jsullivanText BoxOffered through the Research Office for Novice Design Education, LSU, College of Art and Design, School of Architecture.

r Mohammcd ~ ~ l c h Uddin Sou them Univcl-si ty Basic Design and Architectural Design: The Missing Link [Disconnection and proximity between basic design and functional amhitectural design]

Abstract: As long as basic design (whether two- or threedimen- s i o ~ l ) is viewed as a purely compositio~l undertaking, with architecture playing only a non-related peripheral role, basic design will be considered as individual pieces of 2-0 and 3-0 visual a n projects totally disconnected from functional architectural projects at the next studio levels. Perhaps what is lacking is a funatmental under- standing ofthe continuity andcontiguiryofthe basicdesign exercises as a logical transition into architectural design exercises.

The objective of this paper is to focus on the strength of basic design exercises as a tool to prepare students to encounter architectural design exercises. A significant portion of the paper presents examples ofprojects empha- sizing the linkage between basic design andfunctional architectural design through slides.

The paper will broadly investigate following concerns: l What is basic design and what is it's relationship with architectural design l Should basic design be required for architectural design Does teaching basicdesign contribuse to the development of creativity l Level of clarity and ambiguity in their connection and proximity

Recommendations to integrate basic design into archi- tecture studios

There is no debate that all tangible visual arts share the same principles and elements of design. From primitive Afn'can sculpture to modem painting, a jarfrom Crete to a high-tech piece of architecture -allare primarily based on the same aesthetic sensibility. Thus understanding principles of design is a prerequisite for any designer. The study of basic design at beginning architecture studios is fonnuhted to address this signijicant issue. But ofren students are not aware of how it relates to their studio projects at a later level. (This paper does not go into the debate as to whether basic design is needed at all to create architectural design. Rather, it attempts to focus on its advamges for integrating into a studio.) It is possible to

introduce projects at intermediate and upper level archi- tecture studios to integrate and reinforce the learning that startedat the beginning levelsof studios. But it is important that w e m a meaningF1 relevance and linking stmtegy at our early courses within the total curriculum of the archi- tecture program.

In my third-year architectural design studio teaching, I found that students who had Little or no exposure to formal and compositional basic design concerns produced unso- phisticated designs with poor arrangement of spaces. Since compositio~l skill is nonexistent, whatever the idea or concept behind the design, it never produces an efi- cienr, exciting arrangement of spaces. Thismay beparticu- larly evident in complex problems where a variety of functions need to be grouped and sub-grouped with hier- archy. I found an eflective and useful way to introduce basic &sign in conjunction with architectural design in my studios, which helped to overcome this deficiency. In each studio 1 start with a two- to four-week assignment where students deal with abstract projects focused more toward basic design and compositwnal concerns in 3-D form- volume. Two such projects are illustrated here with graph- ics a d o r photographs.

The first project is a typical beginning studio exercise "entry-path-place" conceived as a compositional basic design exercise at it's first phase. The focus is to create a free spatial expression in horizontal direction. The goals are defmition, articulation, investigation and experimen- tation with the basic elements of design. The second phase of the project juxtaposes program of a lighthouse and a telecommunicatwns tower. The program has a similar emphasis in terms of organization of circulation and com- position (except it's direction is vertical). And since stu- dents dealt with mampulation of components in the first phase, integration of form, function, structure, material andmeaning getspriority in this phase. The resultingfinal project is much more rich, detailed and involved. The students relate more clearly between the connection of two phases and take advantagefrom the learnings of the earlier phase.

1 Mohrrmmcd Salch Uddin

Fig. 4 Synthetical : Combining componentdconstituent elements into a unified element. 'Entry-Path-Place" a third year beginmng proja: c ~ l n i v a l as a cornpositid basic design exercise at it's first X NPfiW.l ConCermct on Teaching the Bcgiming Design Studart

Fig. 5.A. 5 B : Model: -Entry-Path-Place" a thin1 year heginning project, conceived as a compositional hasic design exercise at it's first p h n ~

I Mohammed Salch Uddin

Second phase of 'Entry-Path-Place" Juxraposes prognun of a "Lighthouse and Telecommunications Towan. Similar organizational emphasis in vertical direction. (3rd yr. studio. Savannah College of Art and Design)

X National Conference a, Teaching the Beginning Des i i Student

'=

First set of models. Reforming volumebic form. Emphasis on pure basic desibm manipulation.

