Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Paradoxical Architecture : An Argument for the Anti-logic and the Absurd Chang, Yau Ching Norain 2020-05-11

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
42591-Chang_You_ARCH_549_Paradoxical_antilogic_absurd.pdf [ 95.78MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 42591-1.0390673.json
JSON-LD: 42591-1.0390673-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 42591-1.0390673-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 42591-1.0390673-rdf.json
Turtle: 42591-1.0390673-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 42591-1.0390673-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 42591-1.0390673-source.json
Full Text
42591-1.0390673-fulltext.txt
Citation
42591-1.0390673.ris

Full Text

Paradoxical Architecture: An Argument for the Anti-logic and the AbsurdBy Yau Ching (Norain) ChangBachelor of Interior Design, Ryerson University, 2016Committee Members:Matthew Soules (GP2 Chair) M.Arch, BAAnnaLisa Meyboom M.Arch, BAScCarl MacDonald M.Arch, BED, BScWe accept this report as conforming to the required standard.  ___________________________________________	 	 	 	 					Blair	Satterfield  ___________________________________________         Matthew SoulesSubmitted	in	partial	fulfillment	of	the	requirements	for	the	degree	of	Master	of	Architecture in The Faculty of Graduate Studies, School of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Architecture Program. University of British Columbia(Vancouver, BC, Canada)© Yau Ching Norain Chang, May 2020PARADOXICAL ARCHITECTUREAn argument for the anti-logic and the absurdiAn AbstractWe are currently experiencing an unprecedented rate of change in all aspects of our lives; climate change, technology development, commerce fluctuations, political landscapes and policy to name a few. In a world of constant changes, we must abandon the linear causal logic we deploy in our everyday decisions. I propose an alternative approach to logic, the anti-logic, a paradoxical way of thinking. A paradox is a seemingly absurd or self-contradictory statement or position that when investigated or explained may prove to be well founded or true. Paradoxes provide a new untouched landscape of opportunity and decision making strategies that exist in a space above the pragmatic approach of solving problems we deploy today; a surrational way. Architecturally speaking, Tschumi described paradox as “the imaginary blending of architectural rule and the experience of pleasure” (“Architecture and Disjunction” 29), very similar to how literary paradoxes provide a seemingly contradictory statement  but ultimately provide a sensation of resolve. By approaching architectural interventions with an anti-logical approach that exists in a surrational way, the coupling of contradictory architectural rules, such as architectural devices like form and function, can provide new architectural discourse. For example, form follows function is the architectural equivalent of cause and effect, but what if cause no longer equal effect? What architectural opportunities and narratives lie within the expanded space between the logical and the illogical where paradoxes resides?Paradoxical Architecture is an experiment that challenges the current conventions of architectural rationalization and realization of projects and interventions. It is a speculative series that will address architectural projects through surrational thinking to create architectural paradoxes. The outcome of these speculative experiments will aim to luminate and inspire architectural discourse to expand from and surpass the rational pragmatism we deploy today through evocative architectural scenarios created by surrational paradoxical projects. Sites for Paradoxical Architecture will remain name-less to avoid tying paradoxes to the specificity of sites. However, they are based on existing places and the speculative projects themselves will reflect and address rather directly to the very real political, or social, or economic environment they are situated in so that the paradoxical project remains current and urgent.ii iiiAcknowledgmentsI would like to thank Matthew Soules who tirelessly encouraged and guided me in my pursuit of the paradoxical and for the encouragements I relied on to unravel the depths of thsi project I could not have even imagined it could achieve.Thank you AnnaLisa Meyboom for finding the words that wove my thoughts together when I could not. To Carl MacDonald whose encouragement to pruse what I envisioned for this project against all outside friction I had come across this past couple of months.Thank you to my thesis group-mates for exciting and encouraging discussions every Friday morning. To Blaire Schille, Joe Kuhn, and Nathan Keebler who lent their talent and support during not only the infamous last week of this project but the months of half baked strings of thoughts that led to the conclusion of this project.And a final thank you to all my friends and studio mates, current and past SALA students, who grounded me and allowed me to ramble on about paradoxes or how architecture did not have to make sense but all the while has to or even when my topic as still a vineyard; Emily Kazanowksi, Kelsie Knauf, Mitchell Gray, Pualine Moskal, Tori Hamatani, Trevor Whitten.iv vFig. 01   Fig. 02   Fig. 03   Fig. 04   Fig. 05   Fig. 06   Fig. 07  Fig. 08   Fig. 09   Fig. 10   Fig. 11  Fig. 12   Fig. 13   Fig. 14 Fig. 15  Fig. 16Fig. 17Fig. 18Fig. 19Fig. 20Fig. 21Fig. 22Fig. 23Fig. 24Fig. 25Fig. 26Fig. 27Fig. 28Fig. 29Fig. 30Fig. 31Fig. 32Fig. 33Fig. 34Fig. 35Fig. 36Fig. 37Fig. 38Fig. 39Fig. 40Fig. 41Fig. 42Fig. 43Fig. 44Fig. 45Fig. 46Fig. 47Fig. 48Fig. 49Fig. 50Fig. 51Fig. 52Fig. 53Fig. 54Fig. 55LIST OF FIGURESTABLE OF CONTENTSAbstract  ..................................................................................................................................................Acknowledgments......................................................................................................................................Table of Contents  .....................................................................................................................................List of Figures  ...........................................................................................................................................An Insight into Contradictions  ...................................................................................................................A Protest Against Architectural Pragmatism  ................................................................................................Examples of Irony  ....................................................................................................................................A Framework for the Anti-Logical  ..............................................................................................................The SNAFU  ............................................................................................................................................. A Place for the Absurd  .............................................................................................................................The Absurd  ..............................................................................................................................................Glitches  ...................................................................................................................................................You Found a Journal  ................................................................................................................................  Landfill National Park  .......................................................................................................  Museum of the Banal  ........................................................................................................  SeaTower  ........................................................................................................................   The end  ............................................................................................................................You Found a Journal  ................................................................................................................................Works Cited ..............................................................................................................................................iiiiivv01051025273031657881117144190194196Tschumi, Bernard. “Event Cities” Paris, Library of France, 1994. 