mom.arq.ufmg.br
(English) Cyberarchitecture: VirtualArchitecture Beyond Real Space Metaphor(2000)
25 min read original
Ana Paula Baltazar dos Santos
ABSTRACT
This paper discusses the use of the metaphor of real space in cyberspace.
Starting by identifying two kinds of architecture, one of physical space
and one of digital space, this paper shows how the social aspects of
architecture lead to the concept of place beyond three-dimensional space.
Then it evaluates the current use of space as a poor metaphor in
cyberspace and proposes a broader understanding of this metaphor with
regards to the concept of place. Cyberarchitecture is then considered as a
possible interface, as a virtual architecture beyond the real space
metaphor.
INTRODUCTION
It is possible nowadays to identify two different kinds of space: the one
we live in (the built physical world) and the other we navigate in (the
World Wide Web). For both spaces there is a possible architecture, which
has been generically treated as three-dimensional space. It is important
at this point to make it clear that the architecture of the physical world is
built in the three dimensions of space, but it can also be simulated before
being built in three-dimensional digital space. This is called virtual
space, which has been modelled using CAD packages, and is nothing more
than potential physical architecture which is to be built in the near future.
The use of desktop computers, and immersive virtual reality, to simulate
and pre-evaluate potential architecture, are excellent tools, but they can
not be taken for virtual architecture. Another fact that also brings
http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520estevam
confusion between real and virtual architecture is that most of the 3D
worlds of the Internet make appeals to physical space as a metaphor, in an
attempt to create an extension of the real world into the virtual world.
Actually, the use of computers in architectural practice, and the use of
architecture to create digital spaces to be navigated within computers,
have been mixed and misunderstood creating a vast field of
interrelations which in fact do not exist. It is important to consider the
impacts of virtual architecture on the real architecture and vice-versa,
although as yet these interrelationships are not clear enough.
It is already possible to realise some of the impacts of the use of computers
in architectural product, as shown in the image on the next page of the
design for The New Capitol Building for The New Capital formless
form. This design is based on the idea of conveying a transparent view of
politics in Japan, aimed at acheving a real political change through the
building. The concept of visibility from outside and on the inside is only
possible if the building was to be broadcast live on TV and then being
inserted into the context of the whole of society, all over Japan. It would
not only be built in a specific plot, but it is designed to be seen from
everybodys home. The new ways of evaluating the context of insertion of
the building is a very important consequence of the coexistence of virtual
and real worlds. Apart from that, which is an impact of the virtual into the
real, it is worth noticing the appearance of this building. This
summarises the impacts of computer graphics on the design process. The
computer was used as a tool during the design process and the final form
is not usually seen in the real world; but this is a design for a possible
building and must not be taken as an impossible building.
According to Ken Sakamura architecture is understood in its relations to
computers under the difference between the possible and the
impossible, though he also considers both of them as virtual
architecture and emphasises the difference with regards to conception
and realisation. The difference between the possible and the
impossible can be helpful to clarify if architecture has been related to the
physical world the possible building, or to the digital world which
estevam
estevam
allows the impossible building. Possible buildings enclose every
conception, simulation or achievement towards physical architecture,
while impossible buildings make reference to the potential of
architecture on the Internet. The latter, the potential of architecture out
of the physical space (the impossible building), is the focus of this paper.
Once they can exist and be used in the digital world of the Internet as a
social space, impossible buildings are no longer impossible architecture.
In order to understand the potential of architecture in cyberspace, it is
now essential to establish the distinction between three-dimensional
space and the social space of architecture.
ARCHITECTURE AS SOCIAL SPACE
Architecture has been defined in many different ways by many different
people architects or not. Most of these definitions are related to its
three-dimensionality, to its physical features. A classic example is Le
Corbusier: for him architecture was the masterly, correct and
magnificent play of masses brought together in light. This aesthetic
feature of architecture did not encompass the whole idea of architecture
found in Le Corbusiers buildings, but it brought the idea that
architecture was more than merely functionalism a serious issue
discussed during the modernist phase. It seems that definitions of
architecture are used in order to suit specific contexts. Here
architecture will be discussed as both possible and impossible buildings,
as a place, as a social space.