Second set of models. Refining volumetric form. Emphasis on exploration of individual mhitectural elements; e.g. wall plane,

openings m wall responding to path systemls and space.'s, and volumet~ic mass. (3rd yr. design studio. Southern University School of Architecture)

'i' .L - . ,. . %zr -

: ;:&&,:T:~--, ,--j*:* ,. &&,&.&!*I.,:

-.-

Final Model for the Studio-Living Units. Functions are introd~sed to rapture the essence of basic design w d t o rest the interclepzndzncy of function and form.

(3rd yr. design studio. Southern University School of .r\rchltezn~re) .

TCata N d a d C o d e m w T d i the B q i d q g Desigo Student

=first phase of the second project deals more with the aesthetics and integrity of three resm'cted form-volume: a cube, a triangle anda cylinder. This phase isa pure basic design exercise dealing with the understanding of compo- sition, treatment of planur wall, and volumetric mass. Emphasis is placed on eqloring individual elements; e.g. wall plane, opening on wall responding to the path system and space. Each student produce nine to eighteen models before going to second phase. The secondphase deals with the intervention of a set offunctions in to the restricted form The objective is to see how they aflect each other. A program for Gift shop and studio-living for four students with a specific site is given. Functions are introduced to recapture the essence of basic design and to test the interdependency offunction and form The resultingproject shows a clear understanding of design components and creates a healthy ground for discussion beyond the ar- rangement offunctiotls in the jury. I found that when given a clear compositio~~framework within which to work (regardless of the immensity of the project) and given thefreedom to think that buildings are basic design exercises, students initially undermine their capability, as well as question the valiciity of such a design process. But as soon as they stan working in their first phase of the project they find joy and discover endless possibilities of manipulating the design At this point they seem to be ready to abandon their preconceived ideas of buildings andexcessive verbal explanation as a substitute for their design andgraphics. This connection between the basic design and the archirectural design helps students to realize that basic design principles are not limited to one an but are indeed the basic language of all visual an. including architecture.

CONCERN:

A s long as basic design (whether two- or three- dimensional) is viewed as a purely compositional undertaking, with architecture playing only a non-related peripheral role, basic design will be considered as individual pieces of 2-D and 3-D visual art projects totally disconnected from functional architectural projects at the next studio levels. Perhaps what is lacking is a fundamental understanding of the continuity and contigu- ity of the basic design exercises as a logical transition into architectural design exercises.

The objective of this paper is to focus on the strength of

basic design exercises as a tool to prepare students to encounter architectural design exercises. A significant portion of the paper presents examples of projects empha- sizing the linkage between basic design and functional architectural design through slides.

There is no debate that all tangible visual arts share the same principles and elements of design. From primitive African sculpture to modern painting, a jar from Crete to a high-tech piece of architecture -all are primarily based on the same aesthetic sensibility. Thus understanding prin- ciples of design is a prerequisite for a 6 designer.

The study of basic &sign at beginning architecture studios is formulated to address this significant issue. But often students are not aware of how it relates to their studio projects at a later level. m i s paper does not go into the debate as to whether basic design is needed at all to create architectural design. Rather, it attempts to focus on its advantages for integrating into a studio.) It is possible to introduce projects at intermediate and upper level architec- ture studios to integrate and reinforce the learning that started at the beginning levels of studios. But it is important that we find a meaningful relevance and linking strategy at our early courses within the total curriculum of the archi- tecture program.

Almost all architectural schools have one or more course1 s in the first-year level of the curriculum &ding with the basic design issues. Webster's dictionary defines the word "basic*' as: "of, relating to, or forming the base or essence, fundamental, essential, irreducible, constituting or serving as the basis or starting point" Logically, a basic design course for architecture is the fundamental course for pre- paring a student to encounter architectural design. Since architectural design encompasses issues of various dimen- sions, it is expected that basic design will take care of most of the compositional aspects of a design problem. More specifically this aspect primarily deals with the organiza- tional pattern in both two and three dimensions at the schematic level of the architectural design development.

