UIA 2011 World Congress of Architecture
Today, I left my bed early in the morning to attend a theme session of the 24th World Congress of Architecture organized by l’Union Internationale des Architectes (International Architects Union). Unfortunately, some university obligations prevented me from staying for more talks, but I will surely remember this one.
The subject was “Possibility and Responsibility of an environmental design”, and the panel consisted of a Sri Lanka architect, Mr. Madhula Prematilike, and a German engineer, Mr. Thomas Lechner.
As en engineering student, architecture talks and conferences always give an enjoyable feeling of mindlessness — in a very good way. I feel less overwhelmed by tons of formulas and allow myself to think outside of any mathematical constraints, for a change. It’s almost relaxing; and at the same time, I do find the subject deeply interesting. My only regret is that I am still stuck to my original education “motto”, which always brings me back to realism, pragmatism, science, mathematics. I love talking and hearing about architecture, urban planning, implementing ecological solutions while improving daily lives; all these subjects are, to me, at the core of what tomorrow’s world (and in particular cities) will be.
The lack of attractiveness of engineering talks might be due to the intrinsic difficulty in explaining results that derive from complicated formulas. Mr. Lechner’s talk, however, was like in a dream. He mentioned the basic principles of building passive, energy-efficient construction, with an attention given to the surrounding, existing structures. He talked about high-rise buildings that are designed with a double-skin façade. He talked about renewable energies.
It reminded me of that passive building project I did at Ecole des Ponts (and I certainly remember spending a couple of nights on the report). We had to design a scientific base in a national park in Norway, taking into account the researchers team shifts, preservation of the wildlife and the landscape, and of course the environmental aspects. It was an exciting project, especially because of the numerous parameters that we had to consider to find a beautiful design that would comply with the specifications.
He asked that very relevant question: Is the amount of additional materials that we use to improve comfort worth it? That question was, in particular, related to Mr. Prematilike’s talk. Some of Mr. Prematilike’s main rules are “build less”, “build on less”, “build in and out” and so on. (I didn’t write down the others and would like to avoid misquoting.) His positions on “building in and out” result in very welcoming houses, that I think anyone in the conference room would have liked to live in.
Quite paradoxically, my master’s thesis will not consider these subjects, at all. The best I can expect is to include some hint of my interest in the introduction or conclusion. At the same time, the deeper I dive into my research, the more I feel the need to “get some air” by trying to learn as much as I can about that other passion.
One point I need to sort out, though, is my professional target. I guess I’ll have to define the type of job I want to look for. At some point. I don’t have the academic degrees related to these architectural and urban subjects; but my interest is vivid and my skills are adaptable. I just don’t really know in what kind of setting (company or organization) these skills and interests could be put to work.
Small note: I am not recounting Mr. Koizumi’s talks, for the simple and quite stupid reason that I wanted to listen to it in Japanese, and my Japanese level was certainly not sufficiently good… But from what I understood, Japan’s not bad in at all in terms of environmental architecture.
