![]() ![]() ![]() Thus, this research intends to bring a level of authenticity to the field through 3D interpretations of glitch in an architectural form. The study presents digital architectural form existing solely in the digital realm, as an architectural interpretation of computational glitches through both its design process and aesthetic outcome. Advancing from 2D glitch art techniques into 3D interpretations, the research employs a methodology of systematic iterative processes to explore design emergence based on glitches. How, then, do digital designs age over time? Do we interpret glitching as a sudden malfunction or fault in the computation of the design's underlying data, or as digital decay resulting not from the wear and tear of tangible materials but from the decomposition of the binary code, or from system changes that cannot appropriately interpret the data? By exploring a series of experimental design practices for deployments and understandings that are the consequence of malfunctions during computational processing, glitches are reinterpreted. These representations differ from the reality of buildings, which over time will unavoidably age and decay. Faced with a contraction of possibilities in terms of the availability of time and Īrchitectural designs are visualised on computer screens through arrays of pixels and vectors. The contemporary reality, along with its political, social, technological and ecological issues (Latour, 2018), transformed the future-once thought of as an infinitely expandable horizon, spatially and temporally-into an incoming pressure acting on the present (Latour, 2010). It contributed to hindering the world itself from having a future. ![]() As Tony Fry (1999) showed, design-the global, modern and solutionist enterprise-triggered some significant “defuturing effects”. Design has become the world.” This completely designed world, the one that has been brought back from the future, is today showing its fragilities, its precarity. The field of Design has unbound its scope ever since, to the point that, as Colomina and Wigley (2016) noted “here is no longer an outside to the world of design. A transformative process obtained by jumping into the future and then returning to fix a specific reality. They have articulated an idea-or an ideal-of design as a problem- solving activity (Dorst, 2006). All modern reflections on design and its methods have mobilised this ability as their very disciplinary justification. We have been called to materially weave together the horizon of the “vision” and the plane of “action” by using “projects” as vectors. Other disciplines and practices have imagined or planned the future, but they have still relied on design to produce its iterations at a human, vivid and tangible scale. We have seen, foreseen and made others see the future by realising it, by making it real. We designers, through our activities and our practices, have tirelessly produced the future. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |