0.1 The Functionalism of Ludic Architecture in the Modern City.
0.2 The subject of research is ludic architecture and its importance
in an urban context.
This
thesis has evolved from the initial premise that the ludic element is
integral to the “faber”: ie. play and making, or play and
work are not exclusive of one another but fundamentally intertwined.
This
version of ludic architecture is a reaction against the idea that architecture
and the city as an organism are no more than functional entities. It is
also a reaction against the idea that play is non-functional. However,
it is not a reaction against all functional architecture, but more a recognition
that the pragmatic and the playful have a synergetic relationship. The
purpose of the ludic element in general and the intent of this thesis
is to make an architecture that allows, and perhaps encourages creativity,
spontaneity, and activity in the midst of a functional environment. Perhaps
its direct and literal role is not so much to cause these activities as
an attempt to engage the functional city in a ludic way to create an awareness
of the play-element already present and its importance to the city’s
functionality in large and small scales: as built environment and as building,
as well as for the collective and the individual.
Johan Huizinga, who coined the term “Homo Ludens” in his book
of the same title speaks about the modern qualification of homo sapiens
as “homo faber” – man the maker. The idealism of the
functionality and industriousness of humans in recent centuries has been
highly influential in forming much of the modern built environment (the
Bauhaus and modernist movement, for example). The industrial revolution
saw this era of “man the maker” when social classes were increasingly
divided. Engines and mass production allowed for the “freedom”
of the upper echelon to enjoy ludic pursuits. The opposite was the case,
however, for the working class for whom life was nasty brutish and short.
Slums, workhouses, and a general decline in the quality of life coincided
with the wonder of industrialization.
Constant Niewenhuis’ version of ludic architecture, as seen in his
vision of “New Babylon”, removes the social stratification
of culture, but retains the technology which makes it possible for the
human race to be “free” of the mundane activity of production,
hence creating an entirely ludic society in which everyone can attain
his or her creative potential. The city as we know it would cease to exist,
because to Constant the city has only existed for the functional reasons
that would become redundant in New Babylon (these functional reasons being
protection from invasions, as a mercantile center, production center etc.)
Creativity would become not a luxury for the few, but a way of living
for all.
Cedric Price, architect and contemporary of Constant’s also had
ludic aspirations, but contrary to Constant’s vague images and idealistic
models of a utopian city, a few of Price’s designs were built, in
particular the London Zoo aviary and the “Inter-Action Centre”
north of London. Price’s view was that the architecture must “enable
people to think the unthinkable” and should be “enabling,
liberating, and life-enhancing” (British Council.) His designs for
this purpose consisted primarily of modular and moveable structures allowing
for customization and change to allow for a plethora of creative and ludic
pursuits. Key to the design and Price’s thesis was the impermanence
of the building, including instructions for its later dismantlement and
recycling. Evidence that he was not, however, deluded about the power
of architecture is obvious in his suggestion that “the man hoping
to transform his life with a new house might be better off getting a divorce.”
Joan Littlewood and Price’s design for the “Fun Palace”,
a leisure center planned for the Lea Valley Regional Park in the UK, is
described as the “project [that] probably came closest to making
the dream of a spontaneous leisure architecture for the 1960’s into
a reality” (Sadler 135.)
A more contemporary example of ludic architecture is appropriately more
virtual. The projects of the German firm “Rude Architecture”
attempt to engage the urban inhabitant in ways which take advantage of
current technology. “Chat Stop” a project which takes advantage
of the video surveillance already in place at bustops in Berlin, converts
them into interactive chat rooms, where people can videoconference with
others waiting for the bus at other locations around the city. The transit
commuters of Berlin are safer and more playful at the same time. A second
project also involves mass transportation:
“Urban_Diary was an installation realised [sic] in Berlin, in
which diary entries could be transmitted via SMS. All submissions were
displayed on the platform of the underground line 2, located at Alexanderplatz
station.
