„space is the form according to wich we organise variations in what occurs to us simultaneously.
time is the form according to wich we organise variations in what occurs in succession.“
architecture words 6: bernard cache projectiles; p 31
„there are two forms of connection between subject and world:
the frame and
the floor.
a typical example of a device for visually framing
the world is a window punched into a wall. for the device to function effectively, there must be a certain distance between the subject and the world. the frame selects some particular element of the disordered environment while screening out all other elements. through this process of elimination, it generates an object -an object summoned from the outside world. thus the frame form is another name for objectification. the world regulated or percieved through the medium of the frame is a world of objects. (…) photography wich regulates the vision of the viewfinder, emerged in the nineteenth century as an extension of that frame form and subsequently became a dominant medium of expression. indeed, in its various guises the frame form is the basis of western perception and expression. it is a means of producing objects and will forever continue to be so.
(…) the frame form, (…) requires subservenience of both subject and object.“
architecture words 2: kengo kuma anti-object; p.35-36
„(…)the other form of connection, the floor form, wich regulates only the floor on wich the subject stands.
this is the traditional form of japanese architecture , a product of post-and-beam construction
in the same way that the frame form is a product of western manosary architecture
(…) the perception of space is controlled, not by the frame of the window
but by the floor. the subject, being of flesh and blood, always stands on a floor of some kind:
he does not look at the world from on high, or float in mid air like a phantom. (…) the floor form only regulates this quite natural state of affairs – and repeatedly reminds the subject of his absolute, unalterable human condition. all physical beings return to the floor form because they have to stand on a floor. therefore , almost all possible relationships between the world and the subject are merely variations on the floor form.“
architecture words 2: kengo kuma anti-object; p.36
the following images therefore reflect on space as a means of simultaneous organisation,
the absolute boundrary of the floor form, as well as the objectification inherit to the medium of photography.
understanding space through the given paradigms raises a need to philosophical contemplation of each image.
this leads to a contemplation on visible influences on tangible space rather than solely tangible space.
real space/ real images. bernard cache analyzes parts of platos „sophist“
(…) someone who claims to know all and teach all must also be an entertainer, and the most technical and most pleasent form of entertainmeint is imitation. a sophist is therefore a maker of spoken images – an imitator. now what, exactly, is an image? there are several kinds. natural images are reflections seen in the water or shadows cast by the sun. architecture words 6: bernard cache projectile; p 76
reflections are distorted, water is rarely a plain surface.
it reacts to environmental influences. on his water/glass building kengo kuma writes:
„(…)water makes our attemps to categorise the world look foolish. water is also a infintely sesitive receptor,
responding to the slightest changes in the environment. whereas objects are always in an active mode,
water is acted upon. even its configuration is determindes by its receptacle. water is consitently passive.“
architecture words 2: kengo kuma anti object; p 38.
using this explanation, natural images as reflections are susceptible to the environmental changes. platos natural images therefore, mirror the world to the degree where the passive surfacearea is affected by the environment. the more calm the situation, the more undistorted the reflection becomes. disrupting the passive surface leads to a disruption in the reflection.
given that premise, clear reflections in environmental charged areas are to an extend not possible. glass can be understood as an artificial form of water, an imitation. glass as a metaphor for water, in that sense, gives rise to a paradox. as a, more or less, static reflective surface, glass doesnt represent the primal form of reflection in water. in addition the vertical use of glass, paired with its framed form, abstracts the reflection to an objectificational experience. the mirrored world extends itself on the reflective surface. this correspondance and the abundant use of glass in architecture lets space extend itself onto its own surfaces, causing a feedback loop of spartial expansion. objects are doubled in reflection. the excess of artificial natural images, floods the urban landscape.
leaving us surrounded by images, that are tethered to their respective spatial objects.
objects are doubled in a quasi stasis, that is broken by the doubled or tripled reflections given by the double glass surfaces. the city begins to float vertically, the horizon tilts around 90°. consecutively following windows form a mirror that is only interrupted by non-reflective mansonary structures. the reflection floats on behind the stone.
multiplication, tilt, movement, time and frame …to be followed…
shadows …to be followed