This is an excerpt from Reiser & Umemoto's Atlas of Novel Tectonics. I think this is applicable to all of you whether you're working with a diagram drawn from nature (DNA or flower) or a diagram about circulation. Very simply put, they propose that the scale of the diagram is extremely important in terms of generating relationships with the context in which the work is situated. So perhaps a flower is more potent as a diagram if the building enclosure doesn't resemble flower petals, but rather appears (or parts of it) at other scales such as the detail.
I would also add that the diagram is capable of evolving as the work progresses, and in many cases should, in the spirit of finding new and stronger relationships. So while one may decide that the helical nature of DNA should inform, say, the structure of a building, one may decide through the course of development that the helical nature is better at, say, distributing program.
Finally, keep in mind that the diagram is best at creating models of organization (space and event, force and resistance, density and distribution to mention a few), especially at multiple levels.
No comments:
Post a Comment