So I haven't posted in almost a week now. Over the past few days I've been working hard attempting to make sense of what this architecture does, and how the elements in it can enable a series of motions, traces and arbitrary activities to occur.
A big inspiration was reading Re-Working Eisenman by Peter Eisenman, particularly the essay End of the Classical. He discusses a proposal for a new 'timeless' architecture, devoid of representation of meaning through images and the assignment of objects to represent ideas. The architecture would have no predetermined origin or end. Starting points would arise from arbitrary moments created by the functioning of the architectural process. He discusses the architecture as a text; one which enables many undetermined actions to come from it. The traces that come from these actions allow the architecture to be read as an enabler or indicator. How one decodes the architecture is no longer important.
I interpret this text with regards to contemporary orientation as a commentary on changing modes of orientation - from a realm of A Priori knowledge - where signs in the city signify particular ways of reading the city. They are unpoetic and assume the city dweller to be acting in the city a prior, i..e they are only interested in satisfying functional needs. Eisenman's proposal could be interpreted as an arbitrary means of orientation. It involves exploration and the unfolding of the landscape to all possibilities. It doesn't assume anything. It removes meaning from all architectures, and redeploys meaning as one created by all individuals through their own explorations. One person's Eiffel Tower is another person's Parc La Villette.
So what does this all mean? Well perhaps I should read the way my architecture will function in a similar way. I create a series of pieces across the landscape of Verulamium, all of whom enable people experiencing the space to comprehend the overlaying of various means of orientation over the course of time. Some of the architectures will only remain open for short periods of time. This could create a tension between the user's time and the presence and absence of time as monuments interact with the celestial passage of time, and then passively interact after their motions have subsided. Each architecture would operate specifically to its location within the landscape, and interact with other architectures at specific times to uncover histories of the site momentarily (for instance the appearance of roman ruins as crop marks).
More to come. Back to the drawing board.