Hiroyuki Suzuki considers architecture as the art of creating places,
and brings with this assertion the possible difference between space and
place. For him, western culture considers architecture as a mechanism of
creating spaces, which can be moved without regard to the context in
which it is based. The space is seen as a mere three-dimensional building,
a self-sufficient space . On the other hand, he considers the oriental
meaning of architecture as the art of creating places. Apart from his
oriental point of view of the western understanding of architecture,
which is particularly simplistic, his emphasis on space as something
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
without context and the possibility of place as something broader than
that, opens the way towards the social space of architecture. Thus, place
would be space related to culture, history and context, and architecture
would create a social space. In his words, architecture can be regarded
as a domain midway between relics and gardens.
One of the most beautiful discussions of the origins of architecture is that
provided by Vitruvius, when he identifies it with the origins of language.
As Prez-Gmez explains, in a moving passage that recreates the
beginning of humanity, this Roman writer describes how some thickly
crowded trees, tossed around by storms and winds and rubbing their
branches against one another caught fire. Men first ran away like
animals, terrified by the fury of the blaze. Eventually they approached the
quieter fire and realised that it kept them warm. They subsequently
added more wood to the fire and learn to keep it going. As a result of this
social event, they stayed together and uttered their first words, learning
to name the reconciliatory act that had kept them alive. With this initial
poetic naming came the poiesis of architecture, the possibility of making.
It should be noted that they did not steal the fire from the gods. This
architectural action was an act of affirmation taking place in a space that
was, from its inception, social, i.e., cultural and linguistic. Both
Vitruvius and Prez-Gmez also identify architecture as a social space, as
a place . More than just the dimensions of space it is important to
consider the context in which this three-dimensional space is inserted.
This context is a social one. It puts together what can be called the five
dimensions of architecture. Thus, architecture works as an interface
between man and society.
The Five Dimensions of Architecture
Future Systems describe this image (Living Quarters in India, 1981) with
the phrase never featured in architectural magazines pointing to it as
architecture. What makes it architecture is also what makes it a place
the meaning with which the space is invested by its peculiar usage.
Architecture as place is more than a three-dimensional space, it needs a
broader understanding with regards to the way men dwell. The poiesis of
estevam
estevam
estevam
architecture (the possibility of making) is depicted in this picture and so
is the social need of inhabiting. The way people appropriate these tubular
spaces discloses real time interaction as one of the main features of
architecture. As a lived space, architecture is an event and it will always
depend on time and peoples interactions. It would never be an absolute
space; it is always relative to its social context. Besides the three-
dimensions of space there are also the dimensions of time and behaviour.
It is possible to consider the five dimensions of architecture from the
point of view of the final product and from the point of view of the
conceptualisation (both physical and digital). From the point of view of
the final product, architecture can be considered a place, which
encompasses the dimensions of time and behaviour. As a lived space,
architecture needs to be inhabited, and time is part of this lived
interaction as are peoples behaviour.
From the point of view of the conceptualisation, architecture, which is
by its nature a three-dimensional art, has in the last 500 years evolved to a
stage where nearly all of the design exploration and visualisation occur in
any of a number of two-dimensional media. These media do not
effectively portray the experiential quality of approaching, entering, and
moving through an architectural space, an aspect which is primary to any
design. This is due to the apparent gap between two-dimensional
representation and three-dimensional product. Actually, the gap is much
bigger, as there is a lack of two other dimensions, which are needed in
order to approach, enter and move through the architectural space.
These are the dimensions of time and behaviour, which lost their place of
relevance in architectural design since the Renaissance, with the
establishment of the perspectival paradigm.
Once architects began to resolve the whole design through drawings,
architecture was simulated in its three-dimensionality, but at the same
time, architectural design lost its human scale planning and its
temporality. The loss of the dimensions of depth, time and behaviour,
with the two-dimensional projections allowed by perspective methods, is
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
not something irreversible nowadays. Plan, section, elevation,
perspective, axonometric () were perhaps appropriate to the cycles or
epicycles of Ptolomaic, Copernic and Galilean universe. () It can be
readily seen that the plan is dead because its worldview is obsolete. It is
possible to envisage a new process of design using computers, which
incorporates time and behaviour. It would overcome the perspectival
paradigm and could be used to design both possible and impossible
buildings.
