During the pre-master we were introduced to the world of architecture and how to view it. We learned to analyse and how to convey our findings through text, imagery but also video. Finally we combined our learned skills and used them to analyse a building of choice and write an essay about it.
PRESENTATION
Though it was the last assignment I finished, it was the first one we were given. The assginment was to analyse two buildings in pairs and compare them on the basis of a subject. With this assignment I worked together with Maurice. In our case this was "formal". The buildings we were assigned were the Möbius House by Unstudio and the Villa Müller by Adolf Loos.
architube
Assignment 2: architube was all about visually presenting a building by filming the analysis. For this assignment we chose Museum Arnhem. For the analysis we visited the museum and experienced its architecture first hand. We looked at nine different aspects of the building to give a complete picture. I was responsible for two aspects: context and skin. We made the analysis together of course, but to be able to go really in depth into the building we split up the different aspects.
Context
Museum Arnhem is situated on a beautiful location in Arnhem. It is positioned on the south of the Utrechtseweg, which runs from the central station to the west of Arnhem, giving the museum a good connection with both the city centre and public transport. The museum is clearly visible from the road, drawing in people may be interested in what the building holds. But as the museum is situated directly next to the road, there is no real walkway leading to the entrance of the museum. This makes the routing to the entrance somewhat unclear and abrupt.,In the front of the building, there are facilities to park your bike. And even though there is a good connection by bike and public transport, getting to the museum by car is not as efficient. There are no parking facilities for cars, so visitors will have to park in the parking garage underneath the central station. Around the museum lays a garden filled with art, which is publicly accessible. This makes the museum feel more like a part of Arnhem and the garden more as a park for the everyday person.
One aspect which makes the location of the museum so special, is the fact that it is positioned on the edge of the moraine. The result of this are the beautiful unobstructed views of the Meinerswijk and the southern part of Arnhem. This was something the architects of the new extension made use of. In May of 2022 the extension was finished, adding to the complex of the museum originally build in 1873. This extension plays with the unique features of the landscape, by making it protrude over the edge of
the moraine with a stunning 10 meters. This makes the extension visible from the road
beneath, bringing it into view where it would otherwise have been hidden. Making it one of the most characteristic buildings of Arnhem.
Skin
When looking at the skin of the building. There is a clear distinction between the old and new part of the museum.
The old part has a traditional building style and facade. The central volume of the complex is the most detailed, emphasizing that it’s the entrance of the museum. The facade is finished with white cladding and is decorated with all kinds of ornaments. Arches above windows add to the style and classical appearance of the building. These details are symmetrical on both sides of the central entrance, giving the building a formal and stately presence. On the rear side of the main volume, the facade is more open, giving way to a view of the garden. The two wings of the building are simpler in detail and have plainly cladded walls. On the rear side of each of these wings there is an old gate in the centre of the facade. These gates are beautifully decorated with concrete ornaments, making you question why they are no longer in use.
The new extension of the museum totally contrasts with the old part in both architectural style and facade design. The extension is very modern and sharply detailed. The facade is finished with tiles, giving it a very clean appearance. The architects also played with the tone of the tiles across the length of the extension. On the street side the tiles are darker, but as the building gets closer to the edge of the moraine, the tiles become lighter in tone. This gives the visual gesture that the building get lighter as it approaches the edge. This part of the building is mostly closed, only having windows in a few key parts of the design. By doing so the museum is closed off to direct light, protecting the art inside, while still providing some beautiful views of the surrounding nature and the garden. Skylights are added to bring in natural light and also create a more spatial experience.
Reflection
When looking at the video as final product I think we made a fairly complete analysis of the building and its architecture. We touched on the parts which were important to show and I think we succeeded in giving a comprehensive view of the museum. I do think we could have linked the imagery better to the voice-over, like in the beginning. The person who edited the video wanted to give the sensation like you were really standing in the museum and left the shots long and uncut. But by doing so you were left somewhat wanting some visuals of what was talked about. I also think the connection between the old and new part could have been touched on in the details part of the video. But nevertheless I think that the video was interesting and informative enough and succeeded in its goal.
