Representing Architecture Naively

“Naïve in a way that it doesn’t pretend that it is capable to represent built architecture completely, but that understands its limitless power in going beyond: Transmitting explicitly the experience of space rather than space itself.”

It is a fun time for architectural representation. Extreme realism, destined to deceive clients, is dead. A rendering, as good as it is, is never going to represent reality completely. There is always space for lie, for error. Maybe architectural concept shouldn’t be materialized at all. The paradox lies in the fact that built architecture never fully represents the effort in conceptualizing space that precedes it. Then, let’s ask: Why bother making realist renderings? I think we’re better off using an aesthetic that allows conceptualization at its maximum. One that allows imagination to thrive, one that makes content infinitely richer. Making content equivalent in weight as the final product; Making concept as a separate, independent characteristic of architecture and not using it only as a mere representation tool.

Es una época divertida para la representación arquitectónica. El hiperrealismo, destinado siempre a decepcionar a los clientes, ha muerto. Un render, por más bueno que sea, nunca va a representar la realidad totalmente. Siempre hay un margen de error; Y seamos honestos, siempre decepciona. Quizás el concepto arquitectónico está destinado a nunca materializarse. La paradoja está en que la arquitectura construida nunca representará el fondo de manera completa. Entonces, ¿Por qué sufrir tanto con hacer un render tan “realista”? Creo que es mejor usar una plástica que permita conceptualizar al extremo. Que deje espacio para la imaginación, cosa que el contenido se hace infinitamente más rico. Hacer que el concepto tenga el mismo peso que el producto final; que se desligue y aporte, y que deje de buscar solo representarlo.

H House By Franco Ferraro and Martín Dulanto.jpg
Naive Representation of H House. Design by Franco Ferraro and Martín Dulanto.

For quite a while I’ve been interested in representing architecture naively. Naïve in a way that it doesn’t pretend that it is capable to represent built architecture completely, but that understands its limitless power in going beyond: Transmitting explicitly the experience of space rather than space itself. This way it complements built space, and gives way to surprise, improvisation and learning.

Hace ya bastantes meses que vengo interesado en representar la arquitectura de forma ingenua. Ingenua en el sentido que no pretende representar de la manera más “real” la arquitectura, sino que comprende que la conceptualización es distinta y complementaria del producto final (la arquitectura construida); Y que transmite explícitamente la experiencia del espacio sobre el espacio en sí.  Da lugar al aprendizaje, a la improvisación y la sorpresa.

I am fond of a representation style that is related to illustration. I find it useful because with it I can tell a story much easier. Comic strips, for example, are a great tool: With it you can represent life, praxis, and events that are, at the end, what truly define architecture. Tired of the frivolity in hyper-realism, “magic realism”, along with 2D of the 60’s, are back for good.

Me gusta mucho un estilo muy ligado a la ilustración. Me parece adecuado porque a través de este estilo es muy fácil contar una historia.  El cómic, por ejemplo, es una muy buena herramienta:  Es capaz de representar la vida, la praxis, los eventos que finalmente definen la arquitectura. Hartos de la frialdad de las vistas realistas, vuelve el “realismo mágico” y cálido del 2D de los 60’s; Espero que para quedarse un buen tiempo.

For more:

I find Fala Atelier to be my top inspiration on naive representation of architecture. I absolutely love how they use Rousseau paintings cutouts to give life to their work. (If you watch closely, I have used them myself!) You can learn more about them on their Instagram and Webpage.

 

3 thoughts on “Representing Architecture Naively

  1. sino que comprende que la conceptualización es distinta y complementaria del producto final (la arquitectura construida).
    De acuerdo con usted, tenemos en la Isla de la Juventud, el Presidio Modelo, que ya no funciona como presidio ( puede ver las fotos en mi blogg). Hay algo construido, sin uso, y pensamos…. que hacer con tantas edificación inherte. ….

    Rather you understand that conceptualization is different and you would complement of the final product ( the constructed architecture ).
    According to you, we take after at the Island the young, the Model Prison, that no longer it works like prison ( you can see the photos in my blogg ). There is something constructed, unused, and we thought … That to make with so many edification inherte. ….( in stop…)

    Like

  2. Estupenda reflexión, Franco! Me encanta la comparación con Rousseau. No todo es lo que parece! Y en la arquitectura es particularmente así!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s