2012.05.22 09:41
the ethics of parametricism/emergent architectural thought and reification
Let me add another facet (writing here on the fly, so it may not be all too coherent). Besides the mimicry of a myth (so to speak), is not the whole process of getting the 'code' just the way you want it--the continual tests and retests--also something like an inverted (if you will) form of mimicry: "I know what I want it to look like; I just have to find the right parameters." Or, put in a way (hopefully) like above: "I know what nature I want it to look like, but I still have to figure out the right numbers."
In the little bit of parametrics I've dabbled with, using very old (1996) software, I found that using "numbers" that were outside the 'expected' parameters resulted in the most 'novel' results.
A very early example of the 'playing', 2000.
Does it still just boil down to a sophisticated play of/with geometry?
And adding the 'unexpected' thinking, imagine the image above as the 2-dimentional 'grid' plan of a city. It's like actually stepping out of the mimicry.
| |
2012.05.22 14:55
the ethics of parametricism/emergent architectural thought and reification
...ethicality is not an issue because I'll freely admit to using "parametrics" just to see what geometries might emerge, especially by stepping outside of the "expected" process.
|