When looking at a built structure, the first thing that anyone will be drawn to is its overall composition. Regardless of the viewer’s previous disposition, level of education, or mindset this nearly universal constant will remain true. As the user continues to focus on the structure, smaller gestures will reveal themselves. Texture, colour, mass, and light may be some simple examples of this, however they all share the same trait; they may all be considered “tectonics” of a project.
The fundamentals of architecture may be referred to as “tectonics” due to the fact that they are elements “pertaining to building or construction in general” (Frampton, 1990, p.93). Frascari (1994) believes that “located within tectonics is an endless set of …show more content…
Rhythm and syntax are tools of the writer that help to immerse the reader into the text. Without these, the writer is simply putting characters to a page. Hollow, empty thoughts prevail. The architect must consider themselves equal to the writer in their attention to the characters that they use in their work. Gregotti (1983) believes that “the tectonic expression of architecture is capable of enhancing the sensual and intellectual experience of building” (p.495). Therefore, a misplaced combination of details may sour the experience. However, when tectonic elements are in harmony, a truly poetic progression through spaces emerges. Even the layman, unaware of the technical aspects of the design will appreciate its unique properties. This too can be achieved through the use of a concept, which informs many decisions in the process. A concept can be brought into tectonic details very easily, and they can quickly begin to bring the concept through to the entire space. According to Ford (2011), “there are many architectures of whom joints are not just the essence of details, but the essence of architecture, for the way one understands the parts of a buildings and their relationships often become a vehicle for expressing larger intentions. The relation of part to whole becomes a metaphor for a larger idea, or at least codifies our relationship to a building in ways beyond structural comprehension” (p. 37). Therefore it behooves the architect to consider the way that they would like the end user to experience the space, and reinforce it throughout the project. Furthermore, the lack of permeance of detail into the project can result in an empty, hollow expression. When one believes “that quotation is a sufficient substitute for the detail as a system of articulation in architectural language, and that an overall “grand-conception” can dominate and automatically permeate every aspect of
The fundamentals of architecture may be referred to as “tectonics” due to the fact that they are elements “pertaining to building or construction in general” (Frampton, 1990, p.93). Frascari (1994) believes that “located within tectonics is an endless set of …show more content…
Rhythm and syntax are tools of the writer that help to immerse the reader into the text. Without these, the writer is simply putting characters to a page. Hollow, empty thoughts prevail. The architect must consider themselves equal to the writer in their attention to the characters that they use in their work. Gregotti (1983) believes that “the tectonic expression of architecture is capable of enhancing the sensual and intellectual experience of building” (p.495). Therefore, a misplaced combination of details may sour the experience. However, when tectonic elements are in harmony, a truly poetic progression through spaces emerges. Even the layman, unaware of the technical aspects of the design will appreciate its unique properties. This too can be achieved through the use of a concept, which informs many decisions in the process. A concept can be brought into tectonic details very easily, and they can quickly begin to bring the concept through to the entire space. According to Ford (2011), “there are many architectures of whom joints are not just the essence of details, but the essence of architecture, for the way one understands the parts of a buildings and their relationships often become a vehicle for expressing larger intentions. The relation of part to whole becomes a metaphor for a larger idea, or at least codifies our relationship to a building in ways beyond structural comprehension” (p. 37). Therefore it behooves the architect to consider the way that they would like the end user to experience the space, and reinforce it throughout the project. Furthermore, the lack of permeance of detail into the project can result in an empty, hollow expression. When one believes “that quotation is a sufficient substitute for the detail as a system of articulation in architectural language, and that an overall “grand-conception” can dominate and automatically permeate every aspect of