Abstract 4

ADGM 320 Emile LeJeune
Abstract 4 3.17.2009


Tectonics vs. Topology


The opposition between tectonics and topology is not a mutually exclusive relationship, as topology, or blobs, are not the antithesis to tectonics, but an aid that fills the voids of gaps left in the tectonic form. The blob is the ideal of a unique form, dynamic and independent. Surfaces that move through space unhindered, and constantly adapting and changing with its environment. They are not merely objects, but trajectories with no influences, creating complexities and connections, whereas the tectonic reduces a system to its bare identity.
These implications should cast aside notions that buildings are meant to stand vertically in their structural systems, as humans do, but the practical implications must also be considered. This is evident in the application of topological or blob forms in actual construction which has been mostly limited to roof design rather than entirely inclusive architectural design. In the case of the Yokohama International Port Terminal by FOA, a topological design is used in the organization of the site and flexibility of the slabs in the construction. The sketches implicate the use of a Cartesian grid which is modified and altered to fit the needs of the program, progressively meshed into a topological surface, created in practice by the truss roof structure reflecting across the site at the roof level with a morphing surface.
Other projects use a rationalist approach of standardizing construction through the use of fabricated members to create an easily replicated form, yet they also diversify the dimensions of the standard members, creating progressive iterations to influence the evolution of the building. This creates one form that unifies the entire program of a building under one overlay to create connections and a trajectory, in much the same way that blobs do. By changing the members, which in turn change the form of the building, spaces can be distinguished according to organization and use. The replication of construction members is similar to the notion that blobs are not multiplicities of form, but a progression of morphing shape.
The actual practical implications of tectonics vs topology in architecture, is the juxtaposition of rectilinear comprehensible massing forms to the dynamic variables which humanize and disperse the rigidity of the object. The two together create a coherent whole, while each independently may result in uninspired forms.