the Stories of Buildings

Architecture is storytelling to the soul. I help people and organizations understand, translate, and narrate those stories to the world. For me, each story is a chapter in a great book that is both read and written together.

I've always been a bit puzzled by the ego of many architects. The belief for many seems to be that buildings are an expression of the architect's personal philosophy and attitudes towards the world. The problem with this approach is that buildings and architecture, when at their best, become an embodiment of the ideals of those who inhabit and use them.

Our philosophy of architecture has always been to help unleash the creativity of the end user through the development of an intimate understanding of their difficulties, desires, and ambitions. We take this approach of empathy towards the users so that a building not only provides usable space, but becomes a usable, functional expression of the client and end users needs and aspirations.

In many ways, we believe the architect's role is to facilitate the creative process for the client. This does not mean however that the we become a drafting and permitting service for them. It is our responsibility to respectfully challenge their existing notions to find unexpected and innovative solutions.

Ultimately, these things are critical for companies. A building or space is a highly visible component of a company brand that impacts both external and internal perceptions of a business. The care and thought behind every decision becomes obvious after several thousand cumulative man-hours in a space. The building quite literally portrays an identity, it is a realization of identity through the built form. Your hopes, your needs, your story.

These stories become our journey to understand and help shape attitudes about the world we share.

CONima Architects' latest project is in Bloomberg Businessweek

Our recent design for Innovation Endeavor's new Palo Alto office space was featured in Bloomberg Businessweek's article on the unconventional Venture Capital Firm funded by Google's executive chairman and former chief executive officer Eric Schmidt

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/eric-schmidts-newest-vc-fund-07282011.html

The space was designed to be a continually evolving collaboration space that could be reconfigured in minutes for any situation. Every detail was done so that those in the space could see connection details and structural support for everything from the building structure, to the furniture, and that virtually every surface was a potential collaboration point; using such details as plexiglass walls which allow dry erase markers, and simultaneously make the interior wall structure visible.

Architectural Styles Defined: Modern Architecture

Part 3 in our series of articles on the misuse of terms as they apply to the architectural style of a building, and how that misuse leads to poor communication between clients and professionals. Here’s an in-depth look at what defines “Modern Architecture:”

Mies Van Der Rohe's Farnsworth House:

image source farnsworthhouse.org

Let me start by saying "Modern Architecture" is a misnomer. The term modern simply represents the current style of the day that reflects society's impression of itself to the world. Modern architecture as we know it today however started with the International Style, Bauhaus, and the impact of cubist art on the form of a building. Like most styles, it began as a rejection of what was accepted and as an embrace of new technologies. In this case, the progression of steel as a building material allowed greater spans, previously impossible cantilevers, and minimized the ratio of thickness for vertical support. All of which meant that buildings could now be built proportionally in such a different way that they actually didn't even look as though they were capable of standing.

'International Style' Le Corbusier's Villa Savoye:

image source wikipedia

While these buildings are examples of classic modernism, the problematic term is 'classic'. Soon after, a new wave of architects began a new interpretation of how to reconcile the traditional forms of architecture with the new styles and technology in what they called 'Post Modernism'. At the same time, another movement began called 'Brutalism' which spiritually could even be considered a hybrid between modernism and the craftsman movement for truth in materials by leaving rough exposed concrete and using the wooden formwork in many cases to create the finish texture of the concrete.

'Postmodernism' Robert Venturi's House for his mother:

image source about.com

'Brutalism' Paul Rudolph's Westport House (demolished):
image source nothingliving.com

As technology advanced, the limits began to push further. Architects began a new style a 'Deconstruction' which was based on taking traditional geometry, breaking it apart, and then recombining it in different forms. Simple things such as the value of right angles finally came into question, as architects attempted to incorporate new ideas such as chaos theory into space and form.

'Deconstruction' Peter Eisenman's Casa Guardiola:

The question however is, "What is Modern Architecture?" Within the styles described above, the consistent threads are challenges to traditional forms, proportions, and materials; an openness of space, flexibility of arrangement. For the greater part, modern architecture displays a truth in materials and construction. The problem with modern architecture is in the term 'modern'. As time passes, others will decide if the architecture of modernity in the last century is unified as one style and what that style would be called. In the present, there is a strong departure from classic modernism / minimalism, and the deconstruction movement. Whether it remains a pure departure or experiment within 'modernism' such as post-modernism and brutalism remains to be seen.