Basic design courses are generally designated as "Theories of Architecture," "Basic Design," "3-D Design," "Inm duction to Design," and the like. Most students in these classes are confused to a certain extent about the clarity of the assigned project, understanding the focus of the project, the process of attacking the problem, logistic approach to

X Nntioonl Codemwe m Teaching the Begimiog Desigo Student

the solution, relevancy to the field of major, and most important, the connection to realistic architectural design exercises.

It is noteworthy that in the last ten or fifteen years this situationhas changed significantly. Those who were trained in the sixties and seventies may distinguish the differences readily. During that period, projects with sticks, cardboard pieces, straws and other such materials were viewed as pure basic &sign exercises with the emphasis on three- dimensional compositional concerns. The relationship to architecture was either ignored or not considered impor- tant t express.

In the recent past that concern has been diverted into several distinctive directions - all relating more toward architecture itself. It is simcant to note that current beginning design projects from different schools now relate more to architecture in a straightforward manner. Particular emphasis is placed on individual components of architecture, vocabulary of architectlPal design, under- standing of structure, understanding of climate, analysis of historical precedents and so forth.

Keeping in mind the status of current trends, basic design exercises for architectural education may be divided into the following four categories:

1. Compositional: Two- and three-dimensional: empha- sis on principles of design (Figs: 1.A through 1.G ) Ex- ample: Two-dimensional figure-ground 'cutpaper' projects and three-dimensional board, stick, mixed media. Creating a composition with five black squares on a white ground, or creating a tk-dimensional composition with planes and lines (may be implied).

2. Structural: Evolution and construction of three-dirnen- sional form (tangible material / tangible form: emphasis on elements and principles of design) (Figs: 2A and 2. B). Example: Three-dimensional line, plane, volume, con- struction. Constructing a stick bridge or a cardboard stool.

3. Analytical: Analysis, study, abstraction, and represen- tation of components of signikmt precedents (art and architecture) (Figs: 3A and 3B).

Example: Analysis and representation of Le Corbusier's V i Savoye in a schematic model with a minimum num-

ber of components, or analysis of planer wall of Le Corbusier' s Ronchamp Chapel, or representation of Gerrit Rietveld's Schroder House only in lines and planes.

4. Synthetical: Combining componentsfconstituent ele- ments into one unitied design element, or one whole design. Example: Study, creation, and combination of individual design components (entry, path, place, facade) into one integrated design. (Fig: 4).

OBSERVATION: In my third-year architectural design studio teaching, I found that students who had little or no exposure to formal and compositional basic design concerns produced unso- phisticated designs with poor arrangement of spaces. Since compitional skill is nonexistent, whatever the idea or concept behind the design, it never produces an efficient, exciting arrangement of spaces. This may be particularly evident in complex problems where a variety of functions need to be grouped and sub-grouped with hierarchy. I found an effective and useful way to introduce basic design in conjunction with architectural design in my studios, which helped to overcome this deficiency. In each studio I start with a two- to four-week assignment where students deal with abstract projects focused more toward basic design and compositional concerns in 3-D form-volume. Two such projects are illustrated here with graphics andlor photographs.

These two projects represent two diverse student groups in terms of their level of preparation in the first two years of architectural education. The first project represents third year studio work from The Savannah College of Art and Design. These students are exposed to at least fifteen credit hours of two- and three-dimensional design and freehand drawing classes. In addition to those courses, they usually take another fifteen hours of drawing graphics andlor introduction to architecture and theory. Because of their exposure to the field of art, students seem to take architec- ture to its extreme, more toward an idea, rather than a tangibly built fonn with sp-c enclosure/s. In some cases the idea becomes so overwhelming that the student prefers to express the idea in literature (text), rather than in design graphics. I find this expression very incomplete.