08Ghinitoiu, Laurian. CopenHill: The Story of BIG’s Iconic Waste-To-Energy Plant. ArchDaily, 2019. 11Fratello, Rael San. Aeriel View of the Teetertotter. 2019. 13Friedman, Glen E. Lance Mountain. 2015, Los Angeles. 15Hufton + Crow. World Trade Center Transportation Hub. ArchDaily, 2018. 17Burtynsky, Edward. Dandora Landfill #3. 2016. 19The Scarecrow. Directed by Buster Keaton and Edward Cline, performances by Buster Keaton, Joe      Keaton, Joe Roberts, and Sybil Seely, Metro Pictures, 1920. 21Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 1. 2020. 32Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 2. 2020. 33Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 3. 2020. 34Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 4. 2020. 35Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 5. 2020. 36Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 6. 2020. 37Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 7. 2020. 38Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 8.  2020. 39Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 9. 2020. 40Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 10.  2020. 41Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 11. 2020. 42Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 12.  2020. 43Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 13. 2020. 44Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 14.  2020. 45Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 15. 2020. 46Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 16.  2020. 47Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 17. 2020. 48Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 18.  2020. 49Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 19. 2020. 50Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 20.  2020. 51Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 21. 2020. 52Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 22.  2020. 53Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 23. 2020. 54Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 24.  2020. 55Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 25. 2020. 56Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 26.  2020. 57Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 27. 2020. 58Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 28.  2020. 59Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 29. 2020. 60Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 30.  2020. 61Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 31. 2020. 62Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 32.  2020. 63Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 33. 2020. 66Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 34. 2020. 67Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 35. 2020. 68Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 36. 2020. 69Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 37. 2020. 70Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Approach to Paradoxes. 2020. 74Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Project Method. 2020. 75Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Approach to Project. 2020. 76Chang, Yau Ching Norain. You Found A Journal. 2020. 78Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Field Notes. 2020. 80Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Narrative. 2020. 82Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Map. 2020. 84Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill As a Landscape. 2020. 86Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Man-made as the Natural. 2020. 88Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Visitor Center. 2020. 90Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Elevated Path Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 92vi viiFig. 56Fig. 57Fig. 58Fig. 59Fig. 60Fig. 61Fig. 62Fig. 63Fig. 64Fig. 65Fig. 66Fig. 67Fig. 68Fig. 69Fig. 70Fig. 71Fig. 72Fig. 73Fig. 74Fig. 75Fig. 76Fig. 77Fig. 78Fig. 79Fig. 80Fig. 81Fig. 82Fig. 83Fig. 84Fig. 85Fig. 86Fig. 87Fig. 88Fig. 89Fig. 90Fig. 91Fig. 92Fig. 93Fig. 94Fig. 95Fig. 96Fig. 97Fig. 98Fig. 99Fig. 100Fig. 101Fig. 102Fig. 103Fig. 104Fig. 105Fig. 106Fig. 107Fig. 108Fig. 109Fig. 110Fig. 111Fig. 112Fig. 113Fig. 114Fig. 115Fig. 116Fig. 117Fig. 118Fig. 119Fig. 120Fig. 121Fig. 122Fig. 123Fig. 124LIST OF FIGURESChang, Yau Ching Norain. Elevated Path Oblique. 2020. 94Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Empty Can-yon. 2020. 96Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Cantilever Bridge Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 98Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Cantilever Bridge Oblique. 2020. 100Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Geyser Lookout. 2020. 102 Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Angled Bridge Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 104Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Angled Bridge Oblique. 2020. 106Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Murky Hot Springs. 2020. 108Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Murky Hot Springs Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 110Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Electric Range. 2020. 112Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Archivist Trail Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 114Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Logic. 2020. 115Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Framework. 2020. 116Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Next Entry. 2020. 118Chang, Yau Ching Norain. To Your Surprise. 2020. 120Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Fallen Photographs. 2020. 122Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Narrative. 2020. 124Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Threshold as a Paradox. 2020. 126Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Layers of Thresholds. 2020. 128 Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 1 Axon. 2020. 129Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Soil. 2020. 130Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 2 Axon. 2020. 131Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Phsophorous. 2020. 132Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 3 Axon. 2020. 133Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Ozone. 2020. 134Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 4 Axon. 2020. 136Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Installation Narrative. 2020. 138Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Installation Diagrammatic Plan. 2020. 140Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Logic. 2020. 141Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Framework. 2020. 142Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Last Entry. 2020. 144Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Narrative. 2020. 146Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 1. 2020. 147Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 2. 2020. 148Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 3. 2020. 149Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 4. 2020. 150Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 1. 2020. 151Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 1. 2020. 152Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 2. 2020. 153Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 3. 2020. 154Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-1. 2020. 155Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-2. 2020. 156Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-3. 2020. 157Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 2. 2020. 160Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 1. 2020. 161Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 2. 2020. 162Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 3. 2020. 163Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 4. 2020. 164Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 5. 2020. 165Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 6. 2020. 166Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 7. 2020. 167Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 8. 2020. 168Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 9. 2020. 169Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 10. 2020. 170Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-1. 2020. 171Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-2. 2020. 172Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Phase 2. 2020. 174Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 3. 2020. 175Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 4. 2020. 175Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 5. 2020. 177Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 6. 2020. 178Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Phase 3. 2020. 180Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-3. 2020. 182Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 7. 2020. 183Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 8. 2020. 184Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-4. 2020. 186Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Logic. 2020. 187Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Framework. 2020. 188Chang, Yau Ching Norain. You’ve Finished the Journal. 2020. 190Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Does Paradoxical Architectural Method lead to Paradoxical Architecture . 2020. 1921 2Paradox is a parasitic logic device for its host field and while there are many types of paradoxes, they always work in twos; two opposing concepts that disproves each other but is logical like in Quine’s veridical paradox, or two mutually exclusive categories of sets and members where an item could belong to both like in Russell’s Paradox, or two self-referencing, circling, sequential phrases that provide inconclusively in the Liar’s Paradox. Paradox, which is inherently tied to logic, its two parts are often tied to the fundamental elements that generate the logic and understanding of an idea within a field. You will often find the paradox in a cause and effect argument with the two being the contradicting parts. In other words, any field, thought, speculation, or idea that deploys logic, could also have the potential to host paradoxes, if you know where to look.Paradoxes in architecture has the potential to act as the anti-logic methodology in the deployment of architecture. Currently architecture works in dualities, such as exclusion and inclusion, outside and inside, public and private, the same and the different. By deploying paradoxical thinking, It has the room and potential to allow one to look at two architectural entities that do not seemingly belong, whether it is two typologies, two architectural devices or a mixture of the two, put them together to create the feeling of shock and understanding much like what a paradox provides. Paradoxes in architecture can work under the theory of what dialetheism paradox calls a “true contradiction”, meaning that it is not impossible for a [concept] to be both true and false. A good existing architectural example is privately owned public spaces (POPS). By taking the two contradicting ideas of public and private, and deploying both within one space to create a environment that is understood to be private through maintenance and ownership, but still public through access and typology, it is neither public or private all the while it is also public and also private. Regardless of how the two notions are contradictory, they seemingly belong with each other.AN INSIGHT INTO CONTRADICTIONSDefinitions: what is a paradox and what is paradoxicPhilosophers and mathematicians, those who deal with paradoxes the most, have defined many types of paradoxes over time, and with that created many ways of dealing with and exploiting paradoxes. However, a single commonality appears; that is the display of contradictions. “A paradox is a seemingly sound piece of reasoning based on apparently true assumptions that lead to a contradiction”(“Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy”). Through stages of reasoning, theorizing, evidence, one expects the outcome to be a cumulation of the “truths” gathered. However, when the outcome results in something that contradicts the predicate, we are left with an indescribable feeling that resembles a combination of shock and understanding. This is much like how one responds to the paradox “Less is more”. The two seemingly contradicting ideas of “less” and “more”, two things that don’t belong, somehow fits together perfectly.  There is not one party, one category, or one field that can claim the idea of paradox. Paradoxes are everywhere and used by all. It can be found as a literary device dating back to Macbeth, in debates ranging from politics to the philosophy of existence, in physics, in time, and the list goes on. While it is found everywhere, few truly understand what paradox means and is capable of, but our fascination with the idea of paradox transcends time, fields of study, people and actions. Why? Because some things just cannot be explained, perhaps just in this moment, but we know it is true. It’s absurd. It’s illogical. It’s undefinable. It’s intangible. It’s controversial. It’s contradicting, but it is true. This is what a paradox is. 3 4“ THIS SENTENCE IS NOT TRUE. “Liar’s paradoxThe existence of contradictions has been theorized to be tied to two reasons; contradiction as “a flaw or deficiency in our understanding of the central concepts involved in it” or that “our understanding of the very concept of ‘contradiction’ is flawed” (“Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy”). Referring back to POPS, what I have deemed as an example of a paradoxical space, perhaps it is our current understanding of the terms public and private and our understanding of those two concepts as contradicting that makes the POPS seem paradoxical. It is in contradictions like those where we can re-pose the question of whether or not  the two elements of the  dualities which we have acclimated to begin contradictory are really contradictory. Or is it that there is something we are missing in the discourse of the duality public and private. It is through contradictory ideas where the next layer of architectural opportunities lie. Paradoxical Architecture will reveal what we have deemed to be different, what we have decided is mutually exclusive, what we see to be illogical and absurd and will provide room for an paradoxical logic that our currently linear pragmatism design thinking could not have yield. “Contradictions lies within the impossibility” but by utilizing paradoxical logic, within its contradictions are architectural opportunities.Paradoxes are absurd, contradictory, but true. It was “termed insolubilia [during] logical and philosophical investigations during the middle ages”, a root word for the now very common word insoluble with which one meaning is “impossible to solve” (“Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy”). Paradoxes are interesting in a sense that they are illogical, but they are also logical. It’s qualities themselves are contradicting. Paradoxes are paradoxical themselves. If they are not logical nor illogical, perhaps it is anti-logical. Paradoxes as anti-logical logic devices utilizes contradicting principles that are innately illogical to provide a resolve that is logical. By using paradoxes as the anti-logical method to deploy architecture, its results in a Paradoxical Architecture that can offer an opportunity and an alternative lens of rationalizing architectural thoughts, that can ultimately result in beautiful moments of shock and understanding. By not being slaves to our current understanding of the functions of typical, logical architectural dualities, we can extrapolate how contradicting dualities can perform and see what they can reveal. Paradoxes could be a logic device that expands the space between the logical and pragmatic and the illogical and deficient and sit in the interstitial space  between them as the anti-logical and the paradoxical. 