LABORATORY FOR ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN 2
Learning outcomes of the course unit
The theme of the workshop is assumed as settlement problems of architecture where the project is an opportunity to contend with elements of characterized figurative entities within the same theme and in the relationship with the landscape of the context. Urban figures and figures of architecture. Internal and external, three-dimensionality of the figure. Tools of the language. These characteristics represent the objectives in terms of knowledge and ability to understand (Dublin Descriptor 1), of skills (Dublin Descriptor 2) that the student acquires through attending and his/her application at the workshop. Teaching has also a further objective which is the attainment of an early autonomy of critical judgement (Dublin Descriptor 3) as well as the acquisition of skills necessary for communication of the project (Dublin Descriptor 4).
Course contents summary
This course, which belongs to the disciplines of the ICAR 14 group, addresses the issue of the theory and practice of architecture design. In the design process of the workshop what mainly emerges is the theme of figuration as an instrument of interpretation and expression of the meanings representative of architecture within the urban landscape in its historical evolution and in its contemporary phenomenology. Distinction between figure and image. Figuration as cultural fact recognizable in dialectic between author and context. Building Elements composing the figure. In addition to the application of composition-design, some lessons are devoted to the significance of figuration in architecture, in addition to the historiography of styles, and the simulacra of architecture-contemporary image. A study of some authors with emphasis on the role of language and the meaning of poetry. Exercises ex-tempore for critical rewriting of a figurative composition. Techniques of representation and architectural language - plastic mock-ups of the figure; structures, materials and equipment in relation to figuration.
General Reference Bibliography:
M. Tafuri, Storia dell’architettura italiana, 1944-1985, Turin 1986; R. Venturi, D. S. Brown, S. Izenour, Learning from Las Vegas: the forgotten symbolism of architectural form, Cambridge 1972; R. Moneo, La solitudine degli edifici, Turin 1999. ……………
Further targeted bibliographical information is given with respect to specific issues addressed.
The workshop is intended as a place for single or collective operators in which designs are made, according to a methodology of discussion between teacher and student, individually or in small groups (max. 2-3 students). In the first phase, the collection of knowledge and initial analysis, the student will be directed to research in the library or archives. The teaching makes use of lectures (in the Architectural Composition and Building Distribution Characteristics courses), seminars and workshop activities on the architectural project. The different phases feature discussions of general issues both theoretical and practical addressed in the project by the student, who has the chance to experiment under the guidance of a maieutics teacher, standalone solutions.
Assessment methods and criteria
The procedures to check on the final degree of learning take place at a seminar coordinated with other design workshops. The student is obliged to exhibit the work done and its path, to an exam board composed of professors from the area of architectural design, thus demonstrating the knowledge and skills acquired and their possible connections (Dublin Descriptors 1 and 2) in addition to the communicative skills acquired (Dublin Descriptor 4). In addition to the final checks 2-3 moments of intermediate checks on learning are scheduled, conducted in seminar groups within the confines of the single workshop. Student assessment is made by taking into account both the final result and his/her application in the various phases of the project. The architectural project, according to the principle that it is the result of a complex merger between theoretical education and practical experimentation, becomes an element of general assessment within which individual contributions can be located. The evaluation is sufficient if the project demonstrates a capacity acquired to address the issue, in terms of approach but also in terms of graphic representation and verbal presentation. The final decision on the evaluation is the responsibility of the two professors heading the courses making up the workshop.