Bringing Back Emotion and Intimacy in Architecture | Adrian Bica | TEDxRyersonU

Good afternoon, I'm here to tell you all a story about a relationship you never knew you had. This is a troubled relationship that has evolved from waning

emotion

s and general misunderstandings. This toxic issue is between you and the current state of architectural design that once moved us.

architecture

was engaged with a sense of spiritual satisfaction and wonder, it touched us with a sense of beauty,

intimacy

and memory and offered us an

emotion

al platform through which we could better understand the human Collective to which we all now belong, whether have you ever accomplished this or No, that's not what I'm here to talk about.

I am here to outline three reasons why

architecture

is not reaching this level currently and what we can do as a society to realign our thinking with these more humanistic principles. The first was a transformation that occurred at the end of the 17th century when scientific thought rejected the interpretive and intangible aspects of architecture, resulting in buildings that were no longer concerned with their relationship with humanity, it is as if buildings They became individual objects that had little or no interest in humanity. People containing things that could no longer be measured lost their place within the role of design and many of the existential factors that influenced the creation of our societies lost force when we adopted the Cartisian grid as our new architectural Bible as a result of the practice of Design has transformed into a technological science focused on optimization, low cost and efficiency, and although these are important principles that should influence architectural design, we may be putting too much emphasis on them because the buildings that some once they looked like that they started to look like that in the second.

It is the development of an urban culture rooted in privatization and individualism until the 18th century life occurred within the public sphere it is a form of relaxation, enjoyment and social engagement people enjoyed being in the streets and it was the place where one felt connected to the rest of the social establishment that made up your society we now see the public through a different pair of eyes it is a place of transition between the places where we are and the places where we want to be we treat those who stand in our way as obstacles and as obstacles to overcome our Fellow Citizens, we ensure that our thoughts, eyes and bodies never meet.

Being in public is no longer desirable and architecture has begun to reflect these principles by creating exclusively private spaces. Architecture used to engage in the social complexities of society, but as we move away from the public. The architecture of the kingdom that looked like this began to feel like this. The third is the commodification of architecture in a branding mode. As architecture entered the service industry, it became a marketing strategy and, in doing so, eliminated the potential for genuine emotions in response to creative design solutions. For example, the design of fast food chains, hundreds of identical buildings spread around the world are more like products than the creation of our societies, we preserve beautiful historical architecture because the values ​​and principles of that are rooted in their construction. specific period of time that we as a society invested in architecture and with that investment emerged the character and identity of some of today's major cities if we were to consider ourselves part of an elite historic preservation team of the future.

Would we consider what we are building today worth preserving? I think mostly not and I think it's because buildings that felt like this are being processed this way, now design is generally based on design principles and I think if we expanded our list to include the following three we could revitalize architecture once again by alleviating the The negative effects of some of the movements mentioned above, the first being the consideration of architecture as a story. We love stories. Stories engage us, make us think and, best of all, make us imagine. If we reflect on elementary school English class, we might remember a graph that looks like this: This is a graphic illustration of a narrative structure.

A series of incidents, obstacles, and even disasters formulate attention leading to a high point creating a climactic climactic experience. In the same way that architecture can take us for a walk if we so choose to design it to resemble a story, architecture has an introduction today we left Bas Street and were taken to a large reception area which took us to a stair. We were introduced to the building as the artifacts on the walls reflected the building. story and as we continued up the stairs we were introduced to the building's past, this huge area is the heart of the narrative, it is where we will spend most of the day and where a series of incidents, obstacles and disasters could lead to something surprising and climactic .

The conclusion of our architectural story will be in a place we have not yet visited. The space is brilliantly inviting and offers us the opportunity to end our evening through social engagement, concluding our architectural story now, although this building was not created for the purpose of telling. An architectural story, the way we experience it is very much like a story and I believe that if we adopted narrative telling as fundamental design principles, we could once again revitalize buildings to make them worth exploring. Next is the consideration of architecture. As an emotional connection, I would like everyone to consider a time in their childhood when a space affected them so strongly that all other thoughts in their mind completely disappeared.

When we were kids, it was easier to immerse ourselves in an experience because while we were growing up there. There were so many unknown buildings that affected us emotionally and the relationship between us in the built world was dynamic and exciting now that we understood the world more and more, architecture challenged us less and less and although it may be tempting to blame the natural learning process as being the reason for the loss of Mystery I think the tremendously disappointing state of the architectural experience may be more to blame than we think. Julio Bermúdez of the Catholic University of America conducted a research study in which more than a thousand participants were asked to describe their most intimate experiences. architectural experience more than half of the responses included the word emotional, so if our most intimate architectural experience is described as emotional, why do we choose not to design for it?

I think that if we considered architecture as an emotional relationship, we could rekindle it once again. the flame of modern architectural society the third is the consideration of architecture as a piece of craftsmanship modernism sought to reduce the non-essential aspects of architecture, but taking these reductionist principles and taking them to the absurd has sterilized architecture from a design process which fosters the character we often see. Elegant modernist buildings that hide all the details so that the pure form of the building is not compromised by the joints that create it. Now this kind of thinking undermines the potential aesthetic beauty that comes with a beautiful assembly of materials if you think

back

to a time when you came from. through an element whose pieces came together in such a unique way that it almost seemed poetic.

I would like to see the same in our architecture to give you an example. I have put together a few details here that come together either through interlocking, drilling, tightening or holding the accentuation of each of these pieces visualizes the inner workings of the detail and in doing so allows a relationship between the person viewing the architecture and the architecture. same. I would like to conclude my talk by proposing a challenge to the audience. Leaders of tomorrow, we will be the ones who will define the future of architectural ambition, although it may be tempting to believe that architects alone are not the only ones who decide how our buildings will be built, the general public has a huge influence on the decisions we make.

They lead to the creation of our societies. My challenge to the audience is to consider themselves part of the architectural movement that is beginning right now. I challenge you to equip yourself mentally so that when given the opportunity to participate in the creation of cities of art you can be I am sure that your decision will have a positive influence on our future architecture. Thank you.