5 6A PROTEST AGAINST ARCHITECTURAL PRAGMATISMPositions: why paradoxesArchitecture is innately paradoxical; Lewis stated: “Architecture begins with a projection onto the world of an image that is foreign to it” (9). This renders architectural pragmatism a pointless exercise. We currently achieve architectural resolution through linear causal logic which we have deemed to be a pragmatic way of designing. Architectural project start with a list of problems, being the cause of architecture, and ending with a built form, being the effect of architecture. The framework of cause and effect achieves high efficacy in many fields that rely on correlative theories and outcomes. Sciences, mathematics, the law, to name a few, rely on a process or state, a cause, that contributes to the production of another product or state, an effect. The flaw in this methodology is that the process of cause and effect determines facts. Architecture is not a static factual thing thus the application the logical process of cause and effect is illogical. Architecture is not a problem that needs to be solved but rather a process that is constantly evolving and a projector of what we as a society, our desires and a tool to reveal how we have changed. The notion of thinking about architecture as an exercise of using cause and effect is a purposeless and an exhaustive never-ending task, but the idea seems rational and logical. Currently many architectural project deploys this method of thinking. But the dream of chasing the cause, a societal demand, in order to end up with the effect, a built form, is now more than ever an obviously moot task. Tschumi suggests “the cause and effect sanctified by modernism” describing the linear causal pragmatism we see in design today, “needs to be abandoned…in the production of a new architectural reality” (“Event Cities”13). Our world is experiencing an unprecedented rate of change in all aspects of our world, mostly those that involved the interventions and association of architecture; for example climate change, technology development, political landscapes, to touch on a few. Following the cause and effect logic, if the cause being the political, social, economical and environmental problems we experience is ever-changing, then it demands that architecture is ever-changing. However, in the midst of this ever-shifting landscape, we romanticize about designing for resiliency as our solution through the pragmatism we practice today. This is ultimately self-contradicting and paradoxical for two reasons. One, the notion of resiliency as a solution to combat change is contradictory. The idea of resilience dictates “the ability of a substance to return to its usual shape” (“Cambridge Dictionary”) which implies a level of elasticity and snapping back to its original form. The demand of resilient architecture, the effect, one that is a (near) static outcome, to be the solution for the ever-changing demands of society, the cause, is contradictory in its core concept. Second, by tasking resilient and static architecture as an effect and the counter solution to these rapidly changing political, economical, social causes, we are more than ever likely to end up with an effect that has a fleeting or already-have-fled cause, rendering the production architecture, the effect, irrelevant to its not existing cause and the process counter-productive. The notion of using cause and effect towards the production of architecture as a solution to our social, political, economical and environmental problem itself is self-contracting, yet somehow seemingly logical in practice. This could only mean the rationalization of architecture is innately paradoxical despite our efforts to inject logical devices in it.7 8“There is no longer a causal relationship between building and their content, their use, and of course their very improbably building”(Tschumi, “Architecture and Disjunction” 22)In previous discussions, paradoxes are both logical and illogical and situated in between the two under the term anti-logical. If architecture is innately paradoxical under Tschumi’s rationalization of architecture, and self-contradicting in today’s practice, perhaps architecture begs for an anti-logical method in its rationalization. What does this mean in terms of the pursuit of a Paradoxical Architecture? Handy suggests that “paradox can be something extremely positive” so through the exploration of a truly Paradoxical Architecture, and arguments for the contradictory, absurd, and anti-logical, I aim to yield within this inquiry a projects that generate “tension, foster creativity and complex insights and trigger change, acting as brainteaser and challenging common logic and thinking” (20).  This leads to Bernard Tschumi’s theory for the production and rationalization of architecture. As an alternative argument, Tschumi suggests there are two different dualities outside of cause and effect that goes towards the production of architecture. He refers to the pyramid, “a thing of the mind, a dematerialization or conceptual discipline with its typological and morphological variations”, and a labyrinth, “an empirical event that concentrate on the sense, on the experiences of the space. (“Architecture and Disjunction” 84) Put simply, architecture could be described as the abstraction of truth, the concept, but also at the same time, it can also be described as the experience, the reality. This is seemingly logical but if one were to look deeper, this depiction of this duality in architecture could be seen as self-circling like in a Liar’s Paradox. He describes that this duality of thoughts are “interdependent but mutually exclusive [because] the abstraction of absolute truth…gets in the way of feeling” the real truth (Tschumi, “Architecture and Disjunction” 37). Is it possible that architecture demands and is begging for a paradoxical lens?REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTFig.01 : Tschumi, Bernard. “Event Cities” Paris, Library of France, 19949 10EXAMPLES OF IRONYPrecedents: what are the paradoxes in architecture nowTschumi suggests the paradox that the “achievement of architectural reality defeats architectural theory while at the same time being a product of it (“Event Cities” 37). Between the theory, the predicate, and the reality, the contradiction, lies the expanded space, the host of paradox. Through precedents and the analysis of its original theory and its realized outcome and then identifying the vacuous spaces in between them where paradoxes occur, I will extract the fleeting moments or expanded spaces in between to understand where social architectural opportunities lie. Working towards Paradoxical Architecture as a project that focuses on looking at contradicting dualities and how the expanded space in-between the dualities become opportunities to address social issues, the follow precedents will be examined through the lens of architecture dualities and its social implications. 11 12REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTCOPENHILL - BJARKE INGELS GROUP - COPENHAGENCopenHill is a waste to energy power-plant located in Copenhagen. Designed by BIG, it doubles as a public infrastructure that invites citizens of Copenhagen to the first “ski hill” in the history of the geologically planar city. Ingels states that this duality of program works towards this idea of “hedonistic sustainability – that a sustainable city is not only better for the environment – it is also more enjoyable for the lives of its citizens” (Crook). This project challenges the duality of two inherently contradicting programs that together supports one another in the function of “hedonistic sustainability.” A waste plant situated in the industrial outskirts of town is typically an unwelcoming and often ignore function of the city. It is a infrastructural character within the city that begs to be forgotten while it performs the unglamorous task of waste management. A ski slope on the other hand, sits high on it’s city’s landscape. It boasts to be noticed, with its dangling bright lights highlighting the relative tiny skiers sliding down the clean, glistening powdered snow. In this project, the overlooked becomes the site that attracts the act of looking. Architecturally, the power-plant is a program that demands security, and utility while a ski slope, demands height, safety, fun. They both historically service different functions and required different considerations. However, the logical reality of putting these two highly contradictory programs together comes that the plant requires height to perform its function, a quality that ski slopes need but does not have because of the city it lives in. The ski slope that demands fun, and safety, and ultimately becomes a symbol of that while it lives on the cleanest waste to energy power plant’s roof. This duality of programs works in a symbiotic relationship that works to address making Copenhagen not only a fun place but also an environmentally friendly city. This seemingly contradictory programmatic duality became an architectural opportunity to address the social and environmental problem of the city; Copenhagen’s winter blues and carbon neutrality.Fig.02 Ghinitoiu, Laurian. CopenHill: The Story of BIG’s Iconic Waste-To-Energy Plant. ArchDaily, 2019.13 14REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTTEETERTOTTER WALL - RAEL SAN FRATELLO - MEXICOTeetertotter Wall is an art installation located in a desolate area of Sunland Park, New Mexico where the border wall between the Mexico and the US is. The project is a political statement but also an architectural one where the artist Rael San Fratello takes the architectural devices of “site: and “use” to make a statement about immigration currently. The artist uses the border wall which is a site for separation for the use of connection; two things that seemingly are contradictory. The rational functions of a wall is pushed a tested as an architectural and infrastructural element that separates but is pushed to be the structure for a contradicting element, the teetertotter. Notions of stability embedded in the identity of a wall is tested as a perpetually teetering and moving element crosses its stable axis. The contradictory use of site and use alters the original program towards a more democratic and inclusive use.Fig. 03 : Fratello, Rael San. Aeriel View of the Teetertotter. 