The second project represents third-year studio work from Southern University at Baton Rouge. Students at Southern

Tcntb N s t i d Code- on Tcacbiug tbe Beginning *dent

Mohammed Saleh Uddin

m required to take only six hours of graphics and another six hours of beginning design studios. Most of these students lack the basic compositional skills necessary to communicate an architectud idea. As aresult they imme- diately rely on preconceived ideas about buildings. To them design starts with fixed dimensions. Puning together all of the requid square footage and incorporating beat- ing, ventilation and air conditioning takes priority over design manipulation. The resulting product becomes more a space planning solution, executed without understanding the total context of the design. At this point, these students seem to see design as fragments of static solutions.

In both cases I found that inaoducing a basic design exercise and transforming it into an architectural problem was beneficial for the students as well as the instructor. Students seemed to appreciate and gmp the ideaof thought- ful manipulation of form and space at this level. It became easy for an instructor to spot the weak students and suggest improvement in specific areas.

PART 1: THE LINKING STRATEGY: The first project was a typical beginning studio exercise "entry-path-place" conceived as a compositional basic design exercise in its fmt phase. The focus was to create a free spatial expression in a horizontal direction. The goals were definition, articulation, investigation and experimen- tation with the basic elements of design. Students were asked to create three specific design entities: "The Entry." "The Path," and ''The PlaceISpace," with abstract repre- sentation of architectural elements; i.e.. floors, walls, ceil- ings as planes, and columns and beams as lines. As an initial guideline students were given a few sketches show- ing the schematic relationship of entry, path and place. The program asked for a free spatial expression of architectural space-form-function, not denotative to any preconceived images ofbuildings. The exploration process recommended use of contrast in geometry and creation of dynamics in asymmetry. Figures 4, 5A and 5.B illustrate the f i ~ l submission of two such projects in drawings and models. ' be second phase of the project juxtaposed a program of a lighthouse and a telecommunications tower. The intent of tbe project was to demonstrate the implications of the abstract nature of design to solve aprogram which involves response to function, human activity, form manipulation, visual appearance, emotional content, consauction mate-

rial, and technological advancement. This project dealt with the study of vertical volume in relation to the horizon- taUinclined plane/path or space within and along, and movement through. Re-creation of distinct entry-path/ passage-space was the focus of the assignment. Emphasis was placed on expressing the following: 1) Entryway to the Tower body (with visitors center) 2) Tower body (pathwaylmovement system) 3) Telecommunications, Observation Deck and Astronomer's Gallery (semi-enclosed spaces) 4) Oceanographer or Geologist's Work Station (enclosed spaces) The program had an emphasis similar to the earlier ''Entry- Path-Place*' exercise in terms of organization of circula- tion and composition, except that its direction was vertical. And since students dealt with manipulation of individual components in the first phase, integration of form, func- tion, smcture, material and meaning were given priority in this phase. The resulting final project was much more richly detailed and involved. The students were able to see more clearly the connection between the two phases and to take advantage of what had been learned of the earlier phase. Four such projects are illustrated through f d models ( Figs: 6A through 60).

PART 2: THE LINKING STRATEGY The objective of the second project was to study the power of the limit of quasi-platonic restricted forms in relation to the intervention of a set of specific architectural functions. Emphasis on ordering principles of design, the interrela- tionship of form, space, human function, environmental context, and tectonics were among the learning goals. Exploration of interdependence of requirements of func- tions and forms was a significant aspect. The project was divided into three phases.

The first phase of the project dealt more with the aesthetics and integrity of three restricted form-volumes: a cube, a triangle, and a cylinder. Each student was given one square(30 f t each side), one equilateral triangle (each side 3Mt) and one circle (30ft. diameter) in plan. The vertical dimension of these three forms were 60ft, creating a proportion of 2: 1 in elevation. The forms were enclosed with walls having a uniform thickness of 8 inch. The form- volume was not intended to be a total mass.This phase was a pure basic &sign exercise (figures 7.A and 7. B) dealing

X N.tionJ Coalerrnee on Teaching the Beginning Iksiga Stoded

with the understanding of composition, treamentof planar wall, and volumetric mass. For this phase of the exercise students were asked to redesign all facades, and reform the the given volumetric f m into a pleasingly articulated volume in the following three categories: 1. Pure visual and compositional 2. Emphasis on structural systems of different types, and their connections 3. Design inspired by study and research on one or mote contemporary architectls

The second phase dealt with the emphasis of integration of pathwayls connecting to p W s at varying heights (mini- mum of three levels), with the consideration of camposi- tion of solid-void in all facades. Students were allowed to subaact and add formls, keeping the integrity of the origi- nal form-volume. Emphasis was also placed on explora- tion of individual elements; e-g., wall plane, opening on wall responding to the path systeds and spacels. Each student producednine to eighteen modelsbefore moving to the third and final phase Wgures 8.A ond 8.B).

