BP3-15 Architectural Design Studio / Theory of Architectural Design (3.1)

The Faculty of Architecture / Architecture
3rd Year, sem 1, 2021-2022 | Compulsory Course | Hours/Week: 1L+12P | ECTS Credits: 5
Department:
Basics of Architectural Design
Course Leader:
conf.dr.arh Melania Dulămea
Teaching Staff:
conf. dr. arh. Iulian Gudina , șef lucr dr. arh. Emil Ivănescu, conf. dr. arh. Cosmin Caciuc, conf. dr. arh. Ștefan Simion, conf. dr. arh. Florian Stanciu, conf. dr. arh. Liviu Neaga, conf. dr. arh. Melania Dulămea, conf. dr. arh. Dorin Ștefan Adam, prof. dr. arh. Dan Marin, conf. dr. arh. Dragoș Perju, șef lucr dr. arh. Vladimir Nicula, șef lucr dr. arh. Cristina Constantin, șef lucr dr. arh. Cosmin Pavel
Learning outcomes:

Exploring alternative intellectual paths of approach to architecture, building a cultural horizon of understanding the city.
Developing the abilities to identify the major themes of a professional discourse and to explore its connections with the lived experience of the built environment.
Understanding the structuring role of public architecture for the formal and social coagulation of the city.
Understanding the fundamental tension between utopia and contingency in historically significant urban situations.
Training synthesis skills in developing a critical reflection on architecture and the city.

Content:

Theme 1 (III) / Places of the city I. Individual dwelling and grouping of houses, the themes of the 2nd year of study, implicitly attracted a concern for their specific location in the urban setting and for the particular way in which the city looks around some precisely delimited yards. The differentiation between what we call “private” and “public” was also present in the formulation of previous topics and in studio conversations focused on the subject of living individually or together. What we propose for the first exercise of the 3rd year of study is to direct the observation to the public place, deepening the concern both for the concept of place itself, on the one hand, and for the public attribute, on the other hand, in the city context.

Teaching Method:

Case study presentation, teacher-student discussion, project critique

Assessment:

Evaluation through the project by evaluating each student's self-generated study, skills of debate, and the final evaluation in design studio

Bibliography:

Caciuc, Cosmin, “Contextul urban, straturile interpretării și tactica poché / “Urban context, layers of interpretation and poché tactics”, Argument no. 12, Ion Mincu University Press, Bucharest, 2020, pp. 13-38.
Carrera, Judit dir. & Diane Gray ed., Europe City. Lessons the European Prize for Urban Public Space, Centro de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona, Lars Müller Publishers, 2015.

de Solà-Morales, Manuel, “Public Spaces, Collective Spaces” (1992) in Tom Avermaete, Klaske Havik, Hans Teerds, Architectural Positions. Architecture, Modernity and the Public Sphere, SUN Publishers, Amsterdam, 2009, pp. 85-92.

de Solà-Morales, Manuel, “The Impossible Project of Public Space”, in Judit Carrera dir., Magda Anglés ed. In Favour of Public Space. Ten Yerars of the Eurpean Prize for Urban Public Space, Actar, CCCB, Barcelona, 2010, pp. 24-32.

Frampton, Kenneth, A Genealogy of Modern Architecture. Comparative Critical Analysis of Built Form. Lars Müller Publishers, Zürich, 2015, ch. “Towards an Ontological Architecture: a Philosophical Excursus”, pp. 18-27 and ch. “Comparative critical analysis of built form as a pedagogical exercise”, pp. 28-37.
Frampton, Kenneth, “The Status of Man and the Status of his Objects: A Reading of The Human Condition” (1979) republished in K. Michael Hays, ed. Architecture Theory since 1968, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998, pp. 362-377.
Hertzberger, Herman, “Collective Space, Social Use” (2002) in Tom Avermaete, Klaske Havik, Hans Teerds, Architectural Positions. Architecture, Modernity and the Public Sphere, SUN Publishers, Amsterdam, 2009, pp. 93-100.

Norberg-Schulz, Christian, “Heidegger’s Thinking on Architecture” (1983), in Kate Nesbitt, Theorizing a New Agenda for Architecture – An Anthology of Architectural Theory 1965-1995, Princeton Architectural Press, New York, 1996, pp.430-439.
Otero-Pailos, Jorge (2010), “Surplus Experience. Kenneth Frampton and the Subterfuges of Bourgeois Taste” in Jorge Otero-Pailos, Architecture’s Historical Turn. Phenomenology and the Rise of the Postmodern, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 2010: 183-249.
Pérez-Gómez, Alberto, “Engaging the Lifeworld in Architectural Design: Phenomenology and Hermeneutics”, in Karla Cavarra Britton & Robert McCarter, Modern Architecture in the Lifeworld: Essays in Honor of Kenneth Frampton, Thames & Hudson, London, 2020, pp. 94-102
Ricoeur, Paul, “Architecture et Narrativité” (1998), Études Ricoeuriennes / Ricoeur Studies, Vol 7, No 2 (2016), University of Pittsburgh Press, http://ricoeur.pitt.edu, pp. 20-30.
Zucchi, Cino, “Sharing Forms. `Urbanity` as emulation and habit” in David Chipperfield, Kieran Long, Shumi Bose, Common Ground – a Critical Reader, Marsilio, Venezia, 2012, pp. 113-119.

modifică