201915 16CALIFORNIA KIDNEY POOLSThis a photograph taken by Glen Friedman of Lance Mountain, a skateboarder, in a pool in LA. During the drought season in California, a city where backyard pools are more common than not, pools are often drained. These curvy free-formed, often kidney bean shaped concavities in the landscape become sites for skateboarding. This illustrates a duality between use and program during a specific moment and scenario in time in California. The intended use of a pool made obsolete by droughts are now replaced with a new program- skateboarding. This is a coupling of two things that don’t seemingly belong but somehow it makes perfect sense. The rational side of this comes from the shapes of the curves in a typical Californian pool, while the dreams of skateboarding in a pool seems surreal, it actually deploys a surrationalist thinking that Lewis describes as “ conscious and critical [with] its goal being the liberation of ration from the encrusted habits of convention” (Lewis 9). In between this duality of use and program is the environmental anxiety of extreme weather in California, whether it is through droughts that make filling pools impossible or bad winds that make surfing on the coast unattainable, the paradoxical occupation of skateboarding program in a site for a contradicting use draws attention to a very real environmental problem. Architectural opportunities can lie within social and environmental problems of everyday. REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTFig. 04  : Friedman, Glen E. Lance Mountain. 2015, Los Angeles17 18MIXED-USE - TYPOLOGYThe World Trade Center Transportation Hub, commonly known as the Oculus, designed by Santiago Calatrava in all its historic and social meaning comes down to a transit hub connecting the MTA and the Path but all the while behaving like a mall. At its core, the Oculus, a place that encourages mobility and movement has become a place where its program invites people to dwell. The paradox between the program and ambition that is blurred and contradicting. This precedent poses an interesting concept outside of its built reality of paradoxical architecture in Tschumi’s terms. Observing paradoxes between the train infrastructure that is constant in contrast to the retail stores that are constantly evolving speaks to the contradicting identity of the two programs. The Oculus is an example of a paradoxical architecture through the mixed use approach to architecture. This idea can also be extrapolated to work-live projects where the mediation between the two contradictory programs can reveal what we want from our society; in this case being the efficient model of living. REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTFig. 05 : Hufton + Crow. World Trade Center Transportation Hub. ArchDaily, 2018.19 20LANDFILL - TYPOLOGYREDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTFig. 06 : Burtynsky, Edward. Dandora Landfill #3. 2016Landfills were popularized up till the 1980s; the idea of disguising a mountain of trash as empty land is the epitome of the “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. We hide our trash to create the illusion of open land but it is land that we have alienated ourselves from and don’t access. As consumerism increased, and the output of our trash increased, so did our invisible towering “open” landscape. The Dandora Landfill (fig. 06) captured by Edward Burtynsky is an example of how the notion of landfilling can generate an identity for the site. Despite this landfill being shut down, heaps of trash rising up to approximately 15 feet high (Peters) and has ironically become new sites for human (and pet) occupation and more specifically for commerce. This site of away from places of occupation, for example a city, for the purpose of the disposal of what we claim as valueless disguised as empty land has the new potential of being a site for occupation and mine for a new valuable place of commerce. These two opposing functional ideals of a site seem contradictory but given the right catalyst, it could have potential. With research in waste disposal technology in the forefront in discussions of alternative energies, like the Amager Bakke wasted to energy plant in Copenhagen, sites of trash could potentially be sites of gold so to speak. Potentials in paradoxes and contradictions just requires the right catalyst in order to become logical.21 22THE SCARECROW - BUSTER KEATONWithin 5 seconds, Buster Keaton, in his film The Scarecrow, demonstrated an architectural paradox for the sake of comedy. It shows the two main characters, leaving their house through a fence. A typical fence is comprised of a series of vertical barrier elements designed to keep in or out with a single component of a door that moves, to allow the flow of in and out. Within the 5 seconds, Keaton portrays a typical fence that, when the characters approached it, it split and created an opening along the horizontal axis as opposed to a typical swing fence door. Keaton demonstrates that a fence is actually a site for the paradox of “a fence as a barrier and a door.” While the main paradox lies within the architectural element of the fence itself, what is more important as a precedent is the “joke [that] allows one to break with social decorum, publicly revealing taboos through an acceptable medium… [through] the nuanced play between the expected and the illogical” (Lewis 10). The idea of creating a narrative of the expected for the audience then injecting naturally the illogical or in this project’s case, the paradoxical, will be an important part of delivering the project of Paradoxical Architecture. REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTFig. 07 : The Scarecrow. Directed by Buster Keaton and Edward Cline, performances by Buster Keaton, Joe Keaton, Joe Roberts, and Sybil Seely, Metro Pictures, 192023 24Generally speaking, currently paradoxes in built forms all serve or reveal a society cause; such as California droughts, protest for Mexico, homelessness in San Francisco, sustainability in Copenhagen, waste disposal in Kenya, just to name a few. By employing the use to two contradictory dualities of devices or characteristics or concept, one can find that within paradoxical projects are activated sites for architectural opportunities that can reveal and address a social, political, environmental cause. Paradoxes that live within the expanded space give insight into the real realities of life and it is fundamental to find these notions because they signal the societal changes that are currently getting more fleeting and fleeting due to this unprecedented rate of change our society is experiencing. In addition, the potentials of what seems to be paradoxes now with the right catalyst can have the potential be an opportunity in the future. “ Architecture must exist and quickly forgotten. “(Nouveau, “The Singular Objects in Architecture” 12)25 26A FRAMEWORK FOR THE ANTI-LOGICALThe Methodology: How to deploy paradoxical thinkingThe TwosParadoxes exists in twos; and the twos exists in contradiction. Creating a framework for paradox presents some challenges, and in a way a sort of a paradox; it is like creating a logical framework in the deployment an anti-logical outcome, the paradox. With that being said, this project will look to paradoxes and look at the “anti-logic” paradoxes deploy as a methodology for  architectural processes and outcomes. The framework, typically used as a logic device, will instead be an organizational device and a generator for organizing “the twos” in the project. The twos being, the dualities, the oxymorons, the dichotomies as some examples. We can consider the typical structure of a paradox that is described with A and B, with A being the predicate that presents the structure, and B being the contradiction.The DualitiesA  