Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Tiago Pinto Alves Sá
Data de Publicação: 2012
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://hdl.handle.net/10216/80405
Resumo: In the beginning, Man was nomadic. Managing to establish roots in a place, in his evolutionary process became sedentary. Does the Man of the future want to be nomadic again? Aren't we regressing to the times when, some on foot, others with packs animals, were loaded with the supplies they could find in a place and proceeded to the next unknown destination? The difference nowadays, is that we limit ourselves to meet the weight restrictions of any lowcost airline, on arrival at whatever destination we get to, search the architectural "IKEA", and for a negligible cost we can get our cubicle and then we'll be able to set down anywhere we want whenever we want. The emergence of this growing globalized society gradually abandoned the tradition of continuity and permanence provoking new approaches to the concept of living, increasingly growing apart from questions like roots/origins and cultural identity. In this sense, the mobility, based on new physical and geographical infrastructures, induced a new urban appropriation based on transience, evoking the concept of non-place due to the circumstantial passage of Man, disturbing the perception of the society as we know it. Then, Take-away architecture relates to a reduction of architecture to the concept of franchising. It's the "do-it-yourself" architecture, an analogy between anrchitecture and the consumer market of the take-away and fast food. On the other hand, Take architecture away means the absolute reduction of architecture to nothing. It's the extreme of this growing society with no more room to occupy that would be fine to settle anytime, anywhere. It's a future where people simply conform to whatever is already build and just keep on assembling, overlaying the pre-existence with new forms of living spaces with unpredictable character or imagetic. Nomads developed lightweight portable structures. Sedentary preferred caves, followed by wood and stone constructions. Nowadays the rigidity of the built environment isn't following our needs. Architecture will have to keep up with the Man. If we decide we are destroying the environment we start building ecological. If we see that we are running out of resources we build sustainable. What when we realize that we need to move faster? Whose should be the disciplines to decide that? Could some kind of interdisciplinary fusion between design, architecture and urbanism solve this issue as it has been solving so far? It's not possible to know in advance what will happen in the future of architecture, but a rigorous analysis of the past and the constant evolution and renovation of dwelling, may allow us to understand some hipothesis of response to the present and future issues for this question.
id RCAP_684fabb27c7655946731a9b407b33ed5
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/80405
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture awayArtesArtsIn the beginning, Man was nomadic. Managing to establish roots in a place, in his evolutionary process became sedentary. Does the Man of the future want to be nomadic again? Aren't we regressing to the times when, some on foot, others with packs animals, were loaded with the supplies they could find in a place and proceeded to the next unknown destination? The difference nowadays, is that we limit ourselves to meet the weight restrictions of any lowcost airline, on arrival at whatever destination we get to, search the architectural "IKEA", and for a negligible cost we can get our cubicle and then we'll be able to set down anywhere we want whenever we want. The emergence of this growing globalized society gradually abandoned the tradition of continuity and permanence provoking new approaches to the concept of living, increasingly growing apart from questions like roots/origins and cultural identity. In this sense, the mobility, based on new physical and geographical infrastructures, induced a new urban appropriation based on transience, evoking the concept of non-place due to the circumstantial passage of Man, disturbing the perception of the society as we know it. Then, Take-away architecture relates to a reduction of architecture to the concept of franchising. It's the "do-it-yourself" architecture, an analogy between anrchitecture and the consumer market of the take-away and fast food. On the other hand, Take architecture away means the absolute reduction of architecture to nothing. It's the extreme of this growing society with no more room to occupy that would be fine to settle anytime, anywhere. It's a future where people simply conform to whatever is already build and just keep on assembling, overlaying the pre-existence with new forms of living spaces with unpredictable character or imagetic. Nomads developed lightweight portable structures. Sedentary preferred caves, followed by wood and stone constructions. Nowadays the rigidity of the built environment isn't following our needs. Architecture will have to keep up with the Man. If we decide we are destroying the environment we start building ecological. If we see that we are running out of resources we build sustainable. What when we realize that we need to move faster? Whose should be the disciplines to decide that? Could some kind of interdisciplinary fusion between design, architecture and urbanism solve this issue as it has been solving so far? It's not possible to know in advance what will happen in the future of architecture, but a rigorous analysis of the past and the constant evolution and renovation of dwelling, may allow us to understand some hipothesis of response to the present and future issues for this question.2012-07-172012-07-17T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/10216/80405porTiago Pinto Alves Sáinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-11-29T13:44:16Zoai:repositorio-aberto.up.pt:10216/80405Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T23:46:53.602667Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
title Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
spellingShingle Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
Tiago Pinto Alves Sá
Artes
Arts
title_short Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
title_full Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
title_fullStr Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
title_full_unstemmed Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
title_sort Take-away Architecture: Take Architecture away
author Tiago Pinto Alves Sá
author_facet Tiago Pinto Alves Sá
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Tiago Pinto Alves Sá
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Artes
Arts
topic Artes
Arts
description In the beginning, Man was nomadic. Managing to establish roots in a place, in his evolutionary process became sedentary. Does the Man of the future want to be nomadic again? Aren't we regressing to the times when, some on foot, others with packs animals, were loaded with the supplies they could find in a place and proceeded to the next unknown destination? The difference nowadays, is that we limit ourselves to meet the weight restrictions of any lowcost airline, on arrival at whatever destination we get to, search the architectural "IKEA", and for a negligible cost we can get our cubicle and then we'll be able to set down anywhere we want whenever we want. The emergence of this growing globalized society gradually abandoned the tradition of continuity and permanence provoking new approaches to the concept of living, increasingly growing apart from questions like roots/origins and cultural identity. In this sense, the mobility, based on new physical and geographical infrastructures, induced a new urban appropriation based on transience, evoking the concept of non-place due to the circumstantial passage of Man, disturbing the perception of the society as we know it. Then, Take-away architecture relates to a reduction of architecture to the concept of franchising. It's the "do-it-yourself" architecture, an analogy between anrchitecture and the consumer market of the take-away and fast food. On the other hand, Take architecture away means the absolute reduction of architecture to nothing. It's the extreme of this growing society with no more room to occupy that would be fine to settle anytime, anywhere. It's a future where people simply conform to whatever is already build and just keep on assembling, overlaying the pre-existence with new forms of living spaces with unpredictable character or imagetic. Nomads developed lightweight portable structures. Sedentary preferred caves, followed by wood and stone constructions. Nowadays the rigidity of the built environment isn't following our needs. Architecture will have to keep up with the Man. If we decide we are destroying the environment we start building ecological. If we see that we are running out of resources we build sustainable. What when we realize that we need to move faster? Whose should be the disciplines to decide that? Could some kind of interdisciplinary fusion between design, architecture and urbanism solve this issue as it has been solving so far? It's not possible to know in advance what will happen in the future of architecture, but a rigorous analysis of the past and the constant evolution and renovation of dwelling, may allow us to understand some hipothesis of response to the present and future issues for this question.
publishDate 2012
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2012-07-17
2012-07-17T00:00:00Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/10216/80405
url https://hdl.handle.net/10216/80405
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799135786704044032