Critique on the Essay Heidegger's thinking on Architecture

| at 3:45 PM




Everyone has different thinking or their own opinions on architecture. This goes the same as Heidegger, he had a unique/ special thinking on architecture, pretty much different from us.
Heidegger has his own concept of how he defines the world which we often thought of as more abstract and cannot be defined in words. Heidegger defines world as concrete totality as in he believes that when there is the existence of thing/ an object, there exist world, and that the world is the place where human being live and world gives things it look. Heidegger then says that the world is a fourfold of earth, sky, mortals and divinities. Means that he always interpret things in terms of object (concrete) rather than abstraction. Heidegger uses the temple as his example to explain the world existence.

Man and God are related in the context of dwelling as described by Heidegger in the example he used, the temple. The temple, the architecture of the temple made man feel like as if we are with God. Architecture, the temple connects the Earth and the sky which made the world exist and man are able to feel the presence of God through the thing (temple) build on Earth. Temple are built/designed with their own identity so as to depicts the presence of God. Temples from different places has different characteristics and are carefully designed as they are dwellings to God and should represent God well. This sacred place is formed to let man feel the presence of God. A simple example; normally some people would feel God existence and pray only when they perform their prayers at these sacred places like temples, church, mosque and so on. In the Tabernacle, we find God dwelling among His chosen people. "Let them construct a sanctuary for Me, that I may dwell among them. According to all that I am going to show you, as the pattern of the tabernacle and the pattern of all its furniture, just so you shall construct it" (Exodus 25:8-9). The Tabernacle symbolized the dwelling place of God in the midst of His people. "There I will meet with you; and from above the mercy seat, from between the two cherubim which are upon the ark of the testimony, I will speak to you about all that I will give you in commandment for the sons of Israel" (v. 25). Saphir says, "The Tabernacle was a symbol of God's dwelling. There is a Sanctuary, wherein is the especial residence and manifestation of the glorious presence of God. . . Almost all expressions which are employed in describing the significance of the Tabernacle are also used in reference to Heaven." Title: Exodus 25-40 God Dwelling with Man Series: Christ in the Old Testament. I agree with Heidegger’s points saying that architecture (temples, church, mosques, Sikh temples and many more) are able to relate man to God as the place is used for dwelling for the God. So when you enter the temple, you are able to feel God…

The sketch is actually St. Andrews Presbyterian Church in Kuala Lumpur which is the international church of Kuala Lumpur. St. Andrews church is built by the Scottish in the early years for expatriate to pray on Sundays/any other day. This church is chosen by me as I personally think that the design of this church following the layout of a typical catholic church really lets its visitors feel the presence of God inside. The ambient and quiet mood created in the space ( sacred hall) really makes me feel that God is always with us and are listening to every word I am thinking and saying. The majestic look also gives me a feeling that we need to respect the Almighty God..How they made us feel that God is with us in the hall???.. As in my opinion, lightings are the biggest factor/ elements used to create this kind of feeling. The creative and nice play of natural and artificial lights created a sense of God to us in the space. The two stained glass creates colourful lights and also lightens the image of God on the glass bringing up the feeling again. When natural light strikes, it creates colourful lights which lighten the dull mood of the space. It made us believe that this is the dwelling of God….

Heidegger again and again emphasize on the point that world is formed by placing or having things on earth and that the thing connects the earth and sky forming a World. And human is the origin of the world as humans explores and sees the thing placed on earth. The World is the place where we humans live/ dwell. The World we always say and imagine is made up of fourfold of earth, sky, mortals and divinities. Besides, things visit mortal in the world. Things gather fourfold together in their own way. For example, a bridge (thing) connects the places and make the places exist for man to explore. Human life takes place on Earth and architecture(things) between earth and sky forms dwelling for human and a World is then formed. Man and nature is related in such a way that man is in between the earth and sky. Man dwells in nature and speaks to nature via words~language. Where everything in nature is already named and hence man recognize things via images and names that they had already have.

A world gives things their look. Which means that the world is seen as a whole embodiment of the earth, sky, things, man, language and so all this gathers and gives us a look of what a world really looks like. A simple example; this means that what kind of image will we reflect on when people say about a World. In simple words, our home, the place we dwell is a place in nature, is built naturally in this world, between earth and the sky. I agreed with Heidegger points that a place exist when there is a thing placed between the earth and the sky and that the place is made visible to humans.

