W9 - The Lure of the Continuous Skin: Reflection (TE2.3, TE2.5, C4.2, C4.4)

Reflection: Parametricism's Consideration On Human Values and Human Association In Architecture Compared To Its Predecessor.

"Fabricating the Future" (2014) by Neil Leach and Philip Yuan in

their attempt to focus on digital tools and fabrication, materials,
design approach and methodology - a quick example of the
general progress of Parametricism as an "epochal" style.

Before initiating my study on Parametricism, I was well aware on its popularity among the new generation of Architects of the 21^st Century. My enthusiasm on understanding this new architectural ideology was well-driven by the fervour of its practitioners on demonstrating how our technological advancements pave the way to new dimensions of form designs and functional optimisation.

While this technology-oriented architecture style implies the nonessential need of the conventional human interpretation in the design process, it certainly has the capacity to revive the notion of generating human values and enhancing the essence of human association in Architecture. This expectation was developed from my awareness on the actualities of computer modelling on human behaviour towards form and space, as well as the claims which were consistently addressed by the leading practitioners of Parametricism on the need of this architecture style to cater for our new societal behaviour that greatly distinguishes ourselves from our forefathers, or as Patrik Schumacher describe, “the post-fordist network society”.

As an architecture student whose principles value the subtle relationship between man and his built environment, I feel that the aspects of human nature, values and ethics are necessary in the Architecture evolutionary process, especially in this new generation that gradually replaces human capability with technological dependency. After all, these aspects have constantly been in the ancient and traditional architectural discourse, and are observable in the manifestations of the architecture of the past.

This suggestion had guided my search in indicating the extent where Parametricism considers human values and human association in architecture. By going through the Parametricism theoretical discourse that concerns the wellbeing of humanity, I have uncovered the fact that Parametricism does have a theoretical approach that defines the role of architecture on societal function. 

Through spatio-morphological framing of communicative interaction, Architecture is able to frame social behaviour with the use of parametric semiology, and interact with the human senses by parametric phenomenology. The emergence of software’s such as ‘MiArmy’ or ‘AI.implant’ allow architects to determine the functional optimization of parametric semiology by means of visual illustration and computational description through human behavioural modelling within specifically designed environments. There are notable numbers of mostly conceptual and few constructed projects by practitioners of Parametricism that demonstrated this approach; a good example would be the Vienna University of Applied Arts by Magda Smolinska, Marius Cernica, and Monir Karimi. 

However, there is little noteworthy evidence that suggests the use of parametric phenomenology that may have demonstrated the strengthening of interaction between architecture and the human senses, despite the Parametricism’s attribute as an advanced architecture instrument. Perhaps the progress on the exploration of Parametricism has not yet reaches its fullest potential; nevertheless this still implies that Parametricism has little initiation on the topic of human values and association in its architecture manifestation. Moreover, its major contribution on the societal aspect of humanity suggests that it neglects the importance of individuality in human character and the subjective nature of human behaviour.

In terms of the appreciation of human values and association, as generally demonstrated and consistently achieved throughout the ages by traditional architecture (and as demonstrated by Gothic style on last week’s post), the dominant use of computation towards the design process and realisation restricts human creativity, resulting to the absence of natural characteristics in the architecture and consequently dehumanize the built environment by disallowing the human users to appreciate their own existence which may have been projected passively by the contextual elements.   

There is the minority within the sphere of Parametricism who are aware of the importance of these elements, namely Lars Spuybroek, who as Patrik Schumacher personally called the protagonist of Parametricism who has “lost nerve”. Spuybroek has proven his appreciation towards human association with architecture through his most recent projects as well as his extensive research on ornamentation from Gothic architecture, where he emphasized on the characteristics of its style as a product of human imperfection and intuition and the resulting beauty that it projects.

In one of Spuybroek’s prominent project called the “D-Tower”, he put an emphasis on human reaction and incorporates it in his design through active interaction between the user and his built environment. By allowing human feelings to determine the design character of the structure, he connects the users with their built environment and making the structure represents the locals’ behaviour. The structure itself is designed to subtly resemble a silhouette of an organic being, thus removing the distinction of characters between itself and the human users.

Conclusion

Parametricism has indeed the capacity to be the epochal architecture style of the future and today’s generational technology is undeniably useful to optimize architectural functionality. However, without the consideration of the integration of human values and association within the architectural product, as emphasized by the architecture of the past, future generations may not apprehend the significance of our human existence, nor will they appreciate the meaning and capability of our human skills and intelligence. 

In acknowledging the importance of technology as an innovative instrument for the betterment of our lives and the fact that the relationship between man and technology has always been an integral part of sustaining the relevance of our built environment’s architectural evolution, we should also remind ourselves on how we can use our technological marvels to preserve our natural behaviour, rather than allowing ourselves to be fully dependent on the artificial intelligence. Moreover, by using technology to reflect ourselves, we should be able to provide functional optimization for our future generation through Parametricism, while at the same time preserving our human values and our natural behaviour.