COMPUTERS AND ARCHITECTURE
Computers have begun to be used in architecture in the 50s. According
to Bruegmann at first it appeared that the computer had little to offer a
visual art like architecture, except perhaps in the areas of structural
calculations and bookkeeping. It was, in fact, through the back door, via
the structural-engineering department and business offices of large
architecture-engineering (AE) firms that the computer first entered the
world of architecture. In the early 60s, due to invention of interactive
computer graphics, as shown by the image on the left (the first interactive
computer developed in MIT in the 60s), it was possible to start thinking
of using computers to aid design.
The first big conference in computers in architecture took place in 1964
at the Boston Architectural Centre, and according to Bruegmann , the
mood was euphoric. It seemed that as soon as suitable systems could be
marketed at a reasonable price, every architect could design directly on
the computer. In 1964 the expectations around the replacement of the
traditional process of design were already big, and some researches
indicated new ways of using computers beyond representation .
Unfortunately, the equipment was very expensive and these
investigations did not bring any real innovation to the design process.
In the 70s reaction occurred against modernism (in general) and in
particular the use of computers. So it is just in the 80s that computers
returned to the architectural scene, with more accessible prices and also
with CAD (computer aided design) software. The evolution of software
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
was great, but it is still possible to compare the designs produced
nowadays with the designs produced in the Renaissance with the
establishment of perspectival paradigm as demonstrated by
Michelangelos drawings for the Laurencian library in Florence (shown
on the left). This suggests that there is no alteration concerning the way
architecture is produced from the Renaissance until today, even with the
current use of the most sophisticated computers. CAD packages have
added nothing substantial to the way contemporary architects work. The
packages available for architecture, in general, just emulate traditional
methods of creation and representation of architecture. The general use
of computer graphics in architecture just make it easier to visualise and
investigate new geometry, but it does not bring anything beyond
perspective.
Today a new demand for computers and architecture has been
established. It can be viewed from two main points of view: the inclusion
of the dimensions of time and behaviour into the design conception and
the creation of places to be navigated within the computer. In completely
different ways, these two kinds of association between computers and
architecture are entirely related to the social dimension of space, be it
physical or digital.
With regards to the inclusion of the dimensions of time and behaviour
into the design process, it can be said that there is already some research
towards it. A close example is that of the software package being
developed by Michael Bell during his PhD at the Computer Science
department at University College London. His software is an Immersive
three-dimensional CAD, which enables the user to perform design using
a head mounted display. In other words, this software brings the user to
the same space as his design, where the design can be thought and
executed in stereoscopic three-dimensional vision, without the
limitation of the plan, and with the involvement of the whole body (the
image on the left depicts an avatar creating a hose). There is a lot to be
developed in this direction, but it is a good example of how it is possible to
overcome the perspectival paradigm. Prez-Gmez considers the loss of
estevam
estevam
estevam
depth, as men perceive it, as one of the great faults imposed by
perspective. Perspective, as the one point of view simplification of the
three-dimensional space, causes the split between space and time and
consequently separates men from the possibility of interaction. What
Michael Bells software allows is the reconciliation of space and time, by
placing depth, length and breadth in relation to the human body as a
whole, superseding the simplistic one eye view of perspective and its
representation in a two-dimensional medium.
The creation of places to be navigated within the computer has not often
been considered as an architectural task. Most of the web designers are
programmers or people involved with communication, without any
background in the creation of places. It has become very common to
find the three-dimensional worlds of the Internet bearing a remarkable
resemblance to physical space. From the digital worlds depicted into the
movies of the beginning of the 90s to the most recent VRML and 3D
worlds, such as ActiveWorlds shown on the left, all these spaces carry a
very strong trace of classic architecture, meant to be possible buildings.
As Marcos Novak points out, cyberspace requires a liquid architecture, it
is a transphyisical space, and there is no need to worry about Newtonian
laws. These impossible buildings are then possible architecture and the
metaphor of space is needed, although as yet it has not been explored in its
potential.