Heideggar describes place in such a way that the place will come to presence when there is a bridge(thing) which joins the human to the place. A place on Earth will only be present if there is a thing which connects the place to us/ when a thing is placed on Earth. Heideggar also states that “what is within the world is also within space.” “Spatiality” is a property of being in the world. A place comes into existence when humans give meaning to a part of the larger, undifferentiated space. Any time a location is identified or given a name, it is separated from the undefined space that surrounds it. Some places, however, have been given stronger meanings, names or definitions by society than others. Tuan, Yi-Fu (1980). This statement by Tuan, Yi Fu strengthen my point on the presence of place. Yi Fu mentions that a place comes into existence only when human give meaning to the place, creates history at that particular place. Building are locations and that the locations admits the fourfold and installs the fourfold.



When all the things between the earth and sky connects and form a World and with human life taking place on earth, a connection can be seen forming a cycle. And hence the thingness of the things in which the world they gather. Then phenomena is used to described this cycle. Dwelling is a place which human being lives. Dwell simply means to lie somewhere and dwelling refers to a house, apartment and where a person lives. Language as a source of communication so that we can recognize the things surrounding us. When the object is given a name / recognized for what it is, it will always be recognized as it is.




As a summary, Heidegger thought that a World is formed by having things between the Earth and Sky and that man connects to these things via language. Language makes man understand the things surrounding us by giving names to the things and let us recognize them as what they are named. Then all the things with the fourfold forming a world are then connected and formed a phenomena which introduces time and shows how things happen in nature. This describes more of the sequence of the happenings in the World..Heidegger merely thinks that art is not used to represent something but it presents itself to the public and that languange is not use to communicate but rather it speaks for itself...His thinking is different from what we always think of architecture and the World.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Read Comments

Critique on the essay "The Concept of Place"

| at 10:01 AM

In our era of modernism, advancement in technology, sciences has created almost unlimited boundaries to Architecture and built environment. This then make architects more and more creative in their designs satisfying human needs and demands. Remember that we had always said that we wanted life without boundaries, ‘Free life’, like a bird, fly anywhere they like, of course this question came through architects and urban designers’ minds when they are designing. Many creative and innovative designers had come out with ideas of mobile designs, so as we are free from the monotonous( dull) environment. Unfortunately, these projects are still strongly attached to the fundamentals of concept of place.

For example, the author uses example of such projects by Dutch utopian Constant Nieuwenhuis named New Babylon. And Constant then says ‘In New Babylon everybody will always be travelling and will never feel the need to return to the place of origin, because it will anyhow have undergone a transformation. As a consequence New Babylon does not possess a determined plan. Every element is on the contrary left in a state of indetermination, mobility and flexibility.’ Constant wants to create a mobile environment as mobile life seems more interesting. Mobile life could be interesting however mobility could spoil the interaction between human and decreases social activities. But aren’t utopian idea is all about ideal community and society?? However, this concept turns out to be negative. The author supported his points by quoting words from American urbanist Milton Webber; ‘The essence of the city is not place but interaction’. It is true of what the author tries to convey as when the place is mobile, interaction is impossible and the place turns out dull without a community, it loses its importance and enthusiasm. The author supports his point with evidence from architectural theorist Christopher Alexander saying that ‘..the social pathologies which are characteristic of urban life, delinquency and mental disorder, depend inevitably on the lack of direct contact.’ From here, we know that the author tries to stand on his point on the concept of place in which mobile environment creates changing images and decreases interaction which is the ‘soul’ of a place.
Existential space is then used to describe the concept of place even deeper. The concept of space is then explained based on natural psychology. The author referred to Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget to explain the concept of space based on natural psychology. I agree with Piaget point that it is impossible to arrive at any cognition without having an emotional relationship to the object, and without understanding it in a spatial and temporal context. Architecturally, it is impossible to recognize/ understand the space without its context or environment. Piaget states that “An object is a system of perceptual images endowed with a constant spatial form throughout its sequential displacement and constituting an item which can be isolated in the causal series unfolding in time.” We would always generate images of the context/ environment of the space before we understand and gain knowledge of the place. The space/place is defined by its surrounding environment independent of the space which changes with time. The space itself should adapt to its surrounding environment.
The author then states that the world of child is evidently “egocentric”, meaning that everything is centralized or will return to the central point once it started. Everything has its central point or starting points and will always reflect back on its starting point or origin once it has started. The author then supports his points with a simple theory of his child’s thought of the environment. It is true that the when we say existential space is “egocentric”, we recognize that it varies from individual to individual. This is as everybody’s perception of central points might be different. One might think that this is the central but others might have a different opinion. The author uses Gestalt psychology to prove his points, “Man orders his environment spontaneously according to certain “perceptual laws,…”

