Eireen Schreurs In the famous novel by Jane Austen, Sense and Sensibility, the plot revolves around two sisters, one with good sense and the other with great sensibility. The novel follows the two quite opposite characters throughout their life struggles and their ability to conquer them, but only with the help of the other, as it appears. Up until the end of the story, it remains ambiguous whether sense or sensibility triumphs. The MScl programme of the TU Delft Chair of Interiors has adopted this title, based on the conviction that teaching architecture is essentially a balancing act, even to the point that students might begin to wonder if we are schizophrenic. We force them to think academically, yet we urge them to trust their instincts. We ask them to analyse societal demands, while simultaneously expecting them to take a position. We want them to build arguments, yet we dare to call its result 'unbalanced'. How is it possible to compose an educational method that meets such seemingly conflicting learning goals? 10 studio: Library Positions
Before discussing the educational approach adopted by the Chair of Interiors, we should explain why this balancing act is so important. This will require us to introduce our other professional lives - our firms, which inevitably shape our ideas on teaching. As architects, we have learned our position in the world; we have learned to understand the ever-changing context, and our years in practice have taught us our modest place as designers within it. It is within this setting that we must set out arguments, in addition to analysing and solving problems, with an attitude towards the clients and the assignment that is both critical and productive. At the same time, we must be creative and flexible, quick and intuitive in our response and socially engaged, and we must hold our ground regarding our own position, in which we pursue our own ideas and fascinations.the balance between academia and craft is what makes our profession quite special, and this continuous shift between 'making' and 'thinking' is what we teach. In essence, our Chair is a teaching collective. Despite our highly varied backgrounds, we share an interest in particular themes, architects, discourses and aesthetics. We are continually redefining our position and delineating our realm by writing texts, giving lectures and composing literature lists. Our shared positions and the implicit knowledge of the lecturers are continually actualised in the studio briefs, as well as in our teaching performance. Nevertheless, discussions on our didactic approach are rarely explicit. Although it might seem that we lack the right words or an educational discourse to which we can relate, I suspect it is because our Chair regards our position and our didactics as symbiotic. This first issue ofthe STUDIO series represents an initial attempt to untie the knot of what we teach, how we teach and why we teach. It demonstrates how we 'keep the balance', as an articulation of our didactic and ideological position. Berlin State Library (1964), H. Scharoun 1 : ll '1 L" 1 Rolex Learning Centre (2010), Sanaa 11 Eireen Schreurs
7776 restricted programme brief The M S c l programme at t h e T U Delft forms for most students the first solid design assignment. The f o r m a t i o n o f t h e MSc1 programme starts with a strict definition o f t h e brief, which is firmly focussed on the material reality of architecture the architect's ultimate means of expression.the programme involves a public building. In order to avoid excessive emphasis on the programme, we opt for realistic briefs of average complexity and intermediate scale.they involve well-known typologies: schools, music centres, museums, urban clinics, cultural centres - none too spectacular, none too hybrid. In our teaching, we work from w i t h i n a strong awareness o f t h e historical and programmatic development of buildings, stressing the inextricable relationship of buildings with societal demands and representation. We also encourage students to use the brief pragmatically, however, as a source of inspiration and reference. In the 2012 spring semester, the design brief consisted of a University Study Centre of the Erasmus University, combined with an existing small private library (the Rotterdamsch Leeskabinet).The assignment did not question the programme, but it did offer enough freedom for different interpretations.the Erasmus Study Centre, which is currently housed in a campus outside the city centre of Rotterdam, offered us the opportunity to question the representation of academia in Rotterdam, in addition to societal questions of a more general nature (e.g. the f u ture of books and the place of a library in it).the assignment raised a wide range of issues concerning the public and private spheres. We could discuss the type of public life to be expected in such a place and ways to accommodate it, as well as the private experience of concentration while studying. Because the site we selected for the Study Centre was somewhat constrained, all urban gestures were actually architectural moves. Splendid isolation In our teaching, we frequently work with the t e c h nique of isolation.the studio work is supported by brief exercises focusing on particular themes or aspects of the assignment. Students develop their own sense of architectural quality within a 13 Eireen Sclireurs setting in which only certain aspects of architecture are relevant, while others are not.they must work quickly and t r u s t t h e i r 'first guess', thereby training their design intuition.the so called charettes range from