After reading this paper, I took a moment to think about how I would address the problem personally. Thinking on that, I’m able to type this blog about my approach as a designer. Personally, I would have to say that I would most relate to Case study #3. Because I come from a strong background in mathematics, I felt that I could comprehend the most with this passage. I was actually geeked when I read that the two themes for the design were:

“…the creation of a landmark at the point of symmetry…” and “…the development of a scheme in the form of a linear system of buildings and interstitial spaces…”

The use of the words ‘symmetry’ and ‘linear system’ made me feel warm and fuzzy inside! But what I truly respect the most was that a little while later, they started pointing out the problematic themes that this building could present. One theme that kept on emerging was the fact that these two themes seemed ‘dominating’ and that the area is what constrained the building’s shape and structure. This is somewhat my way of thinking. I like to think very big then allow the constraints to let the design take shape, kind of like how a sculpture can take a giant rock then chisel it down in to a work of art.

What I also find intriguing is that they take the design to the next level by figuring out the arrangements by the way of geometry. Again, the use of math is something I really support. Math is logic! However, my whole interpretation of the case study was mainly to think of a central core (the two themes) and sticking with it, no matter how many experiments is needed to make it work out. At the end, though it does say that parts of the structure was still dominating at times, in the end it could be done.

But also, I must say that I wish I had case study #1’s design thinking. This design thinking constrained itself by thinking of future implications that will affect the area. Office space, parking places, car exits, a plaza…all of it was able to shape the design before it could even be designed. Being the child of construction workers, I have seen many building designs that did not seem to take these certain factors into consideration. I even saw one building where it took up a vast area and the owner of the building decided that they were in need of a parking lot, so they built it in a nearby swamp area, since it was ‘conveniently’ placed behind the building. Sometimes, designers only think of the here and now and do not consider the future. What these designers do was think ahead and allow that to guide them in what shape the building should be in, the direction it should be facing, and the overall layout. Though I do relate to #3, I feel as though #1 is where I want to be at!