Urban_Diary is an urban-planning project, an active architecture. We
view the stimulation of urban processes as a form of up-to-date urban
planning, and the design of temporary spaces for urban interaction as
a type of contemporary architecture.” (Rude Architecture)
The use of mass transporation as a “vehicle” of sorts for
ludic architecture is a recurring theme. Whether installations such as
Rude’s qualify as architecture or as installation art is certainly
questionable but their function of engaging the public to participate
in an environment that is part of the “everyday” of the city
is clear.
Constant, in his ludic vision, seems to argue that if only we can be free
from work we will be able to achieve a ludic epitome – and an end
to the city as we know it. There are several problems with this model,
the first being that the loss of the city would be a great tragedy and
the resulting placelessness is certainly not freedom. As much as the ludic
element is important to the functional, the “faber” element
is essential to the ludic. Price and Littlewood’s Fun-Palace design
“confined their army of technical assistants to quarters in the
Fun Palace’s service basement” (Sadler 138.) This indicates
a clear separation between “play” and the workings of the
architecture and the facility. Constant demonstrates a similar move in
New Babylon, separating technical services so that “New Babylonians
would have been as ignorant of the mechanical workings of their environment
as Ludwig II of Bavaria was indifferent to the weary electrician and workmen
stoking the furnaces at his Linderhof grotto. ‘I don’t want
to know how it works,” Ludwig is reputed to have said. ‘I
just want to see the effects.’” (Sadler 138.) This thesis
is a reaction against this attitude that the functional aspects of a ludic
architecture need to be pushed out of sight. Indeed, the working element
of structures and the city are some of the most inspiring and ludic aspects
of their existence.
Also, the idea of world where humans have no reason to work because everything
is automated is fundamentally flawed. Humans as a whole tend to work regardless
of automation and technology – indeed more so. Instead of these
things liberating us to play more they have liberated us to work more.
This statement does not eliminate the need for the ludic element in architecture,
indeed, it reinforces the need for places of creativity in the urban context.
Ludic architecture has no point if it is not in a functional context.
The question remains whether the idealism of a ludic architecture can
be realized in a modern city. Constant’s idealism is admired by
this thesis, but rejects it as wholly impractical. Price’s principal
of the flexible building for creative use is a sound one, and Rude Architecture’s
interventions on the existing urban landscape take advantage of the functional
as an insertion point for the ludic. To that end, this proposal is an
assertion that ludic architecture can and should be realized but only
in a manner that recognizes the element of the pragmatic “faber”
element as essential to the ludic. It is a proposal for a multi-use structure
for active and creative pursuits in Chicago that engages the city and
its occupants by attaching to a major transportation network. Chicago
is historically a “working” city, made from its importance
as an industrial and commercial center of the Midwest. This aspect of
its urban realities make it ideal for the siting of this thesis of ludic
architecture, and their interface will be the key component in the design.
The existing functional infrastructure present in the city will be the
landscape for the ludic intervention. It will not turn its back on the
most essential functional working elements of the city, but use them as
a vehicle for play.
Primary
Reference Sources:
Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture.
Boston. Beacon Press. 1955
Sadler, Simon. The Situationist City. Cambridge. The MIT Press. 1998
Rude Architecture website. www.rude-architecture.de. April 4, 2006.
Formal Examples:
Constant Niewenhuis: New Babylon
Cedric Price: Fun-Palace (unbuilt) Inter-Action Centre (built, 1977 Kentish
Town, UK).
Rude Architecture: Chat_Stop, Urban_Diary installation Berlin.
0.3 Methodology
0.31 Research Methodology:
The research methodologies I intend to use are as follows:
a. Further detailed study of Cedric Price’s designs and analysis
of the practical aspects of implementing Price’s concepts in a
modern urban environment.
b. Research possibilities of interventions such as Rude’s “Urban_Diary”
attached to public transportation and similar interventions particularly
along the Chicago Transit Authorities train lines.
c. Investigate similar play-oriented facilities in Chicago such as the
Redmoon Theater, the Old Town School of Folk Music, and Parks District
Fieldhouses.
d. Contact current owner of Megamall buildings.
e. Make contact with various community groups to discuss their intentions
and needs for the site. Logan Square community groups include: West
Logan Square, North Logan Square, Logan Triangle Association, and Greater
Goethe Neighborhood Association block groups, Fullerton Avenue Chamber
of Commerce, Economic Development Commission of Greater Logan Square,
Logan Square Neighborhood Association, St. John Berchman’s Church
and School, 4th Congregational Church, Ceasefire.
f. Meet with Alderman Rey Colon, 35th ward.
g. City Hall: Contact the Department of Planning and Development, the
office that made the request for proposals for this site. Landmarks
division: check possible historical significance of some of the Megamall’s
façade’s. Department of Records: history of site, check
department of buildings information on the site.
h. Newberry Library: research historical nature of site, maps, historical
information on the train.
i. Chicago Transit Authority: contact regarding interface with train
trench.
j. Extensive photo-documentation of site from all available angles including
the train.
0.32 Design Methodology
The design methodologies I intend to use are as follows:
a. Photo-collages of the special experience of the site and possible
interventions will be a key element in the design. Video may also be
used depending on available resources.
b. Massing models of surrounding site elements will be critical because
the site’s context is extremely important to the design.
c. Study of modular and/ or flexible materials and elements.
0.4 Site Selection
The chosen site is located at the intersection of Milwaukee ave. and Logan
Blvd. in Chicago, Il. This is in the center of the Logan Square neighbourhood
and 3.5 miles northwest of the Loop.
The site is at the point where the Blue line CTA train goes underground
and changes from being an elevated line to an underground subway. This
creates a long trench in the ground around which the land is currently
vacant. The existing train infrastructure is vital to the ludic and functional
intentions of this thesis. Also on the site are several buildings which
make up the “Discount Mega Mall”, which was closed in June
2005 after the building’s owner was cited with 112 building, health,
and safety code violations. The city has since acquired the property and
the Department of Planning and Development has issued a call for redevelopment
proposals. The available land is quite large at 4 acres and whether the
whole site will be used for this thesis remains to be determined. Half
the site is zoned B3-3 which is “Community Shopping District”
and has an FAR of 3, the other half (where the existing “Megamall”
is) is zoned C2-2 with an FAR of 2.2. It is also in a tax increment financing
district.
0.5 Building Program
The building can be described as a multi-purpose activities center &
artspace, open to the general public and providing facilities similar
to a community centre or school, as well as multipurpose areas. *An undecided
aspect is whether to include an element similar to the former Megamall
which was a highly functional, though problematic, institution. This would
consist of available space for vendors.
Art Studios 5000 s.f.
Art Classrooms 5000 s.f.
Gallery/ Exhibition Space 3000 s.f.
Theatre 14,000 s.f.
Digital Media Centre 2000 s.f.
Daycare 2000 s.f
After-school Daycare 2000 s.f.
Youth Centre 2000 s.f.
Gym 5000 s.f
Pool 6000 s.f.
Locker Rooms 2000 s.f.
Gym Equipment & Storage 800 s.f.
Reception areas (multiple) 4000 s.f.
Restrooms (multiple) 2000 s.f.
Café 1000 s.f.
*Market area (possibility) 4000 s.f.
Outdoor stage 1500 s.f.
Circulation/ utility/ misc. 10,000 s.f.
Significant outdoor space TBD
Total: 84,800 s.f./ 7,878 s.m.
Conclusion: This program, though large, leaves available significant open
space if the whole 4 acre site is used.
0.6 Bibliography
Design Museum, British Council. “Cedric Price, Architect.”
http://www.designmuseum.org/design/index.php?id=92. April 6, 2006.
Huizinga, Johan. Homo Ludens: A Study of the Play-Element in Culture.
Boston. Beacon Press. 1955
Rude Architecture website. www.rude-architecture.de. April 4, 2006.
Sadler, Simon. The Situationist City. Cambridge. The MIT Press. 1998
|