The f d phase dealt with the intervention of a set of functions (architectural spaces) in to the restricted form. The objective was to see how they affect each other. The project started with a quotation by Rob Krier, "... A longstanding error in contemporary architecture is the belief that there is a logical connection between the func- tion and the form of a building; or even that the latter is a result of the former. But as this irrevocable equation of a direct analogy of function and space, or fonn is nonexist- ent, an attempt was made to create an awiliary theory which ended in a diffused, vague definition and vindication of architecture ..."

A program for a gift shop and studio-living with kitchen and sleeping for four students with a swc site was given. Functions were introduced to recapture the essence of basic design and to test the interdependency of function and form. In this phase intervention of specific functions into the form were introduced to see how they affect each other. A successful intervention honored the importance of both function and form. While inuoducing or forcing the functions to respond or fit into the form-volume, students were asked not to overlook the importauce of functional interrelationships, a sound structural systemls, and design- ing of openings responding to the functions on either side of the wall/s.

The resulting projects Wg.9A & 9B) showed aclear under- standing of individual design components and created a healthy groundwork for discussion beyond the arrange- ment of functions in the jury. Most students realized that rhere is no such absolute truth as b'Form follows Function" or "Function follows Form." They conceded that both should affect each other, but not to such an extent that they lose their identity and integrity.

CONCLUSION: I found that when given a clear compositional framework within which to work (regardless of the immensity of the project) and given the W o m to think that buildings are basic design exercises, students initially undermine their capability, as well as question the validity of such a design pmess. But as soon as they start working in their first phase of the project they find joy and discover endless possibilities of manipulating the design. At this point they seem to be ready to abandon their preconceived ideas of buildings and excessive verbal explanation as a substitute for their design and graphics. This connection between the basic design and the architectural design helps students to realize that basic design pinciples are not limited to one art but are indeed the basic language of all visual art, including architecture.

The projects illustrated here are selected worksfrom third year architecture studios taught both at The Savannah College of Art and Design, Savannah, Georgia and Southern University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Tenth N . t i o d Coderrnee on Teadling tbe w f g ! .Design student

Fig. 1 .F. Three-dimensional form with planes. Soiirce: Wong. Principles of Th~e-dimensional Design, p. 42 Fig. 1 .G. Three-dimensional form with repetitive modules with variations. Source: Wong. Riuciples of Three- dimensional k i g n . p. 42

Tenth Nationd code re^^^ w Teaching the Bcgindng Design Student

-3:. . .- -2 - .. fi : T.. . ; ..-- ";3 ,*;.. ,by: ;< . a.-+ * : ::

&&

2. Shuctllral : Evolution and Construction of threedimensid form (tangible material I tangible form: emphasis on elements and principles of design). Example: ~ i m e n s i o n d cardhorad/stick construction. Coosbucting a stick bridge, or a cardboard stool.

Fig. 2.A. Stick bridge creating a span. Source: Pearce and Pearce. Expriments in Form, p.29. Fig. 2.B. CPrdboard Stool. Source: Pearce and Pearce. Experiments in Form. Pearce and Pearce, p.35

X N & d Conference on Tea- the Beghing Desig~~ Stadent

'L6 I'd ' w d 30 9 ~ 4 ~ W ' Ja ! sV3 Lar~~oag :nmo~ -1aduq3 dareqmox -=Bds ap!slno pm aP!? Jo WFFP ! S I P -Id * s & W X3.E .s!d

covercopyrightcovercopyright

10_UddinM_MissingLink10_UddinM_MissingLink_1.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_10.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_11.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_12.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_13.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_14.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_15.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_2.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_3.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_4.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_5.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_6.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_7.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_8.jpg10_UddinM_MissingLink_9.jpg