Heidegger states that “A boundary is not that at which something stops but, the boundary is that, from which something begins its presencing”
As we define place within architecture, it is important for us to understand the boundaries that are created within our environment, both physical and perceived. What makes these connections tangible and why is it important to “embroil” them into architecture? What are we connecting to?
Is a boundary a connection or disconnection? Obviously both since no answer is ever completely one way or the other, but many times a boundary which creates a disconnection allows for a new oppurtunity. The new oppurtunity being the way in which the problem at hand is solved. The instance I'm particularly refering to is a river that disconnects two areas of land. The oppurtunity is how we as humans decide to cross that boundary, break it down, and re-define the existence of it in the first place. Basically it is not the boundary that defines us, but rather how we decide to re-define the boundary that makes it something tangible in the world. The boundary may not be real, but human reactions to it are real.
ReplyDeleteThere are also unperceptive boundaries such as political ones, that have nothing to do with environment and are not perceived unless physically made perceptible. Like what Teddy Cruz was talking about, where there are lost spaces where there are no identifiable boundaries yet still significant barriers like the organizations that had to be dealt with in the skatepark which he talked about.
ReplyDeleteI think that boundaries are only disconnections between spaces. I don’t think that there is another side to that question. A boundary is meant to separate two spaces from one another. The way we get around these boundaries is making connections between the spaces. Using the example of the river from before, that it creates a distinctive boundary separating two pieces of land from one another, but then humans build bridges to cross this boundary fundamentally breaking that boundary down. Fundamentally the boundary still exists, but when a threshold is created to cross a boundary, doesn’t that defeat the whole purpose of a boundary?
ReplyDeleteThe thing that makes connections tangible in existence is boundaries. Without boundaries there would be no need for a connection because what are you then connecting? The importance in architecture of “embroiling” these boundaries is the perception of the spaces. We can create multiple boundaries within architecture, but without those connections, i.e. hallways, stairs, doors, windows, there would be no way to experience a space. We are then in fact connecting to spaces across one boundary.
If we think of the space between two spaces as a threshold rather than a boundary, this may open up the possibility for a connection instead of a disconnection. A threshold serves to mark this in-between-space. It is neither the space from which we came, nor is it the space we are about to enter. This transitional space is an entity all to itself. Because a threshold is both the absence of something (the previous space and the future space) and the presence of something (this thing in transition) it holds an immense amount of power. An architect's sensitivity to this space is crucial. The threshold houses great opportunities!
ReplyDeleteBoundary is many things to architects and designers; budget, property, politics, ect. But I believe what is more important than the hard line is the relationship of place. For example, what message is portrayed between one space and function to an adjacent space and function. To better integrate human space, boundaries must be broken and spaces should be allowed to pixelate into one another. The job of an urban planner is to feed spaces to each other. Many designers ignore this potential and only act within the hard lines. In result, the beauty of transition is lost.
ReplyDeleteSometimes boundaries are a good starting point for great design. As Taryn stated previously, budget, property, politics and sometimes the client are possible “boundaries” for architects. Without the ‘limits’ of a particular site (the context), a building has an infinite amount of possibilities. By taking into consideration these boundaries, the design can begin to connect and respond to the natural and human conditions of the environment. The topography of a site and existing structures for example, can begin to inform the form of a building.
ReplyDeleteHere are 2 definition for threshold:
ReplyDeletethresh·old (thrshld, -hld)
n.
1. A piece of wood or stone placed beneath a door; a doorsill.
2. An entrance or a doorway.
3. The place or point of beginning; the outset.
4. The point that must be exceeded to begin producing a given effect or result or to elicit a response: a low threshold of pain.
[Middle English thresshold, from Old English therscold, threscold; see ter-1 in Indo-European roots.]
thresh·old
[thresh-ohld, thresh-hohld] Show IPA
–noun
1.the sill of a doorway.
2.the entrance to a house or building.
3.any place or point of entering or beginning: the threshold of a new career.
4.Also called limen. Psychology, Physiology . the point at which a stimulus is of sufficient intensity to begin to produce an effect: the threshold of consciousness; a low threshold of pain.
Origin: before 900; Middle English threschold, Old English threscold, threscwald; cognate with Old Norse threskǫldr, dialectal Swedish träskvald; akin to thresh in old sense “trample, tread”; -old, -wald unexplained
Etymology: threshold :
O.E. þrescold, þærscwold, þerxold "doorsill, point of entering," first element related to O.E. þrescan (see thresh), with its original sense of "tread, trample." Second element of unknown origin and much transformed in all the Germanic languages; in English it probably has been altered to conform to hold, but the oft-repeated story that the threshold was a barrier placed at the doorway to hold the chaff flooring in the room is mere folk etymology. Cognates include O.N. þreskjoldr, Swed. tröskel, O.H.G. driscufli, Ger. dial. drischaufel.
