Monuments of the future could be a place where no singular truth can be found. One’s reality is lost among others. Complete understanding may never be achieved and confirmation bias is crushed by a presentation of information. Arguably, one’s own truth should be subject to scrutiny much like the single author of truth should have been in the past (historic example of the church). The message(s) of the monument are in flux. The physicality of the monument would be in accordance with that. It may be unknowable, unaccessible, and aloof. Perhaps elements are out of human scale. The monument would perpetuate misunderstanding and ask the viewer to doubt. That is the concept I focused on for this thought experiment. The goal was to create a three dimensional object that had no truth. No one reality or experience is correct. The object is ever changing and can be read in possibly unlimited ways. When one piece is moved, the object reacts and possibly tumbles to another stance. Spatial relationships with itself and the viewer are not static. The object is allowed to move and flux. As someone plays with the object, it reveals certain elements, however it is difficult to predict where it will move next. It casts doubt. You may never see the object in the same configuration again. Formal vagueness and doubt are important investigations moving forward.
"NO TRUTH MACHINE"
This design experiment was another investigation into how to subvert singular truths. In Design Experiment one motion was used to deny a ‘proper’ formal organization. For this design experiment, it was a goal to achieve this denial of truth now in a static formalization. For the experiment I focused on the interaction of two objects: two objects that are complete in themselves and do not depend on one another. Two objects that have distinct qualities so that a viewer could easily distinguish which is which. Object ONE’s characteristics were silver, curvilinear, blobby, soft, etc. Object TWO’s characteristics were gold, rectilinear, pointed, angular, etc. These formal, textural, and color qualities help distinguish them as separate objects.
Object two appears to have sprouted an “arm” to hold object one closer. That arm begins to warp downward as an effect of the proximity: straight rectilinear prisms slide into sagged forms. Object one takes note of the arm. A rectangular, flat imprint appears on the doubly curved form. Object one reaches out in retaliation; a bulbous pointy arm reaching towards an angle of object two. This sharp angle waivers and a wave forms, almost like heated plastic. This battle continues back and forth. Tumors, waves, warps, and bends appear on the “linear” object. Edges, impressions, kinks, and sharpness appear on the “curvilinear” object. The objects are attempting to undermine the formal qualities of the other. This subversion is my version of the “kiss” in architecture. Qualities are slipping from one to the other.
Simultaneously, each object still retains its individual identity. At no point is it understood that one object is overtaking, winning, or infecting the other. Much like a flat ontology, there is no dominant object.
OBJECTS SUBVERTING EACHOTHER'S 'TRUTH'
OBJECTS BEGIN TO WARP UNDER PRESSURE
The goal of the Vellum furniture piece is to create a three dimensional object that has no truth. No one reality or experience is correct. Every time a viewer has an experience with the furniture, there is a capacity for the object to be altered and even be different than the previous experience. Expectations and experience are subverted.
Vagueness and doubt will be achieved through its ever changing formal configuration and infinite adjustability. At this point of development, the piece is made up of 6 jointed arms that hold varied, upholstered pads. Every joint will be a friction connection, theatrically tightened and loosened by the viewer to change the location and angles of the arms. If three different people come upon this piece at different times and adjust it, the result of their adjustments would produce a three very different configurations. This limitless configuration represents the untruth of the object. At the most basic level of adjustability, viewers can adjust the pads to match their own body geometry. Perhaps one example is that the viewer is uncomfortable in the position it was found and they can imagine how to make minor adjustments to the object to be more comfortable.
This Vellum piece will also ask the viewer to question their own understanding and ask how they want to sit/lay/exist by presenting an inumerable quantity of options. There are incomprehensibly many configurations due to the amount of adjustability. The act of finding the object in a formation that the viewer is unfamiliar with is possibly a more important interaction. They could question the “truth” of the object and of the last person who utilized it. Wondering how they used the object. Does the formation tell something about the previous people? About their body geometry or their perception? Perhaps the formation is so far out of the viewer’s reality of understanding that this is seen as a tabula rasa, or a clean slate to start whatever manipulation the new viewer wants. Or possibly the new viewer will attempt to fit their own body (and their perceptual reality along with it) into the existing form: forcing a novel experience for the new viewer. They may like it or they may not. But the information presented, is not a single truth. Formations are temporal and user dependent. Dependent on previous users and dependent on the preconceptions of the current user.
OPERABILITY DISCOVERED THROUGH INTERACTION
USER ADJUSTED TO NEEDS
NOT ALWAYS SUITED FOR HUMAN BODY
HOW DO I GET TO THE GALLERY SPACE?
Design experiment three focused on a midsized gallery space that had experiential circulatonal value. Arriving to, passing through, passing by, and leaving the space has circulational oddities that were not expected. Circulational expectations were subverted. By allowing people to realize they were incorrect, it could help reveal that their perception can lead to a false sense of reality. This realization is a productive experience.
The main ramp underneath the gallery space appears to swoop up into the space. The ramp does go inside the gallery space, however, only briefly. It extends laterally, and becomes a bridge connecting to something beyond. Additionally, there is a covered bridge that bisects the gallery space perpendicularly on an upper level. There is an instance of pause, and users can get off onto the roof of the gallery, however, there is no access into the gallery space. Once inside the gallery, at the end of the main long space there can be noise and people seen and heard beyond. A warped frame hints at the destination. When the viewer comes to the end of the gallery, it is realized that the noise and “party” space is inaccessible from the gallery. The viewer is above the party and can only observe from above. Perhaps the aesthetic distance makes the party seem like an art piece itself. People mingling and moving about the entertainment space. The party space is accessible through a hallway that was hidden in the thickness of the gallery floorplate.
CHANGING PERCEPTION THROUGH REVEALS
Ex4_single reading OF truth in context
That is one of the methods that was used in Design Experiment four. As is, the shape of the reflecting pool points to the singular truth, the George Washington memorial. The parallel edges of the rectangular pool point to the vanishing point in the distance. The view is symmetrical, stable, and comfortable. The intent with the design of experiment 4 was to destabilize this one point perspective. I was not trying to cover up the memorial, nor destroy the pool completely. In fact, from the Lincoln memorial vantage point, the same amount of surface area of water would still be visible.
The east side of the pool was tilted up as if the ground opened like a hydraulic mouth. Additional shapes puncture through the tilted pool, set off-axis from the mall. The shapes break up the reflection into fragments and also draw the eye from the Washington Memorial. These shapes continue down into the (now habitable) space below the pool. This space is a hot spring. There are pools of warm water for visitors to enjoy, even in the cold months. The pool is no-longer only to reinforce the truth of the monument, but to provide experiential space and reframe the monument in more than just a reflection. The fractures and punches in the upper surface allow for small glances of the George Washington memorial from inside the heated pools, below the surface. From the Lincoln Memorial, the subgrade activity hidden. If one is walking west from the Washington memorial the tilted pool surface terminates by a waterfall. As one gets closer to the pool, the water may break and reveal people inside hanging out in the hot pools. Steam from the pools may leak from the tilted fractured pool surface. This may disrupt the mirrored image of the Washington Memorial. The fog may float up and cover parts of the view of the actual monument as well. Also those who haven’t discovered the hot springs yet may question why this is happening.
ADDING BATHHOUSE TO REFLECTION POOL
GENTLY DISRUPTING PERFECT ONE POINT PERSPECTIVE