Blobby Stuff - Parametricism

PARAMETRICISM

Schumacher's presentation on parametricism covers three principles: no rigid forms, no repetition, no unrelated collage of elements. Parametricism aims to create soft forms that respond intelligently to a set parameter, thus creating differentiated elements cohesively. Schumacher argues that contemporary city designs today are filled with distinct features that create visual chaos. The role of parametricism is a solution that allows the designer to create complex organic forms that respond to each other through a set environmental parameter. These new organic forms differ from the traditional primitive shape of cubes, sphere, cone etc and work with new primitives such as splines, blobs, NURBS, particles and scripts. Schumacher states that the old primitives were rigid and that parametricism offer a fluidity that allows flexibility. Through parametricism, Schumacher was able to find an infinite richness of forms that resembled nature.

Schumacher argues that future style should be parametricism, the designs of urbanscape should and can be done through parametricism i.e Instanbul masterplan. The benefits of parametricism offer variations for contemporary society and their need for identity and differences. 

In my opinion, I disagree that the future style should be parametricism. While parametricism is a useful and powerful design tool that creates quite elegant forms, it's principles discards any cultural references. Schumacher saw that Asian countries looked heavily on analogies to justify designs, thus utilising parametricism as an opportunity to break that. The resulting form creates an alien-like building and overtakes the landscape. If we translate that language across an entire urbanscape, the result would generate a hive-like alien inhabitation that would seem very foreign to us. The lack of identity and cultural significance would be a loss for us and a loss for humankind's history moving forward. 

"you can't plan emotion, and you can't plan meaning. "

curious.

Can you create an artwork without reference or symbolism that achieves its intended purpose of eliciting a predetermined emotional response?

What about a musical composition? or a choreographed dance performance? 

Indeed what is the purpose of any art-form if not to provoke an emotional response or affective resonance?

Moreover....

How would you design(plan) "details which achieve the human right of joy-in-inhabitation" without being able to plan for a joyful experience?

Responding to Anthony's response to Ethan

I guess there's only so much that you could plan for in human emotions. Everyone has their unique take on emotions when experiencing a space, which might or might not be affected through external circumstances i.e. weather, other psychological matters. As a designer, I can only begin to assume what the majority would feel in a particular space through either my own experiences or reviews by others. Hence, to evoke a specific emotion, we would start by looking at precedents, and like art, reference to elicit the desired feeling.

Even so, spaces are perceived differently by everyone. For Ethan, a 3 by 2.5 bedroom is a comfortable size because he is used to that space. However, I might feel like a 3 by 2.5 bedroom is a bit cramped to inhabit. Sometimes the people using the space exceeds the designer's expectations. With so many elements to care for, we can't cover all the possibilities. Perhaps a new generation with different interests and backgrounds begins to inhabit our space which we couldn't have accounted for; how would we plan for emotions then?