Looking at what Erika was discussing about threshold. I found it interesting to consider a threshold as something that connects. It feels so ingrained in my mind that a threshold divides. But if I think back to so much of what we are constantly being tossed in these theoretical explorations, it is hard not to find the connections between the definition of space through the definition of spaces. I am beginning to wonder if it is possible for there to ever be just one condition that we are ever referencing as we reach out our arm and extend our finger to share our experience.
The 4th definition(for lack of a better term) for each definition of threshold talks about a how a threshold is an embodiment of pain, ones ability to withstand or not withstand pain. This definition begins to associate the idea of threshold with that of an instigator of emotional energy. Our relationship with the idea of a threshold suddenly begins to define what a threshold is to us. As the speaker from LMN so eloquently put it, "the tool changes you, and then you change the tool". Do we create the tool to define our threshold? Is that tool language? or does that hark back to our relationship with the earth and communication? Thank you Erika for that post.
Basically a boundary and a threshold are the same thing, but not.
ReplyDeleteOne refers to a disconnection and the other refers to a connection.
One becomes a limit and the other becomes an opportunity.
But yet many times we refer to the same instances as both a boundary and a threshold. We commonly associate these terms as synonyms, but in actuality (through the previous posts and discussion) their meanings seem to be more like antonyms. This is definitely something to keep in mind when not only looking at architecture and design, but also when we discuss a space and its intentions.
Boundaries = границы
ReplyDeleteI agree that there are visible and invisible boundaries that are set.
Building and parks may have site boundaries but there is no limit to who can visit and experience them. The space that is unbound is open for variety of potential but when someone comes and alters the space and created boundaries that are visible. How does a space change when it has both a visual boundary and a threshold, is it bound? or does the threshold free the space?
Perceived boundaries are an interesting mix of psychology and physical suggestions, for instance, in a restaurant parties tend to prefer the booth seat for 'privacy.' However, studies show that when this group sits in the restaurant at a table in the middle of the room, a perceived bubble is created and the conversation ensues just as it would within the booth. The physical boundaries of the booth are perceived to create privacy, just as the bubble in the middle of the room.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly, we attempt to create these boundaries, or connections in architecture. We create buildings that are as transparent as possible, or blur the definitive line of outside vs inside and the suggestion of enclosure by a canopy. The creation and suggestion of space and the boundaries between is a very important tool for designers to understand.
One could say that architecture is the careful arrangement of boundaries. Whenever we create a space we create boundaries. Both the boundaries between natural conditions and those between designed spaces provide opportunities for connections. A world without boundaries could not support life. A world with boundaries provides endless opportunity for the designer to link spaces and create overlapping conditions.
ReplyDeleteScott Burns-----
ReplyDeleteI think that boundaries are beginning to be taken away, we are beginning to build more and more so that we connect with the outside world so where is the boundary being set, is it more of a mental boundary of being able to recognize the context in which a structure is placed/ converged with? Physical boundaries maybe to me are just too solid, it is obvious where a line is set when looking at the structure of the building so I think or I taking it that we are talking conceptually or the design behind the maybe even structure of the building and how it defines boundaries?
I found the erika's post particularly insightful because, like kpan, I had never really questioned that a boundary could become a threshold. And I think that is relevant thing to point out here: a boundary is NOT the same thing as a threshold (like alettiere noted), but it can BECOME a threshold. Architects should make it a mission to take notice of the boundaries that define the space they are working in and, if it will benefit the design, figure out a way to transcend them. In so doing, the boundaries essentially no longer exist. We may be able to create a cohesive space by joining two previously disconnected spaces. If our task is to design on a piece of land that has a river dissecting it, we can take two different approaches: create two entirely separate and distinct places or create one continuous site. We could create a bridge, continue the design on the other side, and unite the entire site. That would most likely have more of an effect, be a more interesting design, and be a lot more meaningful than if we had let the boundary define and limit us. In so doing, we will have turned the boundary into a threshold and united the space.
ReplyDeleteThe concept of a "boundary" is interesting to contemplate, my understanding of "boundary" is as a set of limitations. Whether that be a sort of physical constraints, a personal restriction, or technological progression, I think of a boundary as a definitive point at which a change occurs, where the limit is compromised. The limit is defined by the threshold and therefore its boundaries and their thresholds are ever changing with our culture and design-needs. The capability to understanding boundaries is the best architectural comprehension a designer can have when addressing the needs of a space, how an individual interacts within and outside of these limits defines the epitome of the world boundary, and within this definition we discover the threshold. On a larger scale, understanding boundaries will allow one to know their personal limitations and their potential for creating and manipulating physical boundaries.
ReplyDelete- K. Benkelman