Notes to Self

I had my second review this morning. This time my adviser (Meejin) and my readers (Andrew Scott and John Fernandez) were all present. I presented my project without using the word “pastiche” which was helpful for me, but I’m not sure the reader were clear. Also, John could only stay for about 20 minutes, so it was rushed.

Before I forget I’m going to try and record some of their notes.

John Fernandez

The thesis needs to have a reason for programmatic overlap. What are its advantages? Look at three conditions in the urban environment:

1.) Surveillance (or views, alternatively)

2.) Circulation and threshold (how to move from one place to another)

3.) Super-imposed activities (are there activities which might coexist neatly that don’t arrive by natural means?)

Precedent: Chelsea Piers

Andrew Scott

Use the idea of commercial viability as a reason for this projects’ existence. Look at the site more carefully. How does this project interact with the “urban fabric”? Does it comment on the nature of community? Work at the scale of the site model.

Precedent: Edgemont Development

Meejin Yoon

How can poche (an abandoned architectural technique) be of use? How does this relate to pastiche? Look more carefully at fractals in 3d. Make an academic argument. Clarify the relationship between fake and authentic.

Precedent: Church of Santa Maria della Pace in Rome

———————————————————————————–

So now, I’m going to build a sectional site model and make some 3d fractals. No more diagrams!

Filed under: Uncategorized