Posted by BRUTUS on October 03, 2002 at 08:29:44:
In Reply to: Re: is the corridor the only way to transfer between two architectural spaces? posted by Paul Malo on October 03, 2002 at 06:39:40:
well sir you have struck the heart of the illness!
the problem concerning design process ,and pre-assumption that the building is inherently an assemblage of rooms and halls....
- the room concept
- the door-lined tube ,whether single loaded or doubleloaded
- conventional corridor as figural space(a clear shape...)-the black color urban perceptual figures as SOLIDS,and white color urban perceptual figures as VOIDS or - ive spaces....
- object fixation to see the "black" solids and the space being total "residual" or consequential due to placing the solids
- pre-modern urban design with their spatial instinctive perception for the importance of negative spaces....
the piazzas is an interisting example,needless to say about the natural VISTA or the intented vista created later after the renaissance with statues ,obelisques,fountains....etc
the two foms of perception is similar to the two perceptual views in sculpture,whether should we construct a "form" step by step with clay,or should we carve an intialsolid block like a marble rock to reach our intended form.
well we can not invoke a VISTA ,as a powerful architectural spatial perspective ,if we intiate the "black" perception solely,the example of the arch de deffence in france is an interisting example as once implied by jacques in a previous thread
to start from "the general"the spatial surrounding,your word "contiguous space" is marvelous,to avert the concave in favour of convex condition
i had always felt the two kinds of architectural perceptions is similar to the antagonistic logic between the inductive reasoning and the deductive reasoning,well should i modify it to inductive perception and the deductive perception.
were the inductive perception :will be to an external observer,from special figures to general view,which reflect the notion that an assumed universal truth of a theorem is by showing that if it is true of any particular case,it is true of the next case in a series ,or that is true of any particular case(the affirmation of a perceptual law),this is widely preached as a sacred doctrine nowadays between postmodernist theorists,architects,and of course we shouldn't forget worshipers ,on the other hand,deductive perception: which could be highly controversial for some people,aim to have a general view ,which can leads to special set of figures,an explicit notion not an implicit one,Lalande had defined deduction as the operation through which one rigorously concludes from one or more propositions as premises another proposition,which necsssary consequence according to logical rules...