Next, concept of space is said to be connected to human actions by a German philosopher Otto Friedrich Bollnow which means that a space is recognize by human settlement on it. Once human step foot on the place and expands the place, the place slowly gains its name/popularity. Bollnow writes, “Space is conquered through man’s actions”. Concept of place is then explained by means of place of action and point of departure. When there is a reference point, there is a pathway/ guide to start or move. For example, this can be described architecturally also, there is always a starting point as in where a human start moving, and this creates a central point. When human moves, it creates lines and directional words such as behind, on top and below can be used to define human movements. Then from lines (human pathway) adjoining the point of arrival and point of departure, a plane is then created. “Existential space,” exists independently of the immediate situation, possessing its own order and stability compared to immediate space. Immediate space can be spaces human go temporily away from home while existential space can be defined as ‘home’. I agree with the author with his point; when the centre of the immediate space coincides with the centre of existential space, we feel like as if we are home. The author is supported by Bollnow saying : “The double movement of departure and return reflects a differentiation of space in two zones, a smaller internal one and a surrounding external one. The first is the intimate world of the house and home, the second the outside world into which man departs and from which he returns. The distinction of these zones is of fundamental importance for the structure of lived space.” The closer the range between these zones, the more familiar the space is to the person.

Human environment as described by the author is not two dimensional. The third dimension is the vertical axis expressed by terms “up” and “down”. Personally, I thought that there is no difference between the vertical and horizontal axis. The author’s evidence on this point is not very convincing as he explains that the “vertical axis is traditionally considered sacred dimension of space. It indicates a “way” which leads to a reality “higher” or “lower” than our everyday world.” Another evidence from Erich Kastner saying that “the idea of salvation is generally associated with the mountain…” shows us more of the sacredness of the vertical axis. The existential space may also be described in terms of life pattern. I agree with the author’s saying that life follows a rhythmic pattern as what we do everyday/ our daily life follows a sequence of patterns repetitively and that what gives us our own personal style and lifestyle. The author used Piaget’s quote saying; “Life itself is a creator of patterns” to defend his thoughts. Besides, our life has relations also to the space. Moreover, one can identify the space based on the activities which had occurred at that particular space as well. I am convinced by what the author say; “when an action takes place, the place where the action occurs becomes meaningful, in the sense of expressing the possibility of the very occurrence.” So, the space is defined by the activities people carry out in it.
Existential space is the term used by the author to denote concept or image of the environment. When the environment does not allow the development of the existential space, the space needs to be modified accordingly in order to allow it to adapt well with the environment. For example, the author gives simple example like switch on the light telling us that we can alter/install new elements into the space in order for the space to adapt to the environment (changes in time-night and day).

The author then explains how natural elements are used and how they are developed. In my opinion, natural spaces are built depending on what the site offers, for example, if the trees in the jungle have the potential to be somekind of ready-made columns (part of design), it is considered as making use of the natural elements as well. The author then uses Rudolf Schwarz’s quote saying; “We talk about landscape spaces and think of the landscape as a house: the mountain are the walls, the bottom of the valley is the floor, the rivers the ways, the coasts the thresholds, and where the mountain becomes low is the gate.” The author also says that the built form is also determined by the character of the landscape. I agree with this also as for example, lightweight timber structure (timber stilts) is used for structure on mangrove swamps as the soil condition is not that strong to support heavy structure. (Marang Safari Resort Terengganu)

Besides that, it is also important to distinguish between the interior and exterior space. This is important since the author says that man cannot feel “at home” in a space without limits. The author gives examples such as Venturi house, how Robert Venturi creates spatial differential by using curves. In my opinion, spaces can be determined in many ways. For example, designers might want that particular space to stand out, he will use a different shape like circles (squares as basic) to make the space look more interesting and differentiate the space automatically.
As a conclusion, “The Concept of Place” generally explains to us why a place or space should not be mobile as space is greatly influenced/determined by its context/environment. And that Utopian projects focuses on interaction between communities, hence mobility is a no-no to a fixed project like this. The author explains the concept of place from many different angles and explains existential space to make us understand the concept of place. I think that the author is quite convincing and he support his points by backing up most of his statements with quotes from the experts and lastly, he too conveys his message well to the readers.

