Models of Diagnosis and Concept in the Pioneering Architects in Recent Architecture

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2022.208

Keywords:

Architectural issues, architectural concepts, leading architects, today’s architectural approach

Abstract

Architectural sphere evolved into a different direction within the last three decades due to both the development of digital tools and the economic boom, accompanied by the discourses suggesting that radical changes were underway in design and production. In the context thereof, the present study aimed to understand, what today's leading architects considered design input, what factors led them to form, and the conceptual nature of the association they established between form and content. The available texts inked by the renowned architects on their public buildings built between 1990-2020 were accessed via their own web sites and publications. Those briefs were reviewed using textual analysis based on issue and concept notions, remaining loyal to the intra-text context. The conceptual information was then transformed into conceptual categories. The architects were selected among the renowned architects, where the Google Hits method was used to determine the status of being renowned. Accordingly, a total 1146 architectural briefs by 66 renowned architects on their public buildings were analyzed with an aim to transparently see, what was defined as a problem by the designer and by which concepts the designer sought solutions to identified problems. The approaches of recent architects suggested that the architectural discipline maintained its ancient design paradigms, including the quest for function, surroundings, and form, but the way those parameters were addressed and questioned was changed. Furthermore, the spatial configuration-oriented, ecology-oriented, and city-oriented concepts came to the fore, while metaphor and analogy were frequently used. The present study was limited to the own briefs of the renowned architects on public buildings designed between 1990-2020. Unlike the previous studies in the relevant literature, which focused on recent architectural approaches, the present study addressed the subject based on the architects' own texts. Thus, the architect's expression but not the author's interpretation comes to the fore, contributing in the objectivity of the study.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Author Biographies

Dilek Yasar, Istanbul Aydın University

Dilek Yasar holds a master’s degree from Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture, Beykent University in 2012 and a PhD degree from the same university in 2021. She acts as the instructor and coordinator of the interior architecture project courses at Istanbul Aydın University since 2016. She is also the co-head of the interior architecture department. Her research interests include universal design, architectural design and interior architecture, and she published scientific studies on her areas of interest.

Şengül Öymen Gür, Beykent University

Dr. Gür, a graduate of the University of Pennsylvania (GSAS-PhD, 1978), received a Fulbright Scholarship (1972-77) and a grant from the DAAD (2002; 2008). She served at KTU (1971-2009). In 1989, she was promoted to a professorship. Currently, she teaches at Beykent University in Istanbul. She is an active member of CICA (International Committee of Architectural Critics), WA (World Architecture), and the Chamber of Architects, and an intermittent member of IAPS, DRS, CIB W84, and IAHS. She is an honorary member of BTI (Bund Türkischer Ingenieure und Akademiker e. V) and SEA (The Sustainable Environment Association). She also serves as a reviewer of SRE, e-Books, JADE, JAAP, MEGARON, A/Z, Gazi, Uludağ, Trakya, Tasarım+Kuram. She is the author and co-author of 28 books and over 400 articles. She mentored over 100 academics. She is married and has two children.

References

Bagrow, J. P., Rozenfeld, H. D., Bollt, E. M., & Ben-Avraham, D. (2004). How famous is a scientist? - Famous to those who know us. Europhysics Letters (EPL), 67(4), 511–516. https://doi:10.1209/epl/i2004-10104-y

Bell, D. (1973). The Coming of Post-Industrial Society: A Venture in Social Forecasting. Basic Books.

Bergson H. (1922). Creative evolution. Macmillan and Co, Limited St.

Cache, B. (1995). Earth moves: The furnishing of territories. MIT Press.

Carpo M. (2013). Introduction twenty years of digital design. In M. Carpo (Eds.), Digital turn in architecture 1992-2012 (pp.8-14). Wiley and Sons Publication.

Castells, M. (1997). The power of identity. The information age: Economy, society and culture. (Vol. II), A John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Publication.

Colletti, M. (2017). Digital poetics: An open theory of design-research in architecture. Routledge.

Cowdroy, R., & de Graaff, E. (2005). Assessing highly‐creative ability1. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 30(5), 507–518. https://doi:10.1080/02602930500187113

Daley, S. (2013, September 24). A star architect leaves some clients fuming. New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/arts/design/santiago-calatrava-collects-critics-as-well-as-fans.html.

Gausa, M., Guallart, V., Muller, W., Soriano, F., Porras, F., & Morales, J. (2003). The metapolis dictionary of advanced architecture. Actar.

Gero, J. S., & Mc Neill, T. (1998). An approach to the analysis of design protocols. Design Studies, 19(1), 21–61. https://doi:10.1016/s0142-694x(97)00015-x

Güzer, C. A. 2016. Bienal. Antalya’dan geleceğe bakmak. Mimarlık (387): 0–0. https://hdl.handle.net/11511/71477.

Heidegger, M. (1977) The question concerning technology and other essays, W. Lovitt (trans.). Garland Publishing, INC.

Jacobs, J. (1961). The death and life of great American cities, Random House.

Jencks, C. (1997). Nonlinear architecture - new science - new architecture. Architectural Design, (129), 6-7.

Jencks, C. (1991). The Language of Post-modern Architecture. London: Academy edition, Sixth edition, 9.

Kolarevic, B. (2003). Architecture in the digital age. Design and manufacturing. Taylor & Francis.

