
"It it only by interacting with other people that you get anything interesting done."
-Freeman Dyson
The last 4 days I have been marathoning some pretty tough stuff completely unrelated to thesis. It has become a joke among my team that we are fine, in fact, in good shape to finish up all of our work... provided we take a 60 day extension right now.
For those four days I have been sneaking off to draw adjacency diagrams, concur that they don't fit the site/would be terrible spaces, and go back to my "real" work. At the climax of this frustration I was helping a friend with a program and he asked about my thesis. I explained that I was designing studios for people that don't traditionally have studios. He said something like, "oh, sweet, like a bunch of studios here [he pointed all along the mall area]" I said no, "like two."
Pretty much instantly after that exchange I realized that the site along the mall is not large enough to comfortably fit a couple large, contiguous spaces. And also that large contiguous spaces would have little variety in views, material or experience in general. It would also exclude any peripatetic (walking) areas between spaces. I have begun breaking down the studios smaller and smaller.
The advantages seem to be many. Because the studios become numerous they begin to cover more space and will interact with more buildings. The closer these pods are to different buildings the more flexible they become. I think few would relish the idea of walking 10 minutes across campus, working at their studio for half an hour and immediately walking back. The studios feed of their host buildings and the occupants of those buildings.
Of course the challenge of this new strategy will be to still create an interchange of people/ideas now that the studios are segmented. I think that lounges and the restaurant/cafe/bar between studios will mix people while still allowing separate identities.





splitting the studios (still no place for the restaurant/cafe/bar) allows greater diversity of location. experience
p.s. Freeman Dyson is a pretty creative guy;
Check Out the Dyson Sphere
For those four days I have been sneaking off to draw adjacency diagrams, concur that they don't fit the site/would be terrible spaces, and go back to my "real" work. At the climax of this frustration I was helping a friend with a program and he asked about my thesis. I explained that I was designing studios for people that don't traditionally have studios. He said something like, "oh, sweet, like a bunch of studios here [he pointed all along the mall area]" I said no, "like two."
Pretty much instantly after that exchange I realized that the site along the mall is not large enough to comfortably fit a couple large, contiguous spaces. And also that large contiguous spaces would have little variety in views, material or experience in general. It would also exclude any peripatetic (walking) areas between spaces. I have begun breaking down the studios smaller and smaller.
The advantages seem to be many. Because the studios become numerous they begin to cover more space and will interact with more buildings. The closer these pods are to different buildings the more flexible they become. I think few would relish the idea of walking 10 minutes across campus, working at their studio for half an hour and immediately walking back. The studios feed of their host buildings and the occupants of those buildings.
Of course the challenge of this new strategy will be to still create an interchange of people/ideas now that the studios are segmented. I think that lounges and the restaurant/cafe/bar between studios will mix people while still allowing separate identities.




the most valuable thought from this round has been:
maybe problems don't have solutions until you ask the right questions.
maybe problems don't have solutions until you ask the right questions.

splitting the studios (still no place for the restaurant/cafe/bar) allows greater diversity of location. experience
p.s. Freeman Dyson is a pretty creative guy;
Check Out the Dyson Sphere