concrete architectural briefs with set products (e.g. preparing a model or a montage) to more associative and speculative assignments, as with the preparation of a 'material manuscript', the Vedute, as described ii the text by colleague Mechthiid Stuhlmacher in this booklet. The charettes have proven to offer an excell e n t t e s t i n g ground.they f o r m u l a t e the research o f t h e studio and feed the discussion on ideas (e.g. how ideas can be worked through in tangibli objects and how they could work as models for their project). For example, in the library studio, we asked students to produce a small reading room in a model scale of 1:50.The critique o f t h e results introduced students to our ways of working and our ambition for the studio. In a very early stage, our comments demonstrated our agenda and served as an invitation for students to take their own positions. At eye level We explicitly teach students to use their eyes in various ways. First, there is the 'critical eye' the academic eye w i t h which students learn to interpret visual information. We teach them to frame themes, to look at details and to recognise relationships.the 'designer eye' does quite the opposite. Rather than reducing information to elements or identifying systems, the designer eye is a way to let reality sink in, of seeing the potential within a certain context.this is the gaze at eye level, with which students learn to recognise and exploit their own experiences or reactions to a situation, site or context. Our stress on using the eye also relates to the ways in which buildings are actually perceived, neither from the plan nor from the oblique view, but f r o m eye level, using client eyes, which are usually not trained. For this reason, we often work with live clients in the studio, in order to help students understand the significance and framing of the future building for its users. A l t h o u g h the awareness and exploitation of social relevance offers singular starting
Housing project Tietgens Aergelse (2010), Tony Fretton Architects. ' points, the sensitivity to multiple perspectives contributes to capable judgment and the ability to transcend the merely individual. One example ofthe development of a more intuitive gaze is contained in an exercise described in this STUDIO by colleague and artist/architect/ photographer Mark Pimlott. In his lecture, he Introduced the photo exercise of the firs studio week, in which students were invited to look at the site with their eyes wide op^n-what's there? What can 1 use? What interests me? What would fif? Repeated visits to the site and discussions in the studio provided a tool with which students could look contextually and from their own personal experiences. Although the resulting images seemed unfocussed at first, the students picked up themes ranging from the urban (e.g. the building as part of the skyline) to the architectural (e.g. the site as a sequence of enclosed spaces) and the historical (e.g. the site as a collision of buildings from different eras), Severa of the themes re-emerged in the students work, thus affirming the relevance ofthe 'gaze. Column - Johan celsing Architecture and the elements in the studio, we make students aware o the fact that their position can ultimately and only be expressed through architecture.there will never be a sign in the front garden to clarify the intention of the building nor to provide an explanation of its details. Architectural elements are the only means with which to translate abstract ideas into form. In other words, they have to communicate An awareness of how these elements work and what they signify is an Important part of our teaching. In addition to questioning the material choices, we question our position as architects with regard to these choices. Studio discussions aim to reveal the potential of various architectural elements. We refer to modernist automatisms (e.g. the abstraction ot the detail) and show students what the exposition of elements can bring. We shovv them that the construction is more than merely a technical device to fix gravity; it is an essential arch'tectural tool that provides a distinct logic and rhym to the building.this is equally true for an elemen like the fagade, as colleague Dirk Somers argues in his polemic essay 'What happened to the 14 Studio: Library Positions
fagade?' In this context, architecture is regarded as an autonomous project, even though it is informed by cultural and historical conditions. Good education What makes good education?there is no formula, butthere is a set of shared principles.this STUDIO can be seen as a frame within a timeline. Bad education stands still. Good education, we believe, is contextual in its essence, and it keeps sharpening its position. It is an education that situates itself between the situation 'out there' and the academic context It continuously develops and reacts to what students already know or do not know, and what they can or cannot do.the position described above is the basis, which leads us to test ever new grounds. What, then, is a good student project?the charettes n the studio appear to have predictive value. Ifthe exercises are consistent, it means thatthe student is speaking with his own voice. In many cases, the final design is also good: it is informed, it is personal and it is rich in ideas. Once students have found the balance between sense and sensibility, they can fly away. Davey van Giesen Photo, Vedute, Charette, Design 15 Eireen Schreurs
16 studio: Library Positions
Erik Revelle Narutai Riangkruar Nadine Spielmann 17 Week 3-4: Reading Room Cliarette