This brief asked students to combine design and a chosen second discipline in order to explore how your blend of knowledge and experiences can manifest in a creative output. The goal of the brief was to research and design a response to the question: How might we encourage students to use the library and its services? Designed outputs could have included a communication design campaign, a physical object, a digital app, or a new environment.
My research resulted in a two part proposal and essay.
In part one, first I call on architecture by Warren & Mahoney at the Walter Nash Centre to set a precedent for how a library should be integrated into a space. At the Walter Nash Centre the library is cleverly integrated into the entrance and information centre of the facility. This stops the library space from becoming a siloed function.
Next, using constructivism to combine my second discipline political science and question objective reality, I argue that context is a construct of our surroundings. Therefore, in context of a forward future facing architecture and design school, why does the library reflect a spatial design from yesterday's year.
The result of part one is to redefine the spacial design of the library at the School of Architecture and Design by integrating it into the entrance of the building and making it a locus of knowledge.
Part two draws parallels between constructivism and co-design. Both practices acknowledge the need to assume nothing and investigate everything. Part two proposes a new service for the School of Architecture and Design where students have autonomy to formally propose projects. The projects are funded by the university surplus, validated by a university committee, and selected by all faculty members. This process is democratic but more importantly an acknowledgement that its incredibly unlikely that any one person, no matter their expertise, will have the answer to resolving complex problems.
The entire proposal was guided by a statement from Frank Lloyd Wright during his fourth lecture at the Royal Institutre of British architects in 1939,
“What we call organic architecture is no mere aesthetic nor cult nor fashion, but an actual movement based upon a profound idea of a new integrity of human life wherein art, religion and science are one: Form and Function seen as One, of such is democracy.”