fundamental part of this project will be the pairing of the A and the B and then identifying the paradox it creates. Within the project of architecture, there a limitless amount of concepts, elements, fragments, feelings to pair. Tschumi suggested that by moving away from the notion of cause and effect as a method of deployment in architecture, we should consider methodologies that are “in favor of promiscuous collisions of program and spaces, in which the terms intermingle combined and implicate one another in the production of a new architecture [and perhaps paradoxical] reality” (“Event Cities”13). Similarly, the project of Paradoxical Architecture will look to architecture devices, much like the devices “program” and “space” Tschumi had suggested, as the A, the predicate and the B, the contradiction, that when implicated against one another will create the new paradoxical architectural reality.The ImplicationsThe framework (fig. 08) is an organizational tool for dualities and the architecture implication it may present. For example, “use” in conjunction with “site” can provide a logical implication of zoning. While this framework will not reveal the paradoxes on its own (for that we turn to the catalyst which will be introduced subsequently) it creates something that is more comprehensive than a list of pairings, but space for architectural opportunities. Looking at the range of dualities, one can infer that the implications of those dualities will vary in scale. Ones addressing “site” and “infrastructure” may differ in scale from ones addressing “room” and “function”. This framework not only will allow some rigidity in the rationalization of this project, but will also be flexible in allowing the outcome to vary in scale so we can understand how paradoxical architectural thinking can extrapolate and transverse the different levels of intervention from a room, to a building, to a city, space and perhaps further.27 28THE SNAFUThe narrative through surrationalismAt this point I have talked about the deployment of the twos in a paradox, the method of organizing the twos to reveal its architectural implications, and the surrationalism in manifesting the architectural paradox. These all generate the basis for the paradox referencing the A and the B mentioned at the beginning. However in a true paradox, in addition to the A the predicate and the B the contradiction, it requires an element called “the assumption of truth” As a simple example, the paradox “Less is more” is the most obviously example of the demonstration of exerting the assumption of truth. “Less” being the predicate is assumed to be true to the “more”, the contradiction. All that is to say the assumption of truth must be injected within in surrationalism in the project of paradoxical architecture. Tschumi in his essay on The Pleasure of Architecture suggests that “architecture resembles a masked figure” (96). This is where the role of narrative comes in; it is tasked with the role of revealing.I have theorized that paradox sits in the middle in the expanded space between the pragmatic and the deficient and the methodology of anti-logic that paradoxes use exist in the expanded space between the logical and the illogical. What is the anti-logic in project of architecture and its dualities? Lewis attempts to define surrationalism relative to surrealism in that surrealism “has been reduced to simplistic association with dreams and the supernatural” but surrationalism, he finds, “seeks a creative logic to engender disquieting associations between or within the everyday” (9). In other words, he is describing the anti-logic that paradoxes deploy. Paradoxical Architecture through the deployment of surrationalism has the ability to “use rationalism to test the boundaries of rationalism itself” (9) and push it beyond the logical, surpassing the rational and into the space that is on the cusp of the illogical and therefore the anti-logical. Lewis sees surrationalism as “a way of thinking through givens” with that being the dualities of architectural devices defined above. Through the surrationalizing of the dualities in the project of Paradoxical Architecture, what will be generated is a “surrational mode of inquiry” into our society.Without diving too deep into quantum mechanics, the Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle states the position (p) and the momentum of the particle (m) cannot be both measured at the same time due to the fact that “any attempt to measure the velocity of a sub-atomic particle will knock it about in an unpredictable way, so that a simultaneous measure of its position has no validity” (University of Oregon). Consider the position (p) and momentum (m) of a subatomic particle to be the predicate (A) and the contradictory (B) of a paradox. The very reasoning of the paradox itself will render the paradox as causal statement and no longer paradoxical. This simply alludes that an alternative methodology in architectural presentation must be explored outside the description of the architectural project as a rational or even a surrational concept. By using narrative as a way of normalizing the paradoxical interventions or experiments in this project, the contradictions of the dualities are revealed through the truth provided by the narrative and thus the paradox is presented for the audience to experience. The difficulty lies in the framing and organization of the narrative of the architectural projects proposed. While the veiling of the paradox within a narrative might be the most ambitious task in this project and fundamental in the proposal of paradoxical architecture, it will also give the audience the experience, which is the difficulty of “uncovering architecture that makes it intensely desirable” (Tschumi, “Architecture and Disjunction” 95). As an example, referring back to Keaton’s film The Scarecrow, the “plots are generated by entirely reasonable deviations from the ordinary” (Lewis 10) in order to reveal a paradox. So in the project of representing Paradoxical Architecture, a normal and expectable narrative must be set up with moments of paradoxical deviations to reveal the grander project of Paradoxical Architecture. The outcome of the narrative becomes a story that reveals and suggest a social dilemma through the use of surrationalism to create paradoxical dualities in the project of Paradoxical Architecture.  In summary, in the project of Paradoxical Architecture, the fundamental ideas, structure, and deployment of paradoxes are applied; the structure of twos, the contradictory character of those dualities, the assumption of truth, and the rationalization of that truth in a surrational way. This approach to paradoxes, surrationalism, and architectural interventions will ultimate yield “conscious, critical, and rational projects” [that] result in the snafu that is paradoxical architecture. (Lewis 9)29 30A PLACE FOR THE ABSURDThe Catalyst: a (potential) site for the paradoxWhile the idea of “site” for paradoxical architecture is less so the traditional site in the architecture language, alluding to a place in the physical world, site for paradoxical architecture lies in the architecture logic, and in its deployment. It lies in the architectural devices such as scale, form, use, site, program, material, environment, function, user et cetera.Lewis suggests that architectural rationalization and the realization is paradoxical, Tschumi suggests the understanding and experience of architecture is paradoxical, and I have suggested the approach to architecture should be paradoxical. What has not been discussed are the sites for the paradox. What has the potential to be the appropriate catalyst for the exploration of Paradoxical Architecture. I have argued that the paradoxes exists within the expanded vacuous space between the psychology’s definition of logical and illogical, Lewis’ definition of rational and the surreal, Tschumi’s definition of the mind and the body. Architecturally speaking, the search for a site to host this project should exist in the space between these dichotomies; the logical and the illogical; the rational and the surreal; the everyday and the dream, the understanding and the experience, the mind and the body, the built and the representation, the pragmatic and the deficient. Not one site, neither room nor building, nor city nor landscape, can provide a fertile enough site for the project of Paradoxical Architecture. Instead I propose a catalyst that can be applied to different hosts for paradoxical interventions; ones found in the architectural devices we currently deploy in the production of architecture.31 32THE ABSURDExperimentThis experiment looks to find, to amplify, to “absurd-ify” the normal through architectural devices. The following is a series of architectural scenarios that are absurd.I have theorized that the site for paradoxical architecture lies within the architectural devices we use today in the creation and rationalization of architecture. The first experiment begins by exploring the space between the logical and the anti-logical, and the absurdities while playing with the architectural devices.formFig.08 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 1. 