. The structure is inserted into the ecosystem and its program distributed over site. Entrance leading directly towards the dining area is the first of experience the house is directed against. One passes through the master bedroom and swimming pool along the right with the stream cutting across them. As we enter the dining area the rest of the house unfolds.
Even when conversations are focused on the context and the location of the the building within context to have these captured on record isn’t considered. Though the two tasks of interview and documenting the building has to a degree done simultaneously and now there is an disjuncture on how both activities are conducted. Text and images don’t necessarily complement. For this case it can be excused as the data collection for the article and image production are isolated endeavors. In present dissemination strategies the image is the consumed entity and text explains the content. An integrated task is still an unknown in the review method. Editorial agenda is the plot to question. Is the method on how a project is published a ploy which the publication controls or can a freelance review team submit under its creative leverage its been hired against? Method of sorts could border between location of personal agenda to continuing shifting mandates as per the publication one chooses to associate against.
Problems a part of the review could be considered absent. Reason for picking a structure for publishing is mostly done for its merits and never for direct criticism. Factors wrong with the building is avoided since space allocated to actual review is limited. Errors of design in an evaluated critical reading may be a vital part of reading a structure but contributory in developing core opinion group to finally find its way into print. For the stream house distributing the program in the landscape creates a core security concern among its owners. How does one lock the place down? The site edge is porous since the plot is relatively large and structures occupy one part of the property. Spacial identity the program sort to achieve isn’t very evident and is confusing to a guest to the property. Grey unfinished concrete though sleek projects a cold context instead of warmth one expects of a residential property. Aesthetically aligned openings have been complained as too large for being actually functional and at least on the day of the visit letting in a sizable amount of rainwater into the rooms. Lack of overhangs have been the complaint, which the client assured be accommodated after the architects have completed the contract and handed over the project.
To see a building is to understand it through the eyes of the client. Fortunately for us on the day of the visit the client made an impromptu visit to the property. As their second home, retreat from the city residence the site caters to the entertainment requirements of the owners. Working from the city residence and retreating for fun is the principle program. In love with nature the clients present their aspirations of how they see the place become and adapt to their needs over time. Relating the aspiration of clients and of the architects, coupling both into an image in built form is the ideal path for a critique. The review of the building is a state of understanding presented between ideas of space as designed by the architect and the client who’s needs have to be catered to as a result of the established intervention. This too is of the several possible method models to consider against.
To sum this quasi chronicle, if there can be a method it needs to be found between several aspects. The process of production of the design of the building whatever might be its program. This production method compares to the context where the practice is based off. Influences of climes of production may be considered. Clients and their brief of the kind of structure and space they can accommodated which is hinged off on the site with the project budgets allocated for it. Then comes the actual documentation of spaces which is to try and bring together the various forces. Errors, problems and discrepancy in aspects of context - client - costs and designer attitudes adds to the narrative. If one documents the critique process these are the things which are encountered. They can all be captured in concoct but will they be retained in the final edit is a matter of question? What one is left with is a documentation, for that essence a data capture method to be consistently applied. In this limit can then emerge a review published as required by a dissemination framework.