on sustainability and it’s encroach on design

DON'T READ THIS! THIS IS NOT THE ESSAY! THE ESSAY IS BELOW.

I found a proposal for a building named Antilla located in Mumbai India, designed by Perkins & Will.  Antilla is covered in foliage, and vertical and horizontal gardens.  It is made up of living walls but what exactly does it look like?  It looks like a stack of CD cases with some green covers.  “Living walls are lovely but not a free ticket to environmental integrity.” (Web, 1) When I look at this building I see that it is green.  Literally green is not the definition of “Green Design.”  The materials used may have sustainable qualities, but is this not clearly a green trophy? 

Definition of Sustainability is the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.

The Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is a Green Building Rating System.  It is a standard for environmentally sustainable construction.  During this past summer I interned at an architecture firm that did a mainly LEED Certified projects.  I was there when they were in the midst of a specific project with the goal being LEED certified Gold.  I was given the task of checking off the possible credits that could be earned on the LEED website.  I had to click the box that said yes on a chart that had the list of all possible credits allowed on that project.  There was Public transportation access and bicycle storage and carpooling and water use reduction, 20%, 30%, and building reuse and so on. (Web, 2) The top of the site had the possible merit that could be earned, based on what I was checking off.  I felt like I was an accomplice for cheating.  It was as though I was bypassing the thought process I usually expect when confronted with a problem.  Then I realized, Money.  That is how this process of making something green was being accomplished.  Then right smack in the middle of my face was the reason.  “Platinum Certified.”

Organizations with money are jumping on the Bandwagon of Green Design.  Does this mean that in order to be successful, the contemporary understanding is that it has to be more than just a company; it has to be a green company? 

 

 

Does the merit of having a Green certified design makes a successful design?   

Sustainability is defined as the ability to meet the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. 

Does sustainability follow design or does design follow sustainability?   I am writing about sustainability and its influence on design.  Similar to the approach between functionalism and design.  Now, more and more, it has become the responsibility as a designer to be sustainable.  Though

Other factors that affect sustainable design- monetary impact, environmental impact,

Do you have to take one thing and not the other, do you compromise?

Do you compromise quality for quantity?

Does merit have a price? Yes.  Does that still make it sustainable?  Yes.  Is it still designed well?

Does sustainability outweigh design?

If something is designed using the most sustainable resources but from a design stand point is ugly then is it really sustainable?  People would inevitable not be attracted to using it and isn’t that wasted material, time, resources? 

Greenwash? Where has this derived from?  there are so many companies trying to jump on the green bandwagon

The question came up: creating a design that people love, or one that does no harm?

Is sustainability just on paper and not in the design?  Is there a sustainable esthetic that could be better honed in design?

This discussion is not to be misinterpreted that badly designed green design should be rid of, but that being green just isn’t enough; especially if monetary and intellectual resources are available. 

 

Web Cited

1-      http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/10/25/sites-residence-antilia-green-tower-in-mumbai/#more-6649

2-      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leadership_in_Energy_and_Environmental_Design#Point_rating

3-      http://www.architectmagazine.com/industry-news.asp?sectionID=1006&articleID=471526

functionalism AND environment

The auditorium is warm and dim.  All the freshmen are together, at least all those that made it out of bed.  It is 8:15 am and there are bobbing heads left and right.  Lecture only started 15 minutes ago.  Were we doomed from the start, or are we all cursed with the late nights of RISD studio?  I think that a combination of factors lead to the sea of bobbing heads.  Is it accurate to state that the auditorium seating is comfortable enough to lull 300 plus students to sleep?  I think yes. 

When I think of functionalism, I think of a chair.  How often do I use it?  When I use it am I aware of the reaction and condition of my body?  For example, when I sit in the wooden seat with attached table I am upright and slightly leaning on the back rest.  This keeps me alert and comfortable when writing notes.  I doubt that I would be able to absorb as much information if I was sitting on a cushy overstuffed chair.  The design language is not only read through my eyes, but read through the overall interaction with the object.   

The act of sitting, it is safe to say, is one of the most commonly interacted within any given setting.  Sitting is defined also with an environment and body interaction.  There is a response made by the person to certain seating.  If an environment does not have seating does that translate that it is not a resting spot?  Just as parking lines indicate an action (parking), chairs can communicate through its own language. 

One of the most obvious words of chair language is translated “sit.”  The question is when to sit.  For airplanes there are more than a few reasons the seats take up the ratio of space they do, but the idea of “stay in your seat” is pretty clearly expressed through the size of the chair, and the effort it takes to pass by the other passengers. 

On a Subway the seats are made of some sort of smooth plastic.  Though just enough indentation in the seat to keep you from sliding too much, there is a sense of movement and change.  When stepping into one of the cars, of the Subway, there is a rush to acquire a seat.  When the doors open there are already people filed by the door ready to hop over the gap and part the wall of bodies ready to take their spot.  The case of New York City is that it is fast pace and constantly moving; the main transportation seating just reflects that and is designed accordingly. 

