ARC 560R
Superurbia (or 'superbia')
Critic: John Szot
Unique Numbers: 00595 , 00600 , 00845 , 00850
Lecture: M,W,F 1-6pm
www.superurbia.net
digital visualization studio
If suburbia has come to represent one version of architectural hell, what does paradise look like?
With suburbia as the a point of reference implied by lexical parallelism, superurbia might be closely related to 'hyper-urbanism', the 'megalopolis', and the 'superbuilding' ideas predicated upon the implementation of large-scale structures that consolidate as opposed to compartmentalize. In terms of density, superurbanity would transcend rather than exceed the urban, whose density depends upon the proximity of individuals. The superurban development is an agglomeration of many programs; somewhere between a building and a municipality, it houses its diverse tenants within a single spatial/figural concept. If the suburban home is internally motivated, the bounds of a superurban buildingšs interior are questionable. If suburbia could be defined as the intersection of capitalism and democracy, superurbia advocates its opposite through supporting a monolithic political context.
The superurban context has but one component: the big building. This studio will focus on two design problems located in New York City, each over 500,000 square feet.
Course Outline:
Charettes
Research Presentation
Project 1: ??? - Austin
Project 2: pleasurable business vs. commodified pleasure New York
From a technical perspective, right now is an exciting time to be studying architectural design. Although its initial role in design as a visualization tool has long since been transcended, the computer is far from coming into its own conceptual territory. This is due in part to the ubiquity of digital technology, whose fluid nature has infinitely expanded the field of opportunity through universal application. In architecture, recent methods casting the computer as the primary design tool have focused on open dialogue and collaboration with the machine to push complexity beyond the limits of human comprehension, which previously defined the frontier of built form. Billing themselves under modified versions of the Modernist agenda, the advocates of these theories have drawn upon the computeršs vast and precise analytic and diagnostic capabilities to generate a large body of un-built, experimental work in the interest of reclaiming a pro-active cultural role for contemporary architecture. Unfortunately, the body of work to date suffers from a narrow aesthetic focus that has enabled critics and institutions to undermine it through unflattering labels. This reaction is not easily dismissed, mainly due to lack of proof that these projects represent more than a new aesthetic position. Regardless, as architects who work within this aesthetic continue to meet with technical (and political) success, the gap between the virtual and physical narrows. The eminent manifestation of this body of work begs broader research in digitally-aided design techniques to carry the discussion beyond form.
This studio will assume an experimental and critical stance with respect to the computer in the interest of investigating alternatives to the narrow perspective presented thus far in contemporary architectural design theory.
This course has an extremely ambitious technical agenda that will be realized through a rapid succession of design problems related to building design. This studio is for both the technophobe and the technophile; however, because the focus of the design studio is not technical, once a basic understanding has been established, the students will be expected to build their technical background on an independent basis parallel to their design thesis for the semester with the aid of the instructor as an advisor.
Clinics and seminars covering the various software packages available to us (Form*Z, 3DVIZ, Adobe Premiere, AutoCAD 2000, among others) will support critical discussions of research examining the contemporary architectural theory addressing the practice of designing very large buildings.