THE REAL SPACE AS A POOR METAPHOR IN
CYBERSPACE
Virtual worlds are becoming out of focus mirrors of physical space. Most
of the elements used to build these worlds are rough representations of
elements taken from physical space. It is possible to argue the need for
bricks, glass or even roofs and trees, as shown in the image of TalkWorld ,
although most of these 3D worlds not only use this kind of material, but
also make them available for their users to build their own architecture
within the world. Apart from technical problems due to the computer
memory required for the insertion of large numbers of polygons, and the
rendering of them in real time, this appliance of physical space as
estevam
estevam
estevam
metaphor does not seem to be the proper one. There is no need for
weather protection, there is no need for strong structures, there is no
need for glass windows. In fact, there is no need for these rough
representations of reality, although it could be justified for helping with
recognition and orientation, but this only really applies in the case of first
time and novice users.
Evaluating many of the 3D worlds, it is possible to identify the massive use
of three-dimensional space, as much in material terms as pointed out
above as in conceptual terms. The conceptual metaphor of three-
dimensional space, is what led to the material metaphor, and so it needs
closer attention. Three-dimensional space is always used in the physical
world to protect men from inclemency and also to allow privacy, thereby
dividing the world into internal and external spaces. The group of private
spaces, known as suburbs, towns, cities, counties, countries and so forth,
is the known public environment, through which people move. The
distance between these spaces is responsible for the establishment of
different societies. Every society then is related to one specific location
and also to some common personal interests. Geographical distance
plays an important role joining and separating people and also making
societies conform. On the Internet, geographical distance does not play
this role anymore; as only personal interests will guide people in making
their choices.
The concept of moving through space, and also the concept of private and
public space has been unquestionably used to create digital space. In this
way, both 2D and 3D worlds are extremely limited by the possibility of
moving through pre-determined data. Two-dimensional Web pages are
based on browsing kinds of movement, whilst 3D environments create a
parallel world as an extension of the real. It is easy to make a direct
relation between moving through real space and moving through virtual
space, and at first sight it seems great to be able to meet people all around
the world without any geographic barrier in a new but known
environment. Actually, this is a big step towards the establishment of
new and different societies, but it also ties up the potential of cyberspace.
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
It does not allow any possibility for approaching cyberspace beyond the
physical space metaphor, and the so-called virtual world has not been
virtual but rather a representation of the real.
Hiroyuki Suzuki believes that the presuppositions of virtual reality have
been based on spaces rather than on places and he indicates that the
attempt to create virtual reality seems to assume that the world can be
understood as space. Neither real nor virtual worlds can be understood
as space, in the sense of three-dimensional physical construction, but
must be seen as place, social space, the space invested with meaning,
where time and behaviour are essential. The metaphor of space in virtual
environments can be stronger than it is today, it can evolve beyond the
concepts of physical space.
THE POTENTIAL OF SOCIAL SPACE IN CYBERSPACE
The metaphor of space has been used in computer language in two ways.
Firstly, as an attempt to adapt the computer to human patterns, computer
designers give their inventions names such as windows, scrolling and
spread sheets, etc. Secondly, there is the characterisation of the new
societys need for dwelling through the many metaphors used, such as web
site, home page, virtual city, virtual community, and so forth. The direct
application of such terms from real space into the virtual one is not the
best way of providing a dwelling atmosphere in cyberspace. In fact,
many of the terms are not applicable without geographical reference, as it
is community, which would define cyberspaces society.
According to Michael Heim , community derives from comunitas, which
were created around the medieval monasteries , related to the world
religions. Community is then a social group of people joined around a
physical space, which is geographically limited and based. The primary
concept of community is based on stability and physical proximity. Apart
from being a group, the cybersociety is not stable or physically located.
As Heim reminds us, the very term electronic community is problematic
because it masks the ephemeral, and even alienating features of
everything electronic. This new society is not a community in the old
estevam
estevam
estevam
sense of the word; it is dynamic and flexible; it does not grow around a
physical space, but it is growing spontaneously without any physical
barrier except the screen of computers. The use of space as metaphor can
tie up the growth of cybersociety if it is not treated carefully as a set of
selected features, instead of directly using physical space
representations.
As indicated before, every inhabited space would depend on at least five
dimensions: the three-dimensions of physical space and the dimensions
of time and behaviour. In this way, the space would be considered a place
due to its social context. In order to provide cybersociety with a place, it
is necessary to understand the qualities of real places. Cyberplace would
not merely have the three-dimensions of physical space and the
dimensions of time and behaviour, it would still ends up being a
representation of real space. More than that, it is important to create a
new phenomenon instead of representing a previous one. According to
Heidegger , phenomenology means () to let that which shows itself be
seen from itself in the very way in which it shows itself from itself. For
him, representation is not phenomenological once it does not show itself
from itself, but it shows something else from itself, or announces this
something else through itself. As a phenomenon, cyberplace would take
the idea of social space, its five dimensions, and rework them towards a
new place.