ARTICLE
The third assignment was all about analysing text and imagery. For this assignment we had to pick one specific article out of a magazine about a single Dutch building. We had to analyse this article on several aspects like the main analyses and reflection of the writer. But we also had to answer the questions: who is the author?, for whom is it written? and what is the relation between text and image?
THE ARTICLE
The article I chose is about Villa Kavel 01, by Studioninedots. It was part of the may edition from the magazine De Architect. The article is a general analysis and description of the project.
The author
Willem Wopereis is the author of this article. He is an architect himself, currently working at HofmanDujardin. He has worked as a freelance writer and editor for De Architect over the period of two years and 8 months. As he is an architect himself it could be concluded that he has proper knowledge of the subject and is a trustworthy writer when it comes to architecture.
The audience
After reading the article, my guess is that it is written for people interested in architecture bot also interior design. In the article the author uses a general amount of terminology specific to architecture and engineering. This convinced me that the article is written for those who have decent knowledge of the subject. I also noticed that the article is also about the engineering of the project. This is something not everyone will find interesting if they’re only interested in design. So I’d say the article is also written
for those with a more technical background. This could also be interesting for an architect looking for reference.
Text-image
Something that stood out to me was that the second paragraph touches on the layput of the floor plan, but the floor plans are on a whole different page. So while you’re reading you want to look at the floor plan, trying to understand what the author is saying. But for that you need to switch to another page, losing context and ease of reading. Same goes for the detail drawings. These show the construction and engineering, but are not placed anywhere near the texted where this is discussed. Even though the text can stand alone on itself, you do want some confirmation to your imagination while reading. In my opinion the text and related images could be positioned better.
Structure
The article opens with an introduction, giving a general summary of what the article is about. Even though it gives an accurate description, it doesn’t really spike your interest. After the introduction the second paragraph explains how the project came to be, what the context and concept of the project is. Then it continues to go on about the exterior design, falling somewhat out of context with the focus of the paragraph. After this the article goes into the interior of the project. The fourth paragraph is about the vertical division of the programme and some reasons behind the design of the first floor and the basement.
The final paragraph is about the teamwork between the different parties involved in the design process. There’s no real summarizing end or really a paragraph to end with at all. The final sentence “De kracht van het project is zichtbaar in het onzichtebare.” could be read as a final sentence, but I’d say it’s a weak end to such an article.
Main analysis
The article touches on a lot of different aspects of the design. There isn’t really a main story line that continues throughout the article. This is confirmed by the introduction of the article on the first page, which is basically a short summary of the analysis and not really a strong point (see quote below).
„Op een ruitvormige kavel in de pint van een eiland in IJburg staat een zwarte monoliet. Het abstracte volume oogt op afstand robuust, maar is tot in de kleinste details uitgewerkt. De villa voor een jong gezin is tekenend voor de integrale werkwijze van Studioninedots. Door de eigen engineeringsafdeling in een vroeg stadium in te schakelen houdt het bureau het proces in eigen hand.”
Main reflection
The author doesn’t really reflect on the design. He mostly states some facts, which could be considered as part of the analysis. He does give his opinion about the effect of the ‘brown’ concrete and the light coloured floors. Here he says that it creates a warm character to the interior. He also states that the ground floor plan is made usable by the interior blocks. This is definitely an opinion instead of a fact, as the floor plan is totally not usable and rather a waste of space in my opinion.
Things that stood out to me
Something that annoyed me very much was the way some sentences were spread out over several pages. Sentences didn’t end on the end of a page, but continued on the other side. This made reading more difficult than it needs to be. But the worst case was one sentence that was spread out over 5 pages!
Something else that stood out to me was that the paragraph about engineering wasn’t really about engineering. It was more about the teamwork between different parties instead of how the building was engineered.
Essay
The fourth and final assignment was to write an essay. For this we had to visit a building of choice and analyse it. Based on our analyses we had to write an essay where we had to use words and images to present our analysis. I chose the Rietveld Pavilion designed by Gerrit Rietveld, located at the Krüller Möller Museum in Arnhem.