Kolerevic, B. & Klinger, K. (2008) Manufacturing material effects: rethinking design and making in architecture. Routledge,

Koolhaas, R. (1995). Whatever happened to urbanism? Design Quarterly, (164), 28-31.

Lawson, B. & Dorst, K. (2013). Design expertise. Routledge.

Lozano-Hemmer, R. (1999). Utterance 4 relational architecture. Performance Research, 4(2), 52-56.

Leach, N. (2002). Designing for a digital world. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Leach, N. (2009). Digital morphogenesis. Architectural Design, 79(1), 32-37

Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. The M.I.T. Press.

Lynn, G. (1993). Introduction, folding in architecture. Architectural Design, 63 (3-4), 9-13.

Lynn, Greg. 1998. Fold, Bodies & Blobs. Collected Essays. Ed. Michèle Lachowsky and Joël Benzakin. Books by Architects

Lynn, G. (1999) Animate Form. Princeton Architectural Press, New York.

Mallgrave, F. & Goodman, D. (2011). An introduction to architectural theory, 1968 to the present. Wiley-Blackwell.

Mcguigan, C. (2010, June 10). The death of starchitecture. Newsweek. https://www.newsweek.com/death-starchitecture-73049.

Mc Leod, M. (1989). Architecture and politics in the Reagan era: from postmodernism to deconstructivism. Assemblage, (8), 22-59.

Mc Luhan, M. (1962). The gutenberg galaxy: the making of typographic man. University of Toronto Press.

Mehaffy, M. W. (2004, September 20). Introduction. The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment, The Order of Nature. New Science, New Urbanism, New Architecture, London. http://www.katarxis3.com

Mitchell, W. J. (2001). Roll over euclid: how Frank Gehry designs and builds. Guggenheim Museum Publications.

Murphy, G.L. (2002). The big book of concepts. MIT Press.

Muschamp, H. (2000, May 26). When Ideas Took Shape and Soared. New York Time. http://www.nytimes.com

Oxman, R. (2004). Think-maps: teaching design thinking in design education. Design Studies, 2(5), 63-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(03)00033-4

Oxman, R. (2005). Theory and design in the first digital age. Design Studies, 27 (3): 229-265.

Picon, A. (2010). Digital culture in architecture. Birkhäuser.

Ritzer, G. (1993). The McDonaldization of society: an investigation into the changing character of contemporary social life. Pine Forge Press,

Schulman E. (1999). Can fame be measured quantitatively? Annals of Improbable Research, 5(3), 16-17.

Simkin, M.V. & Roychowdhury, V.P. (2013). A mathematical theory of fame. Journal of Statistical Physics, 151(1-2), 319-328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10955-012-0677-5

Simkin, M. V., & Roychowdhury, V. P. (2015). Chess players’ fame versus their merit. Applied Economics Letters, 22(18), 1499–1504. https://doi:10.1080/13504851.2015.1042135

Tamari, T. (2019). Star architects, urban spectacles, and global brands: exploring the case of the Tokyo olympics 2020. International Journal of Japanese Sociology, 28(1), 45–63. https://doi:10.1111/ijjs.12099

Toffler, A. (1980). The third wave, William Morrow And Company.

Venturi, R. (1966). Complexity and contradiction in architecture. New York, Museum of Modern Art.

Wigley, M. & Johnson, P. (1988). Deconstructivist architecture. The Museum of Modern Art.

Wigley, M. (1989). The Translation of Architecture, the Production of Babel. Assemblage, (8), 7-21

Yücesoy, B., & Barabási, A.L. (2016). Untangling performance from success. EPJ Data Science, 5(1). https://doi:10.1140/epjds/s13688-016-0079-z

Downloads

Published

20-12-2022

How to Cite

Yasar, D., & Öymen Gür, Şengül. (2022). Models of Diagnosis and Concept in the Pioneering Architects in Recent Architecture. ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 10(2), 410–427. https://doi.org/10.15320/ICONARP.2022.208

Issue

Vol. 10 No. 2 (2022)

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2022 ICONARP International Journal of Architecture and Planning

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

COPYRIGHT POLICY 

1. The International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) open access articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDeriatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). This license lets the author to share (copy and redistribute) his/her article in any medium or format.

2. ICONARP cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms. Under the following terms:

The author must give appropriate credit, provide a link to ICONARP, and indicate if changes were made on the article. The author may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the ICONARP endorses the author or his/her use.

The author may not use the article for commercial purposes.

If the author remix, transform, or build upon the article, s/he may not distribute the modified material.

The author may share print or electronic copies of the Article with colleagues. 

The author may use the Article within his/her employer’s institution or company for educational or research purposes, including use in course packs. 

3. The author authorizes the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) to exclusively publish online his/her Article, and to post his/her biography at the end of the article, and to use the articles. 

4. The author agrees to the International Journal of Architecture and Planning (ICONARP) using any images from the Article on the cover of the Journal, and in any marketing material. 

5. As the author, copyright in the Article remains in his/her name. 

6. All papers should be submitted electronically. All submitted manuscripts must be original work that is not under submission at another journal or under consideration for publication in another form, such as a monograph or chapter of a book. Authors of submitted papers are obligated not to submit their paper for publication elsewhere until an editorial decision is rendered on their submission. Further, authors of accepted papers are prohibited from publishing the results in other publications that appear before the paper is published in the Journal.