Reflecting more on the functionalism of seating I revisit the definition.  Functionalism is defined as a design based on the purpose of that building. (Web, 1) The definition is taken from an architectural stand point but I think that it still applies to design.  I think that it has to do with the mentality of the user, “humans.”  People avoid touching.  Something about grazing jacket sleeves or outer thighs or even bags get people to react in a bug eyed, shifty way.  Where is close proximity tolerated?  The elevator is one, waiting in lines are another but both these are usually sort and not much else can happen during these times.  The Subway is one place where it is still uncomfortable but because of the length of time spent between stops there is an ease that develops.  On the subway, people are comfortable enough with the cupped seats to sit next to a complete stranger.  Same goes for airplanes.  There are armrests, but we cannot imagine the experience without them.  Under what other circumstances outside of public transportation would that be acceptable?  

I used an example in the timeline of the Aeron chair; I have experience this past summer in using one.  Though the office was air conditioned usually, some days it didn’t seem on and that is when I loved the Aeron.  It has a mesh bottom and back support and it was very bouncy and I felt as though I was in a bouncy breezy hammock.  I think that it spoke comfort to me and I enjoyed it the first time I sat in it.  During my time there this summer I was introduced to another chair, the liberty chair by Humanscale. It is supposed to be a step up of the Aeron but when I tried it out for a few hours I still enjoyed my Aeron more.  It really has to do with preference but when I saw the liberty chair I assumed that it was supposed to make me feel cushioned but it felt too solid.  The Aeron is lighter and quite a bit bouncier.  I think that based on this experience I was able to decide which felt better in my case.  As an Industrial Designer I am excited about knobs and screws and complex adjustments.  Is there an allure to gadgets that require multiple adjustments? Yes, but I don’t think as an overall design that the Aeron should have so much.  Would my mother enjoy adjusting it herself?  Probably not the language of that chair is too complex for my mother to grasp.  That is why the Liberty Chair is probably better for my mother.  The liberty chair doesn't have very obvious screws or adjustments, but it looks like a fancy computer chair in a language that my mother can understand.  

I made a timeline regarding functionalism based on what I’ve read about the subject, but I think that the only way for functionalism to be tested and understood is through experiencing in the setting.  Just like when it is appropriate to create a model in order to discern if the shape is on the right path.  The process in investigating not only the surface of design but the underlining structures of how Functionalism can read in environment is integrated deep in the grain of the seemingly mundane everyday objects that are guiding us and talking with us throughout our lives.  Unless we turn our attention to appreciate the communication of these objects we will neither understand functionalism or be able to use the language.  

Web Cited

1-      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functionalism_(architecture)

jump on!

Everyone is trying to jump onto the green train and it is moving fast so what do you do?  YOU GREENWASH!  Just paint it green, write "green" in helvetica and your set.  

functionalism AND design

Functionalism seems like an esthetic choice but I think it is the integration of both function and form.  A chair has to be inviting and intriguing.  The Morris chair looks luxurious in a comfortable approachable way.  The Wassily chair looks edgy and interesting like a director’s chair.  The Eames’ chair looks like a generic usable chair to me.  Something about the curved ply and angled metal seems less formal but still authoritative.  The Wiggle chair looks like something that I just want to sit on because of the obvious material.  The Aeron chair looks like a great spinning chair and to me that is important.  The transparent back and seat is also very interesting.   You can see that there is only a frame and a thin fabric.  It looks so different from the other office chairs; it looks light and dependable.  

sure there was research done but does it look nice?  The bike looks intentional but when does the function and transparency of operation outweigh design?

folding stools function = authority

lighting the path

I traced a few key changes in the types of bulbs used for street lights.  At the same time comparing the different reasons for change.  I found that the usual reason for change was the improvement of the technologies. The thought of lighting being used outside was brought by Benjamin Franklin  when he took the candle outside and lit the streets.  

The invention of gas power for heating, lighting and cooking brought a better source for lighting outside.  

Though it requires a lot of maintenance the arc lamp gives off a larger area of light.  

Mercury vapor expanded the range but the color was not pleasant.  

Thus the Sodium Vapor lamp became popular and is widely used today.  

The changing of the type of light has expanded the use of street lights and the efficiency.  Street lights serve an important purpose.  They are now much more dependable.  There must have been a shift that brought not only dependability but an esthetic factor.  As dependability became higher so did the expectations.

passage of time

Time is defined as a measuring system used to sequence events; to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them.  The clock has passed the test of time literally and symbolically.  The first design used to capture the passage of time that I would like to explain is the Water clock.  It is a vessel which uses the properties of water to measure time.  The water level of a vessel that has a small hole on the bottom is how they read time. 

Christal Huygens developed the weight driven clock.  With the use of a technology that had a natural period of oscillation his mechanism of time measurement had an error of less than 10 seconds.  The clock has to be fastened and the amount of space it takes is a consideration with this clock.  How were people to know what time it was when they were not at home around their hanging clock?  I suppose that is why there were clock towers during this time. 

The spring powered clock had great advantages.  Allowing the owner flexibility and option to not mount it but be able to place it on a table or even carry it around as a watch.  The problem with the spring power is that it ran slower as it unwound. 

The Quartz clock is a precise technology that is used to measure time.  This technology allows for innovative new designs and technology without winding or maintenance.  For example the motion-powered wristwatch which uses a tiny rotor spinning in response to motion and generating electricity.