Add To Collection
Add to Collection
Behind the Forms × Spatial Metaphor
Behind the Forms × Spatial Metaphor
Guangzhou, China
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
View Original
Add To Collection
Add to Collection
Other Projects by JXY Studio
Behind the Forms × Spatial Metaphor
Guangzhou, China
Firm
STATUS
Built
YEAR
2023
SIZE
1000 sqft - 3000 sqft
BUDGET
$0 - 10K
Architecture should be considered a discipline with a dual nature. On the one hand, buildings, as tangible entities, provide people with absolute scales and objective functionality that can be entered and manipulated, along with the consequent physical feedback and user experience. This includes the support and definitions of human material needs, as well as the constraints and the prescriptions on the logic of social activities, while simultaneously delimiting the interfaces, scopes, mechanisms, and extents of the buildings themselves. From walls, columns, beams, and slabs, to ramps, steps, openings, eaves, and other components, all reflect the universally applicable material attributes of buildings.
On the other hand, starting from architecture as a comprehensive consciousness system, the cognition, laws, and thinking that it generates, either actively or passively construct an inductive theoretical framework, pertaining to generative methods, constitutive principles, and perceptual patterns, from which the random and subtle constraints of the physical world are removed for generalization. From an ideological and creative standpoint, the distinctive potential that plays a central role in architecture lies in the intertextual metaphors and interactive influences co-constructed by spaces and human behaviors. To some extent, this could be considered the spiritual attribute of architecture.
In the specific context of our current era, the rapid developments of the economy, society, and culture in the external world, along with the constraints and norms that often occur unconsciously within, seem to burden architecture with excessive material meanings. Consequently, in the realm of its spiritual significance, the non-material constructs concerning emotional projections, memory associations, imaginative thinking, and even cultural identities, are then habitually reduced to technical issues, placed and exposed within a more utilitarian and extreme material context, attempted to be integrated into the discussion within a framework that ignores the other characteristic of the discipline.
Under such a trend, architecture is often recognized and discussed solely as man-made materials, while its seemingly non-natural features in contrast to the external world are standardized and mechanized, leading to a tendency where the study of relations between architecture and the environment are quantified in terms of regulations, hierarchies, and systems. Thus in the context today where the various doctrines and ideologies are gradually being dissolved and abandoned, the so-called ideal forms directed by certain commoditized and stylized design thinking are gradually emerging, potentially dominating the architectural discourse in almost the entire macro era in terms of materials and technologies.
However, architecture, as an irreplaceable disciplinary medium, synthesizes the material and the spiritual, the objective and the subjective, creation and metaphor, the guiding role of which in observing, perceiving, and even examining, defining the relations between human beings and the world deserves to be revisited. Even when the rational values of technical components are amplified by profit-driven motives, it should not be neglected how architecture extends and diverges perception, experience, expression, and imagination; even when the material forms of architectural consciousness become partially rigid and labeled, there is no need to exclude alternative, space-related creative thinking and expressive modes.
Painting, theatre, music, and poetry, perhaps generally, in a certain cognitive sense, might all be seen as expressions and representations of the external world and its reflected characterization, compositions, relations, and spirits, based on internal thinking and individual emotions. In such a context where perception, reinterpretation, reflection, and reconstruction are focused and amplified, architecture, with the potential in diverse forms, the capabilities and methods of which should not be ontologically separated from other creative disciplines, while the distinctive consciousness of spatial expression within it, should be regarded more as a certain comprehensive morphological background, fundamental system, and even methodological standpoint.
In relation to the discussion of this part, the exhibition presents a variety of investigative explorations that attempt to elucidate the duality of architecture from different angles, covering spatial creative expressions emphasizing abstractions and generalizations of painting, reconstructions of spatial typologies starting from theatrical logics, reinterpretations of spatial experience modes based on traditional view of nature, and spatial morphological representations of transformations and reconfigurations relating to urban scale. These open examples particularly focus on the broader and more diverse spatiality within architecture, taking architecture as the basis while not limited to it, generating forms while not constraining them, which attempt to propose possible methods, modes, and perspectives of thinking.