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Read Comments

Critique on the film 'Minority Report' starring Tom Cruise

| at 6:44 AM

‘Minority Report’ is a film starring Tom Cruise and directed by Steven Spielberg. This movie is about an imaginary police department called Precrime, in Washington DC in the year 2054, main lead by John Anderton, a Chief Inspector in Precrime. Precrime is the name given as crimes are predicted first by three psychics which they referred to as Precogs and they prevent crime from happening. The author, Philip K.Dick is very imaginative and tries to show us how the future would look like. For example, cars driven vertivally on the walls, scanned eyeballs instead of having IDs, people flying individually like Superman instead of sitting in helicopters.

Initially, this movie starts off with an introduction on how Precrime polices prevent murder from happening. Predictions from the Precogs are used to rewind time and catch the criminals before they committed the crime. Then there comes Danny Witwer, representative of the Department of Justice, in which he came with an aim to understand more about Precrime program. Then here comes the climax when Precogs predicts that John Anderton will kill a totally unknown man to him named Leo Crow. Shocked by the predictions himself, he ran away from Precrime. The author has then gave us an impression that Witwer could have set him up. Anderton suspected Witwer most for setting him up. Curiosity grows in viewers mind on whom has done it.

Anderton then looks for Dr Iris Hineman, the lead researcher for Precrime. Precogs predict the future but sometimes they have different thoughts on it and she reveals that Agatha, one of the Precogs often had different vision, the Minority Report. To avoid getting caught by Precrime, Anderton then undergoes surgery to replace his eyes and uses his old eyes to gain access to Precrime office. Agatha is stolen from Precrime as Anderton was keen to find out the true story of his life, why he wanted to kill the man he don’t even know. Reading images from Agatha’s mind, Anderton sees the same images as what he had seen in Precrime. After that, Agatha then shows images of this woman Ann Lively, who died drowning. Agatha asked Anderton ‘Can you see?’ which creates more curiosity among viewers.

Being chased by Precrime, Agatha and Anderton then ends up in Crow’s house where Anderton is going to kill Crow as in prediction. Curiosity builds up again when the author & director make us ask, Why Anderton wants to kill this man whom he don’t even know?? Answers are then revealed when he saw photos of his son on Crow’s bed. He is then determined to kill Crow. Agatha which has a different thought kept on repeating the line ‘You can choose, you can choose’ to prove that Precrime protocol is not always correct. Murderers can still choose their own destiny until the very last minute. Witwer then finds out something weird about Ann Lively’s death and met Burgess to discuss about it. Having thought that Witwer would discover the truth behind Ann Lively’s death, Burgess killed Witwer.

Anderton then had no choice but to bring Agatha to his ex-wife’s house. Here, Anderton comes to know that Ann Lively is actually Agatha’s mum and that is why she kepts on showing Anderton the same image of Ann Lively to let him know the secret behind her mum’s death. Precrime polices have tracked him down just because he knows this little secret. Then during Burgess’s celebration dinner, Lara helped Anderton and Burgess bad acts are shown to everyone. Burgess then killed himself….


There are a few things that I find quite impressive in this movie. One of it is the curiosity the author and director had created in this movie. The curiosity when John Anderson’s name, the chief inspector of Precrime appears on the red ball and images of him killing a man named Leo Crow. Curiosity when the director made it as if Witwer is the one who set Anderson up knowing his illegal drug problems. Curiosity to know who has been behind all this bad acts hiding himself up. Curiosity of whether Anderson would pull the trigger or not when he pointed the gun on Crow. In this scene, author tries to tell us that our future is still in our hands until you put your words to action. We still can change our decision until the real action has been carried out. For example, this is when Agatha says ‘you can choose’ and repeated it a few times. Curious also to know who killed Ann Lively just to prove that Precrime is correct. Another thing I find impressive in this movie is the author & director’s natural instint and impression of Future. He predicts the look of the Future and expresses to us via the movie with use of high-tech equipments as well as a play of natural sciences.

