Disorderly order
There are some things which I’m not clear about “disorderly order”.
First of all, how do we define “disorderly”?
Do we define it as “something that is not orderly”?
If we do, does “orderly” refer to industrial aesthetic?
Secondly, why do we seek “disorderliness” ?
Is it because it contrasts with the “orderliness” of industrial aesthetic, which we are trying to get out of?
Or is it because we suspect that it is a necessary resultant aesthetic when we design based on biological sensibilities?
Thirdly, what is the significance of Kheng Soon’s example of taking a photograph of a forest floor with regards to “disorderly order”?
Is it an example of how one can impose an order upon something “disorderly” through framing?
Or is it an example of how one can uncover and express understanding of an inherent order of something “disorderly” through framing?
First of all, how do we define “disorderly”?
Do we define it as “something that is not orderly”?
If we do, does “orderly” refer to industrial aesthetic?
Secondly, why do we seek “disorderliness” ?
Is it because it contrasts with the “orderliness” of industrial aesthetic, which we are trying to get out of?
Or is it because we suspect that it is a necessary resultant aesthetic when we design based on biological sensibilities?
Thirdly, what is the significance of Kheng Soon’s example of taking a photograph of a forest floor with regards to “disorderly order”?
Is it an example of how one can impose an order upon something “disorderly” through framing?
Or is it an example of how one can uncover and express understanding of an inherent order of something “disorderly” through framing?
posted by Weixiong at 2:47 am
2 Comments:
When I look at a forest floor, I sense familarity in what seems to be chaos, establishing that there might be an inherent order in the disorderliness I am witnessing. On the surface, there is perhaps order in say colour (greens, browns), though the contrary is easily found. Looking at the level at which individual items are classified, I might see that a leaf as a system, is a leaf by definition by what we know of certain inherent characteristics, though all leaves are different in formal expression (like the platonian argument on what defines a chair). So the inherent order here may lie in some defined parameters within which all leaves may deviate from. When we take the infinite expressions of the leaf system, and we mix it with the infinite expressions of other systems (say the twig systems, the soil systems, the insect systems etc), we result in a complex weave of chaotic systems that make up the forest floor.
Then I realise that there is another even deeper system, at the molecular level of nature's expression, that of DNA, ATGC, and the infinite variations of these four building blocks that have actually resulted in not just varied expressions, but all the varied systems mentioned above. The complexity and diversity is mind-boggling, yet the underlying order is a sweet and simple solution.
I see some answers to my questions in your comments.
Firstly, it seems like the chaos that we desire imply diversity and unpredictability within a system with fixed laws. So far I only know of one such system: fractals. Of which the fixed law is self-similarity. Many natural objects in their great variety follow this law. This answers the "what" in my questions.
So how can we create chaos in architecture? I can think of some ways.
Mathematically, we can generate facades, floor plans or even volumes based on fractal formulae like the Federation Square in Melbourne.
Metaphorically, we can design something fixed whereby something within it is free to change like Habraken's "open building concept".
This answers the "how" in my questions.
However, I feel that what is most important is why we seek chaos. I'll like to know why u desire chaos. Or do you?
Post a Comment
<< Home