A good example of this reworking of space concepts toward cyberplace is
that of the telephone. Telephone made possible for the first time a real
interaction between two people beyond physical space. This can be
considered the first virtual environment ever created, the first
cyberplace. Nowadays, the Internet allows a greater development of the
virtual place of communication begun by the telephone.
It is possible to find many little pointers towards cyberplace and most of
them are related to interaction, which makes men have the feeling of
presence without being physically present. Interaction is concerned
with time and behaviour and it is not necessarily based on three-
estevam
estevam
estevam
dimensions. Following the traces of interactive multimedia, in most
cases cyberspace cannot be said to be interactive. Both the World Wide
Web and interactive multimedia grew up from the same concept, or in
other words, they are the evolution of an old idea. In 1945, Vannevar Bush
brought up the idea of a personalised library, a device able to store books,
records and communications, and which is mechanised so that it may be
consulted with exceeding speed. This library grew into hypertext,
developed in 1960s by Ted Nelson . Hypertext, according to Nelson, is a
means of navigating through a textual document in a non-linear form, a
means of freeing information. The conceptual hypertext is an advanced
idea of non-linear (non-hierarchic) ways of accessing information and
could be used as a metaphor in cyberspace. In fact, the structure of
Internet is literally and not metaphorically hypertext based. The
structure itself is made up by texts with key words linking other texts, and
so on; but this is not what could be called a non-linear structure, it uses a
metaphor of real space move from one point to the other and takes
hypertext as its literal structure. A good and simple example of hypertext,
being spherical instead of linear, can be found in the search engines,
which make use of the key words not just as links, but so as to connect
many different things together, as they would never be in space. The
hypertext structure is totally related to interactivity. It is supposed to
offer the user a range of choice to interact with.
Another pointer towards interaction in cyberspace is the work of Anti-
Rom . This is a group whose intention is to be an antidote for the
boringness of contemporary interactive multimedia presentations. It is
possible to find as the central point of their investigation the object
oriented design. It means that every object acts as it was programmed to,
but what makes it different to the basic programming is the autonomous
way the objects deal with their own characteristics (possible behaviours).
Anti-Rom research gives many good examples. A simple one is a ball that
needs to be played with in order to move. In fact, the movement of the ball
is not pre-programmed, but rather its potential behaviour there is a
mathematical equation relating the possible movement to the speed and
estevam
direction of the cursor movement attached to the spherical properties of
the ball. This ball requires user interaction in order to work, and even
though it is two-dimensional it allows a certain degree of immersion.
Regarding cyberspace advances towards cyberplace it is crucial to take
drama into consideration, not because of its success as reality
representation, but because of the euphoria it is able to allow.
Cyberspace today is itself an object of euphoria, but children of today will
be the adults of tomorrow and something else will be needed in order to
avoid disphoria (despair, despondency). The element of involvement
that is able to arouse euphoria seems to be drama.
It is possible to summarise that: (i) drama can be considered the secret to
preserve users euphoria as a feature towards interaction. (ii) real
interaction is possible if the content is presented as transformation and
not as static information object oriented technology can make it
possible. (iii) the possibility of shifting from linear hypertext to spherical
ones eliminates the imposed hierarchy allowing more freedom towards a
real interactivity between the user and the phenomena, whilst also
allowing the shift from watching content to inhabiting it. All this leads
to the social features of space as a place of interaction, and this can be
joined together towards cyberarchitecture.
CYBERARCHITECTURE
The needs in the real world will keep changing with the growth of the
virtual world, but this can not be misunderstood by bringing digital to real
and real to digital without a careful understanding of the relevant impacts
caused in one by the other. A relevant impact of the virtual world into the
real world would be a change of human perception. Depriving people of
reality it would be possible for them to perceive reality in a broader way,
i.e. to stop paying attention to the controllable aspects of nature and to
focus on its spontaneous features; technology can contribute to a
transformation of our perception of nature rather than replacing our
estevam
estevam
perceptions. The aim of cyberarchitecture is not to replace, to extend or
to create a parallel reality, but rather to create a phenomenological
virtuality (another world) to satisfy different needs.
