Monday, 31 May 2010


Check out these wonderful posts about cardboard architecture, which consisted of an entertaining/comedic analysis on "cardboard fort architecture". The critics, who make up an American architectural practice called Build LLC, were fascinated by this underrated design methodology that goes back to every architect's basic instinct, back to their childhood design and build urges, which "helped us figure out the ABCs of design and construction... that helped us get where we are today. " It sort of reminded me of the projects we used to get as first year architecture students, projects like creating an architectural dish or a 1 pound tower.

These posts were very entertaining, but an earlier series on what they called "couch cushion architecture" really made my day. Just like the cardboard series, this couch series examines a more primal example than cardboard boxes as a material, and that is interior furniture. The analysis of each project consisted of light commentary and a mark on each project. Here are some of the submissions along with their evaluation as given by the critics:

A brilliant synergy between the weighted foundation and the light tensile structure, this project impressed us with its attenuation of structure and bright interior spaces. The courtyard and formal entry are also well thought-out and provide a clear means of way-finding.

Grade A+

The A-frame’s sound structural properties and ease of construction have long since proven their architectural merits. We applaud the use of red shag carpet as a departure from what would otherwise be a mere pedestrian form.

Grade: B+

This whimsical project draws inspiration from the classic Tuscan stone towers of Italy; where a taller tower symbolized an owner’s power and prosperity over neighboring structures. Unfortunately the design falls short of greatness with its lackadaisical cushion placement and poor choice of plaid.

Grade: C

While typically the stacked foundation technique leads to a stable and impressive base, this particular application seems dubious. Fraught with apparent labor strikes the project is rumored to have developed irreconcilable technical inadequacies and unresolved scheduling conflicts.

Grade: D-

Good God gentlemen, you’re a mess! You need walls, you need a roof. Get to work man!

Grade: F

No comments: