This study regards the activation of perception at a dimension different from everyday perception as the core of experimental works of architect couple Elizabeth Diller and Ricardo Scofidio who have raised provocative issues at the boundary related to...
This study regards the activation of perception at a dimension different from everyday perception as the core of experimental works of architect couple Elizabeth Diller and Ricardo Scofidio who have raised provocative issues at the boundary related to the limit of architecture introduced experimental works with backgrounds heterogeneous with architecture since the 1980s and Charles Renfro who joined them after the 2000s (Diller Scofidio + Renfro is the full title of the office established when he joined, hereafter abbreviated as ‘DS+R’), and it attempts to look into their properties.
DS+R’s works fall into three periods. The first period is one in which it sought designs in various non-normative and non-hierarchical genres influenced by contemporary culture and arts in experimental works heterogeneous with architecture through exhibitions and performances in the 1970s and 1980s. The second period is one in which it focused on public design related to the city in the 1990s. This stage can be described as a period in which they pursued design dealing with the boundary between the real and the imaginary. The third period is one in which Renfro joined them and it concretely realized the themes experimented in the previous two periods in its works on larger scales, such as architecture, urban public design and landscape.
This study attempts to identify a process in which the activation of perception becomes architecture, based on the fact that the perception newly awakened, that is, activated perception as compared with everyday perception appears in various methods in seemingly independent works, although the objects of interest differ by each stage.
In such a process, ‘Slow House’ (1991) occupies a critical position. It is because it was realized in artistic experiments like its early exhibitions or performances, and it best expresses the way of activating perception architecturally shown in the two periods using technological devices like supplements in the 1990s.
Its characteristics are investigated in two aspects of activating perception: ① To transform traditional and customary architectural elements into strange and unfamiliar elements to make architecture ‘be perceived in another way’ and ② To actively accept mechanical devices such as cameras, screens and closed circuits as important factors of architecture to ‘be perceived newly.’ ‘Slow House’ viewed from these two aspects can be analyzed and organized as a ‘visual machine’ generating various perceptual experiences.
Two properties activating the perception, captured by ‘Slow House’ become the key to investigation of DS+R’s works before and after.
Artworks such as its early exhibitions and performances can be divided by two ways: ① To transform everyday objects such as cups, clothes and mirrors to be perceived newly and ② To make performances perceived more richly using supplements like TVs or projectors in plays and dances. It is noted that these two properties were expressed and integrated architecturally in ‘Slow House.’ Thus, these early works become a process of potential experiments for a sort of ‘becoming architecture’ in ‘Slow House’ to express in a Deleuzian approach.
In its later buildings or urban public design works, the ways of activating two kinds of perception, captured in ‘Slow House’ are transformed in various methods. While the ways of activating perception in its early artworks constituted a process of ‘becoming architecture’ through ‘Slow House,’ its later works are a process of another ‘becoming’ for the activation of perception in which they are transformed and expressed in various methods.
The activation of perception that becomes concrete in ‘Slow House’ and transformed in its later architecture and urban public design can be classified into four specific methods: ① control of sight; ② control of speed; ③ control of materials; and ④ tension between the real and the virtual, which show close relationships between ‘Slow House’ and later works more clearly.
While the two ways of activating the perception drawn from ‘Slow House’ focus on the peculiarities expressed in a single building with distinctive characteristics and spread it outside to be understood in a ‘horizontal (chronological)’ structure with other works, an analysis through four kinds of methods for the activation of perception allows peculiarities for the activation of perception in a ‘net of relationships’ with other works to be ‘vertically’ understood.
Through this analysis, it is found that the distinctiveness of DS+R’s works is that the ideas experimented in works of genres absolutely distinct from architecture are expressed architecturally and that its architectural ideas are further enriched through multidisciplinary works. Like Marcel Duchamp opened the way of modern art crossing the domains of the arts, DS+R is thought to contribute to modern architecture specially in that it expands and reinforces the discipline of architecture ranging from everyday objects to huge urban public design and crossing the boundaries of different areas, such as arts, landscaping, information science and consumer culture.