At times I have looked at my bibliography and thought to myself what the hell do all these people and projects have in common? This is something that I have been trying to work out (and will be part the lineage section in the outline below).
The thread I see running thorough a lot, if not all, the examples is the constant concern of architecture and other fields frames and infill. The main, difference, I think is the different definitions they place on each. It is a strong lineage that I think leaves a lot of clues as to how to deal with the two most important issues we have to tend with: growth of informal communities all over the world, and suburban sprawl.
At the end, this is what I intend to do with my thesis and design; understand the qualities each one of these projects found for both the frame and infill and try to expand it.
Maybe this is a better way to put it; the frames and infills are basically equations, I want to understand the parameters used by each of this designers and their intended results (if any).
Having already done some of the work, I am interested in two of these groups specifically; the landscape urbanists and the work by Teddy Cruz and similar practices. From the landscap urbanists I like their work making catalogues as infill. From Teddy Cruz and that group or practitioners I want to learn how to expand the parameters beyond the object and into social, political, and economic conditions.
Downsview Park proposal by James Corner and Stan Allen
Teddy at MoMA - image by author
In Order to Account for a Wider Field of Agency
2 weeks ago