Well, the context of this movie is pretty much imaginary and futuristic with the use of high technologies and a little play of sciences, like cars driven vertically, eyeballs are scanned instead of using ids, 3D images appears from a small and simple drive and many more. And the story of this movie about predictions of the Future by these mutated humans called Precogs and from the predictions, Precrime crew would prevent crime from happening by catching the person before they commit the crime. I think this prediction story with mutated humans as predictors fits well with the context, a highly technology design environment.

I think the author of this movie tries to tell us that our future is determined by ourselves. Our future is not set and we should not let fate determine our future. For example in the movie, Precrime works to catch those people whom Precogs predicts as criminals. These criminals are not given a chance to change their minds. Predictions of future can’t always be correct. Maybe these murderers change their minds last minute and decided not to kill instead. However, they are not given the chance to do so, they will be caught innocent and jailed forever. I think that the author conveys his message well.

Personally, I think movies inspire design thinking sometimes. And of course movies like this have an impact on design thinking. Author or director often expresses their feelings through symbolic and figurative words, dialogues, and also the backgrounds/context of their works, similar to architects and designers in which they express their feelings in their designs. From this movie, we can see how the author expresses his impression of how the Future looks like and he creates nice context or environment by combining technology and sciences to give us a futuristic feeling. And of course the context fits well with his story…=)

Thanks for reading ya =)
References
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_Report_(film)
http://www.ehow.com/how_5084277_write-critique-essay.html



  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Read Comments

My Architecture Life

| at 7:27 AM

My childhood moments that lead to architecture
Um, actually there isn't any particular childhood moments that leads me to architecture , And to be frank, I hadn't even thought of my ambition seriously until time forces me to do so..=.= and this is after completing my pre-u, Ausmat in Sunway-U, only the ambition question pops out.. Till then only i surfed the net, visit various different universities for their information on rankings, best courses that suits me and of course, their shocking fees!! Cracking my minds for the final decision, UCSI is then chosen out of so many other tempting and beautiful universities in Malaysia...woohOO!!

Why did I choose Architecture?
.. hmM....Archi-tecture??..why??.. haha..last time, i'd actually searched through the Jobstreet.com for interesting jobs in Malaysia, it sounds a bit silly but that's what i did..However at that time, I've already had a few fields that I would like to venture in which are chemical engineering as a Chemist as I love Chemistry very very much, and maybe phsycology as well. I was very much into Science at that time and it bores me in my pre-u, hence, I thought that a little combination of art and science would be fun, Architecture cames to mind then...

Best experiences studying Architecture
Okay, the best experience in Architecture is of course getting to know many many crazy friend, crazy in a positive way =)..Friendly and helpful friends over here in Architecture school compare to others. hmM,..I loved it when we have field trips or any site visits to wherever interesting places. The togetherness and teamwork during last minutes in all group projects was unforgettable. Staying up overnights together even though without sleeps was fun! Studying architecture changes the way I look at different things too...

Worst experiences studying Architecture
Worst experiences in studying architecture are of course when too much work piles up at the same time and there is only limited amount of time left. Whoo, that smells like no sleeps, no rest, no perfect meals, and caffeine all day!! hmM, its Architecture that we are saying right noW, so....i guess we all know whats worst...

Best habits throughout my studies
I don’t have any specific best habits actually..sounds like so ‘rendah diri’, haha, maybe i didn’t realise the good habits myself. Or can Workaholic be my best habits?? since i was given a workaholic tag by all my friends..

Worst habits throughout my studies
Plenty! Playing facebook, sleeping so damn late everyday, drink few cups of coffee in a day, and many more. And the worst habit is changing the Whole design Concept last minute or after finished all drawings...Then at the end of the day ends up Crying as there is no more time left to finish up the whole project..Seriously, this is the WORST!!

What keeps you going? Anything specific?
I’m going to build my own Home, my dream house!! Browsing through magazines, seeing famous architects creating and designing something special and brand new to everyone, gaining Fame and be admired for a unique design is nice. I want the photo of everything I design in every magazine you can find about Architecture. So thats what keeps me going..

  • Digg
  • Del.icio.us
  • StumbleUpon
  • Reddit
  • RSS
Read Comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)