It is possible to use different devices in order to enhance realism in
cyberspace, but is it a real need? New devices and improvements are
always welcome, if they are affordable and standard or establish a
completely broad and new requirement, as happened when computer
graphics became popular, thereby establishing a minimum hardware and
software requirement. Actually, cybersociety has been growing by itself
due to its rich potential of content exchange. Following the pace of this
spread, hardware and software are also improving in order to make it
bigger and more successful. It is important to focus on the specific
features of place pointed out in this paper, not as a representation of the
real into the virtual, but as a conceptual way of building a potentially
virtual world in order to improve the content exchange.
There is a subtle line separating real and virtual possible and impossible
buildings if this line is not perceived, cyberspace can become a sequence
of representations of the external world inside the screen. This would tie
up, narrow and limit even more the potential of both worlds. If Paris or
London is recreated in cyberspace , it is possible to allow more people to
get there with an unbelievable speed and flexibility. But would people
prefer to go to virtual cities instead of going to real cities? Would they
feel more present in these representations than in real space? Is it
possible to consider these spaces as phenomena? According to the view
expressed through this paper the answer for all these questions is NO.
There is no need to create parallel worlds with reference to the real in
order to try to make the real more accessible. The potential of the virtual
world is much bigger than to represent and extend reality. Step by step
(but fast) the virtual world is naturally establishing different connections
with regards to those of the real world. More than chat rooms, MUDs and
MOOs, the communication is happening through the Net based on a new
concept. Instead of meeting people, it is possible to meet what people
think, to meet content. Even considering the possibility of meeting
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
peoples avatar, this is not a contact with a real person, but actually it is a
meeting with the representation of the way people want to be seen. This
content could be changeable, more dynamic and faced as event instead of
form. This possibility of transformation of content is one of the
demands for cyberarchitecture . In order to create a possible interface for
the cybersociety it is important to create a more pleasant way of making
the content available and meeting the content.
It has been made clear that architecture is not possible without place, be
it real or virtual. It is not possible to consider every aspect of real
architecture while trying to identify its virtual correspondent; but it is
possible to import the knowledge acquired from real architecture, which
has a huge history of dealing with social requirements and technological
evolution. Thus, place would be considered instead of space, and
cyberarchitecture would evolve towards cyberplace, creating a social
environment able to cope with its technological evolutions. It is of
cyberarchitecture interest the poiesis of architecture. As a phenomenon,
cyberarchitecture would avoid some of the mistaken ways of creating
virtual worlds as extensions of the real world, as mimesis of the real.
Likewise just as architecture is the interface between man and real
society, cyberarchitecture would be the computerised interface between
man and cybersociety. Cyberarchitecture can be foreseen as a step
towards overcoming the perspectival paradigm. It is thought that
architecture had its first moment before the Renaissance, when it was
built in loco; its second moment from the Renaissance to today, with the
establishment of perspective as paradigm; and it now envisages the
possibility of a third moment, overcoming the perspectival paradigm with
the inclusion of time and behaviour in its production process through
virtual environments. Both worlds, real and virtual, will coexist and
constantly feed each other. Then, there is a need for cyberarchitecture -
the architectural conception in virtual environments and there is also a
need for virtuality through information technology in real architecture.
REFERENCE LIST
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
estevam
Makato Sei Watanabe/Architects Office, The New Capitol Building in
The New Capital, In: The Virtual Architecture the Difference between
the Possible and the Impossible in Architecture, edited by Ken Sakamura
and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo University Digital Museum, 1997, 292-299
Sakamura, Ken, Introduction, In: The Virtual Architecture the
Difference between the Possible and the Impossible in Architecture,
edited by Ken Sakamura and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo University Digital
Museum, 1997, 1-3
Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, Mineola, New York, Dover
Publlications, 1986, [First edited in 1931, Translation by Frederick
Etchells], 13
Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Architecture Without a Place, In: The Virtual
Architecture the Difference between the Possible and the Impossible
in Architecture, edited by Ken Sakamura and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo
University Digital Museum, 1997, 6-12.
Ibd., 12.
