This blog is for INDA students investigating the relationships between beliefs and buildings. This will be the digital venue for posting student work, commentary among students, and critiques.
Good analysis! I really appreciate the fact that your work is not just descriptive; it doesn't only tell us the parables you mentioned, but tells us why or how they work. Very good. These are some suggestions about how you should move forward:
__First of all, if you want your audience to believe in your good and interesting analysis, YOU MUST VISUALIZE IT. Your boards are way too verbal for now. There is no way your audience will read everything or listen to your every word. Thus, unless you find a way to make your work more visual, you will waste it. __you could try a more visual, time sequence format, like a comic book. BUT, DON'T USE PHOTOS OR DOWNLOADED CUTESY CARTOONS. MAKE YOUR OWN. Try using live trace in Illustrator or draw by hand. For example, don't tell us the various steps of indoctrinating a mouse in superstition--SHOW US THESE STEPS. Do the same for the athlete and the Pigeon. I.e. show us a step by step elevation of these experiments.
__your statistics are also important, but you do not emphasize anything. How do you visually emphasize: larger text, colorful text for the most important statistics; larger icons, etc. Again, look at website about infographics. Check out http://www.coolinfographics.com/ __look at any given page, ask yourself what are the first pieces of information that jump out at you, and why are those the pieces of information that jump out at you. How is the text, typography, color working to capture your attention and communicate a message in as few words as possible. __on that same note, what do you see first, the information or the background of the diagrams? Your background is both too strong and has nothing to do with the information you are relating.
__I like your first concept model! Very clear first-order translation of the idea of cause-and-effect into a physical manifestation. Good. Now, push it further. For instance, if you stepped on one of these cogs, what would happen--well, nothing. These cogs have no relationship with the physical movement of a pedestrian as a pedestrian steps onto them. You should come up with another device that produces an effect for every pedestrian 'cause'--each step, each glance, etc. This involves looking at behavior. What do people do on your site? What do people do with the PROGRAM you are putting on this site? How can your architecture produce an effect that attends these 'casuses' or behaviors and makes people believe in something new? __stop thinking of the space only in plan. Start thinking 3 dimensionally!!!!! __check out the work of Fischli/Weiss. They deal primarily with the idea of "contingency:" how one thing depends upon another. Check out this video of their most celebrated work, "The Way Things Go:" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXrRC3pfLnE __you can also look up "Rube Goldberg Machines" as other cause-and-effect examples __then ask yourself, how do you get someone to participate in this time and time again? What program or site location can make them do this? What program could you put in the water to make the "enter" the water again and again? __ask yourself, what do people already believe about your site? Do people believe the water is clean? No. Then how can you change their belief? Or, do people think the water is solid? Can you walk on water? No. Can your architecture change this belief? These are just 2 examples. What are the existing beliefs, what are the ideas you want users to believe, and how do you get them to engage with your architecture such that they will believe it. __Have an answer to these questions--in a visual format--posted on the blog by Friday at 1 pm.
__Finally, if you are showing a site plan, please show all of the site! Why would you not show the roads? The sidewalks? The Architecture building? Are they not important? If they are not shown you are saying they do not matter. I would disagree.
Good analysis! I really appreciate the fact that your work is not just descriptive; it doesn't only tell us the parables you mentioned, but tells us why or how they work. Very good. These are some suggestions about how you should move forward:
ReplyDelete__First of all, if you want your audience to believe in your good and interesting analysis, YOU MUST VISUALIZE IT. Your boards are way too verbal for now. There is no way your audience will read everything or listen to your every word. Thus, unless you find a way to make your work more visual, you will waste it.
__you could try a more visual, time sequence format, like a comic book. BUT, DON'T USE PHOTOS OR DOWNLOADED CUTESY CARTOONS. MAKE YOUR OWN. Try using live trace in Illustrator or draw by hand. For example, don't tell us the various steps of indoctrinating a mouse in superstition--SHOW US THESE STEPS. Do the same for the athlete and the Pigeon. I.e. show us a step by step elevation of these experiments.
__your statistics are also important, but you do not emphasize anything. How do you visually emphasize: larger text, colorful text for the most important statistics; larger icons, etc. Again, look at website about infographics. Check out http://www.coolinfographics.com/
__look at any given page, ask yourself what are the first pieces of information that jump out at you, and why are those the pieces of information that jump out at you. How is the text, typography, color working to capture your attention and communicate a message in as few words as possible.
__on that same note, what do you see first, the information or the background of the diagrams? Your background is both too strong and has nothing to do with the information you are relating.
__I like your first concept model! Very clear first-order translation of the idea of cause-and-effect into a physical manifestation. Good. Now, push it further. For instance, if you stepped on one of these cogs, what would happen--well, nothing. These cogs have no relationship with the physical movement of a pedestrian as a pedestrian steps onto them. You should come up with another device that produces an effect for every pedestrian 'cause'--each step, each glance, etc. This involves looking at behavior. What do people do on your site? What do people do with the PROGRAM you are putting on this site? How can your architecture produce an effect that attends these 'casuses' or behaviors and makes people believe in something new?
__stop thinking of the space only in plan. Start thinking 3 dimensionally!!!!!
__check out the work of Fischli/Weiss. They deal primarily with the idea of "contingency:" how one thing depends upon another. Check out this video of their most celebrated work, "The Way Things Go:" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXrRC3pfLnE
__you can also look up "Rube Goldberg Machines" as other cause-and-effect examples
__then ask yourself, how do you get someone to participate in this time and time again? What program or site location can make them do this? What program could you put in the water to make the "enter" the water again and again?
__ask yourself, what do people already believe about your site? Do people believe the water is clean? No. Then how can you change their belief? Or, do people think the water is solid? Can you walk on water? No. Can your architecture change this belief? These are just 2 examples. What are the existing beliefs, what are the ideas you want users to believe, and how do you get them to engage with your architecture such that they will believe it.
__Have an answer to these questions--in a visual format--posted on the blog by Friday at 1 pm.
__Finally, if you are showing a site plan, please show all of the site! Why would you not show the roads? The sidewalks? The Architecture building? Are they not important? If they are not shown you are saying they do not matter. I would disagree.