Such creative explorations emphasizing spatiality without relying on materiality are aimed at unfolding the logical dimensions, as well as the diversity of forms in representations and expressions behind architecture. At the same time, the exhibition presents a certain juxtaposition and complementarity of spatial metaphors and pure abstract art forms, ultimately hoping to lead the focus on the complexity of subjective variety embedded within architecture as a medium of spatial thinking, and the possibilities that the self-iteration of its disciplinary structure could potentially motivate certain creative thinking, perhaps also, to act as an unformed, fault-tolerant, open dialogue that in urgent need of supplement and improvement, attempting to broaden certain fixed, stiff boundaries.
On the other hand, starting from architecture as a comprehensive consciousness system, the cognition, laws, and thinking that it generates, either actively or passively construct an inductive theoretical framework, pertaining to generative methods, constitutive principles, and perceptual patterns, from which the random and subtle constraints of the physical world are removed for generalization. From an ideological and creative standpoint, the distinctive potential that plays a central role in architecture lies in the intertextual metaphors and interactive influences co-constructed by spaces and human behaviors. To some extent, this could be considered the spiritual attribute of architecture.
In the specific context of our current era, the rapid developments of the economy, society, and culture in the external world, along with the constraints and norms that often occur unconsciously within, seem to burden architecture with excessive material meanings. Consequently, in the realm of its spiritual significance, the non-material constructs concerning emotional projections, memory associations, imaginative thinking, and even cultural identities, are then habitually reduced to technical issues, placed and exposed within a more utilitarian and extreme material context, attempted to be integrated into the discussion within a framework that ignores the other characteristic of the discipline.
Under such a trend, architecture is often recognized and discussed solely as man-made materials, while its seemingly non-natural features in contrast to the external world are standardized and mechanized, leading to a tendency where the study of relations between architecture and the environment are quantified in terms of regulations, hierarchies, and systems. Thus in the context today where the various doctrines and ideologies are gradually being dissolved and abandoned, the so-called ideal forms directed by certain commoditized and stylized design thinking are gradually emerging, potentially dominating the architectural discourse in almost the entire macro era in terms of materials and technologies.
However, architecture, as an irreplaceable disciplinary medium, synthesizes the material and the spiritual, the objective and the subjective, creation and metaphor, the guiding role of which in observing, perceiving, and even examining, defining the relations between human beings and the world deserves to be revisited. Even when the rational values of technical components are amplified by profit-driven motives, it should not be neglected how architecture extends and diverges perception, experience, expression, and imagination; even when the material forms of architectural consciousness become partially rigid and labeled, there is no need to exclude alternative, space-related creative thinking and expressive modes.
Painting, theatre, music, and poetry, perhaps generally, in a certain cognitive sense, might all be seen as expressions and representations of the external world and its reflected characterization, compositions, relations, and spirits, based on internal thinking and individual emotions. In such a context where perception, reinterpretation, reflection, and reconstruction are focused and amplified, architecture, with the potential in diverse forms, the capabilities and methods of which should not be ontologically separated from other creative disciplines, while the distinctive consciousness of spatial expression within it, should be regarded more as a certain comprehensive morphological background, fundamental system, and even methodological standpoint.
In relation to the discussion of this part, the exhibition presents a variety of investigative explorations that attempt to elucidate the duality of architecture from different angles, covering spatial creative expressions emphasizing abstractions and generalizations of painting, reconstructions of spatial typologies starting from theatrical logics, reinterpretations of spatial experience modes based on traditional view of nature, and spatial morphological representations of transformations and reconfigurations relating to urban scale. These open examples particularly focus on the broader and more diverse spatiality within architecture, taking architecture as the basis while not limited to it, generating forms while not constraining them, which attempt to propose possible methods, modes, and perspectives of thinking.
Such creative explorations emphasizing spatiality without relying on materiality are aimed at unfolding the logical dimensions, as well as the diversity of forms in representations and expressions behind architecture. At the same time, the exhibition presents a certain juxtaposition and complementarity of spatial metaphors and pure abstract art forms, ultimately hoping to lead the focus on the complexity of subjective variety embedded within architecture as a medium of spatial thinking, and the possibilities that the self-iteration of its disciplinary structure could potentially motivate certain creative thinking, perhaps also, to act as an unformed, fault-tolerant, open dialogue that in urgent need of supplement and improvement, attempting to broaden certain fixed, stiff boundaries.
Product Spec Sheet
Were your products used?
Join as a manufacturer to add your products.