Ibd., 11. For him relics are recollection of history; gardens can not be
moved, but they can import and store elements from outside world. Then
he considers architecture beyond the concept of space as defined in the
western culture. He sees architecture as a place, as a site for storage of
culture, as a domain between relics and gardens.
Prez-Gmez, Alberto, The Space of Architecture: Meaning as Presence
and Representation, In: Questions of Perception-Phenomenology of
Architecture, edited by Steven Holl, Juhani Pallasmaa and Alberto Prez-
Gmez, Tokyo, a+u architecture and urbanism, July, 1994, [special issue],
9
the notion of place summarised by Professor Philip Tabor (The Bartlett
School of Architecture, UCL): place = space invested with meaning
Future Systems, For Inspiration Only, London, Academy Editions, 1996,
80.
Zobel, Richard W. The Representation of Experience in Architectural
Design, In: Presence, volume 4, number 3, Cambridge, MIT, summer 1995,
254.
Novak, Marcos, Transmitting Architecture: The Transphysical City, In:
CTheory, 29 November 1995 [http://www.ctheory.com/a34-
transmitting_arch.html]
Bruegmann, Robert, The Pencil and the Electronic Sketchboard:
Architectural Representation and the Computer, In: Architecture and its
Image, edited by Eve Blau and Edward Kaufman, Cambridge, MIT Press,
1989, 139
Ibd., 140
Some researchers, as Nicholas Negroponte, believed that architects
would be able to reproduce an artificial intelligence able to solve all
objective problems imposed by architecture. He developed the software
called Urban 5, which allowed everyone to input text data and the
computer generated cubic shapes that could be manipulated by the user.
Later on some experiences took place in England using computers to
generate architectural forms, and some hospitals and schools were built;
Geoffrey Broadbent hardly criticises the resultant architecture defending
architects creativity which he believes to be incomparable to what
computers were able to generate.
Cabral Filho, Jos dos Santos & Santos, Ana Paula Baltazar, Arquitetura e
Computadores Enquanto Instrumentos ticos, In: Boletim culum,
Campinas, Faupuccamp, number 10, [special number], year 2, September
1997, Brazil
Michael Bells home page: http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/m.bell/
human body representation in virtual environments
Prez-Gmez, Alberto, The Space of Architecture: Meaning as Presence
and Representation, 20-21
www.activeworlds.com
Novak, Marcos, Transmitting Architecture: The Transphysical City
www.etchinghill.com
Virtual does not oppose to real, but according to Gilles Deleuze
classifications, virtual belongs to the category of event and needs to be
actualised, whilst potential things are those belonging to the category of
substance and are able to be realised. Then, virtual architecture would
be physical or digital, depending on its capability of being an event, of
happening, and not merely being materialised (realised) as a
representation or pre-programmed set of potential features.
Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Architecture Without a Place, 6-12.
Ibd., 12
dwelling as being-in-the-world (according to Heidegger) expressed as a
need in both physical and digital worlds
Heim, Michael, Virtual Reality and the Tea Ceremony, In: The Virtual
Dimension: Architecture, Representation and Crash Culture, edited by
John Beckmann, New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 1998, 156-177
Ibd., 160
Ibd., 160
Heidegger, Martin, Being and Time, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1990,
[Translated by John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson], 58.
Bush, Vannevar. As We May Think, Reprinted in Communication
Bulletin, March 1988, 35-40, originally published in Atlantic Monthly, July
1945.
Ted Nelsons homepage: http://www.xanadu.net/
Anti-Roms home page: http://www.antirom.com
In conversation with Bruno Latour he developed the argument of
euphoria and disphoria as two possible sensations before
transformations allowed by new technologies and he also suggested
euphoric responses as the key towards satisfactory results.
Ibd., 167
standard is considered as which can be used without restricting other
people access or even without the need of changing the whole equipment.
Some interesting researches are recreating these cities, but here, it is not
going to be considered the aim of these other researches
Como citar esse artigo:
BALTAZAR DOS SANTOS, Ana Paula . Cyberarchitecture: Virtual
Architecture Beyond Real Space Metaphor. In: Greenwich 2000
International Symposium Digital Creativity: Architecture, Landscape,
Design, 2000, Londres. Greenwich 2000 Digital Creativity Symposium.
London : The University of Greenwich, 2000.
Original URL:
http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520
Top Related