PARALLEL PROJECTIONS OF INTERCONNECTING CONCEPTS

The following is my interconnected models developed from the previous drawings in week 1.
I did interpret the phrases put forward during week 1 loosely, which is why the specific phrases do not necessarily match the designs.  In this post, I will assess the things I like and dislike to clarify which design I should use in the final crysis model.

1)
Alvar Aalto:
MONUMENTALITY-  Holistic use of singular material (Bricks) heightens sense of monumentality.
Kengo Kuma:
HORIZONTALITY- Horizontality and low scale of the building complements the discreteness and invisibility of the architecture.

 I like this pairing of models. However, when I look at the original two concepts put forward in week 1, they are kind of contradictory. Again, that was because I had initially interpreted the concepts very loosely. I don't think the colours work. I may change that.

2)
Alvar Aalto:
RHYTHMIC ARRANGEMENT OF ELEMENTS-Rhythmic arrangement of elements mimics the tactility of the forest.
Kengo Kuma:
FRAGMENTATION- Dispersal and fragmentation resulting in the building's envelopment by the landscape

This particular amalgamation of models, i think has depth but maybe lacks something. I did push and pull to elongate elements to fix this. I think though that it does communicate two different elements coming together, with a meeting place for the two groups (which would be the mid-section of the structure where the link between them).

3)
Alvar Aalto:
VERTICALITY- Verticality of the elements stresses importance in the landscape.
Kengo Kuma:
FILTER OF LIGHT- Placement of planes as a filter of light

 

I like this design. I think it feels more like a platform for the two groups to meet and share thoughts. I think the colours are subtle enough.