2020. 3233 34Fig.10 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 3. 2020. 34Fig.09 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 2. 2020. 33formenclosure35 36formenclosureFig.12 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 5. 2020. 36Fig.11 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 4. 2020. 3537 38formformFig.14: Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 7. 2020. 38Fig.13 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 6. 2020. 3739 40programenclosureFig.16: Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 9. 2020. 40Fig.15 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 8.  2020. 3941 42formFig.18: Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 11. 2020. 42Fig.17 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 10.  2020. 41enclosure43 44scaleformFig.20: Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 13. 2020. 44Fig.19 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 12.  2020. 4345 46scalescaleFig.22: Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 15. 2020. 46Fig.21 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 14.  2020. 4547 48enclosureformFig.24. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 17. 2020. 48Fig.23 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 16.  2020. 4749 50enclosureenclosureFig.26. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 19.  2020. 50Fig.25 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 18.  2020. 4951 52enclosureenclosureFig.28. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 21. 2020. 52Fig.27 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 20.  2020. 5153 54scaleformFig.30. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 23. 2020. 55Fig.29 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 22.  2020. 5355 56formformFig.32. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 25. 2020. 56Fig.31 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 24.  2020. 5557 58formscaleFig.34. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 27. 2020. 58Fig.33 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 26.  2020. 5759 60materialitymaterialityFig.36. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 29. 2020. 60Fig.35 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 28.  2020. 5961 62scaleenclosureFig.38. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 31. 2020. 62Fig.37 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 30.  2020. 6163 64scaleFig.39 : Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 32.  2020. 6365 66SEA OF TOWERSMIXED USE TOWERSThe contradictions: mixed use towers is now mixing the unlikely occupants of fish (ocean creatures) and humansUrgency: rising sea levels, decommissioned train cars thrown into the atlantic, ocean health-The project: train car as dimensional tool, how does that limit architecture space?GLITCHESExecutionHow can little “glitches” in our current world of architecture provide new expanded space for new architecture logic. Through surrational architectural logic, these glitches create new architecture projects, new questions that nods at current crisis, and works towards the new paradoxical norm.Experimenting with the absurd lent way in the creation of meaningful absurdities and architectural contradictions to create not just architectural absurdities but architectural glitches that are seemingly absurd but may be more than just that.Fig.40. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 33. 2020. 6667 68ROLES REVERSEDTETRIS REMIXEDMIXED USE TOWERSUNITIZED SPACESThe contradiction: architecture speaks about negotiating with nature. In present day we see nature as the victim of our creation. When nature re-overtakes built form much like how weeds take over an abandoned house, what effect does it have on the program in the space. When built form becomes a victim of nature.Urgency: question climate change, when nature takes over Project: building is no longer our job, un-building is.The contradiction : buildings are often the sum of its parts and made into a whole, what if being a part of a whole is temporary and can be re-tetrisUrgency - units as a commodityThe project: looking at typical unit shapes / modules in a typical tower and how re-tetris-ing it can generate a new form and the opportunities it brings to the building, the unit and the propertyFig.42. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 35. 2020. 68Fig.41. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 34. 2020. 6769 70RENEGOTIATING THE PUBLIC SPACEFOUNDATIONS OF A NEW CITYReaching for the mountainsThe contradiction: materials we find to be a solid separator between the public and private becomes malleable, turning thresholds into a new malleable interstitial space for the negotiation of public and privateUrgency: public spaces are often curated, making it less public in a sense the public doesn’t have real agency in the public spaceProject: challenging the extent of what a material can do as an agent of the public space.The contradiction: towers (a building) become the foundational columns for a new city. the towers are unoccupied so what’s left is the structure, an element of the structure for a new building Urgency: empty condo crisis in VancouverThe project : what kind of a new city can be created from just using empty condo towers in VancouverFig.44. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 37. 2020. 70Fig.43. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Glitch 36. 2020. 6971 72The project of paradoxical architecture aims to destabilize the current linear pragmatism architecture is bound by. Due to this unprecedented rate of change we are experiencing in every aspect of the world, linear logic is insufficient and therefore design needs to explore the wildly unreasonable, the inappropriate, the seemingly illogical and the self contradictory. And surprisingly, this approach may yield useful and pragmatic results. 73 74Paradox: A seemingly absurd, or self-contradictory statement that when investigated or explained may prove to be well founded or truewhats noreal and whats aZsurdworkable architectural dualitiesthe narrative of the architectureAPPROACH TO PARADOXESSELF CONTRADICTORYTRUESEEMINGLY ABSURDFig.45. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Approach to Paradoxes. 2020. 7475 76PROJECTUNPRECEDENTED RATE OF CHANGE IN THE WORLDWhat is changing so quickly?environmental issues, social issues, etcParadoxes:self contradictory but trueProject outcome:building / infrastructure /programPARADOXICAL ARCHITECTUREMETHODLINEAR LOGICIS INSUFFICIENTAPPROACH TO PROJECTPROBLEM (anti)LOGIC ARCHITECTUREsea level rise“____ as ____” (in contradiction)*Order of priority can shuffleSITEFUNCTIONUSERPROGRAMFORMENVIRONMENTUSEBUILDINGINFRASTRUCTUREINTERVENTIONSTRUCTUREENCLOSURETYPOLOGYtrash consumptionforest firesozone depletionagingrefugeesair purificationpandemic controlFig.46. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Project Method. 2020. 75 Fig.47. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Approach to Project. 2020. 7677 78Qou found a diarq froe an uncnown traneler& 9s qou iuicclq Ûih through the pages, unsure what you would come across, you see a compilation of written epcerhts, scetches, collages, and drawings& 9fter failing to find a naee of whoe this belongs to or a return address, you investigate deeper into the entries to see if anything would give you a clue as to who this traveler is, where she came froe, where she eaq go& Qou soon realire that the entires are dehictions of what the traveler sees and experiences as she travels to different cities, spaces over time. Curiosity leads you to further explore certain entires in this journal. Most of these entries are seemingly absurd. It almost seems like they happened at a different time; perhaps in the future. As absurd as they may seem, you feel a sense of recognition and understanding; whether it is an object you are familiar with or a frame into a place you have been to. However, the rest of the composition contains some jarring contradictory themes, ideas, or program. Seeing how the world is changing at such an unprecedented rate these days, you come to see that with further investigation that these seemingly absurd entries do in fact somewhat makes sense. They seen rather paradoxical.Fig.48. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. You Found A Journal. 2020. 7879 80Fig.49. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Field Notes. 2020. 8081 82At was a long and arduous drine of winding roads Zut A finallq arrined& 9s soon as I snaked around and found a parking spot I quickly snatched up a park map they had at the beginning of the trail head. I remember driving past here as a kid, we would just drive past it as if the entire area is a sore thumb but after the re-design, this park has become a place to experience the new nature, to play and also to re-discover. The park received new funding the last couple years for all these cool trails as universities around the area bought the site up as an anthropological and archaeological site to research how our trash consumption has surpassed the previously predicted numbers. Every trail offers a different experience, some are easier with the experience more catered towards views and lookout towards the Methane Geyser by the Compost Range or my favourite the Empty Can-yon in the Recycling Range. Some trails are harder, with a greater slope and more winding roads like on the Plastic Trail that passes through the Plastic Basin where vintage plastic six-pack rings are. The park prohibits personal diggings as they have archivist working full time on site for the university. Lhe rule is siehle2 Deane no trace& An other words, dont tace out anq of the hrecious trash that eaces the harc what it is, and dont leane anqthing in it& Fig.50. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Narrative. 2020. 8283 84Fig.51. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Map. 2020. 8485 86MURKY HOT SPRINGSIPHONE WELLPRESERVE BOUNDARYPRESERVE BOUNDARYLandfillMountainFig.52. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill As a Landscape. 2020. 86REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTREDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHT87 88Dandora LandfillSITEmanmade landscapeman made... ...as the naturalFig.53. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Man-made as the Natural. 2020. 8889 90VISITOR CENTERORGANICS LOOK OUTLANDFILL NATIONAL PARKEMPTY CAN-YONPARK ARCHIVISTPAPER VALLEYPRESERVE BOUNDARYCing rangearchivmain pateauRE-USE LOOP 4.2kmPLATEAU DRIVEFig.54. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Visitor Center. 2020. 9091 92Angled Bridgethis bridge mediates changes in slope of the topgraphy along a curve. The strut is an angled support that eliminates the need for an other column and all the while acts as the guard. Protected Elevated PathTo protect the precious topography from human activity, structure minimally disrupts the topography. Planks are held in tension on the underside to create a gentle arc so the users feel close to the ground plane while the structure only meets the ground on either endsCANtilever CANyonstructure hidden within the layers of can substrate allowing archivist to continue to work below the cantilevering bridge. The metal trusses are by-products of the cans, much like how a wooden path is the by-product of a tree.Typical Archivist Trailnatural path created by excavation and discoverysteps into the pool Murky Hot Springs Mercury CreekFig.55. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Elevated Path Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 9293 94Fig.56. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Elevated Path Oblique. 2020. 9495 96VISITOR CENTERLANDFILL NATIONAL PARKGLASS ROCK200mEMPTY CAN-YONcantilevering bridgePARK ARCHIVISTPAPER VALLEYBOTTLE TRAIL 2kmC OMPrecycling rangemainPLASTIC TRAIL 1.6kmRE-USE LOOP 4.2kmRE-USE LOOP 4.2kmPLATEAU DRIVEFig.57. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Empty Can-yon. 2020. 9697 98Angled Bridgethis bridge mediates changes in slope of the topgraphy along a curve. The strut is an angled support that eliminates the need for an other column and all the while acts as the guard. Protected Elevated PathTo protect the precious topography from human activity, structure minimally disrupts the topography. Planks are held in tension on the underside to create a gentle arc so the users feel close to the ground plane while the structure only meets the ground on either endsCANtilever CANyonstructure hidden within the layers of can substrate allowing archivist to continue to work below the cantilevering bridge. The metal trusses are by-products of the cans, much like how a wooden path is the by-product of a tree.Typical Archivist Trailnatural path created by excavation and discoverysteps into the pool Murky Hot Springs Mercury CreekFig.58. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Cantilever Bridge Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 9899 100anti-slip texture on walking surface mimics ridges metal cansFig.59. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Cantilever Bridge Oblique. 2020. 100101 102HOT SPRINGS TRAIL 5.1kmGEYSER LOOKOUTIPHONE WELLPRESERVE BOUNDARYPRESERVE BOUNDARYel eFig.60. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Geyser Lookout. 2020. 102103 104Angled Bridgethis bridge mediates changes in slope of the topgraphy along a curve. The strut is an angled support that eliminates the need for an other column and all the while acts as the guard. Protected Elevated PathTo protect the precious topography from human activity, structure minimally disrupts the topography. Planks are held in tension on the underside to create a gentle arc so the users feel close to the ground plane while the structure only meets the ground on either endsCANtilever CANyonstructure hidden within the layers of can substrate allowing archivist to continue to work below the cantilevering bridge. The metal trusses are by-products of the cans, much like how a wooden path is the by-product of a tree.Typical Archivist Trailnatural path created by excavation and discoverysteps into the pool Murky Hot Springs Mercury CreekFig.61. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Angled Bridge Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 104105 106The angle of the strut the mirror angle of the topographic slope so that the steeper the slope, the more vertical and higher the guard member is; the slower the slope the lower and more flat the member is to encourage looking over.anti-slip texture on walking surface mimics Fig.62. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Angled Bridge Oblique. 2020. 106107 108MERCURY FLOWMERCURY CREEKMURKY HOT SPRINGSHOT SPRINGS TRAIL 5.1kmGEYSER LOOKOUTMETHANE GEYSERE-WASTE BASINIPHONE WELLPRESERVE BOUNDARYPRESERVE BOUNDARY RANGEe le ct ro n i c  r a n g eFig.63. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Murky Hot Springs. 2020. 108109 110Angled Bridgethis bridge mediates changes in slope of the topgraphy along a curve. The strut is an angled support that eliminates the need for an other column and all the while acts as the guard. Protected Elevated PathTo protect the precious topography from human activity, structure minimally disrupts the topography. Planks are held in tension on the underside to create a gentle arc so the users feel close to the ground plane while the structure only meets the ground on either endsCANtilever CANyonstructure hidden within the layers of can substrate allowing archivist to continue to work below the cantilevering bridge. The metal trusses are by-products of the cans, much like how a wooden path is the by-product of a tree.Typical Archivist Trailnatural path created by excavation and discoverysteps into the pool Murky Hot Springs Mercury CreekFig.64. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Murky Hot Springs Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 110111 112HOT SPRINGS TRAIL 5.1kmGEYSER LOOKOUTMETHANE GEYSER EGG SHELL PEAKC OMPOST RANGEe le ct ro n i c  r a n g ehive pl at ea uFig.65. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Electric Range. 2020. 112113 114Angled Bridgethis bridge mediates changes in slope of the topgraphy along a curve. The strut is an angled support that eliminates the need for an other column and all the while acts as the guard. Protected Elevated PathTo protect the precious topography from human activity, structure minimally disrupts the topography. Planks are held in tension on the underside to create a gentle arc so the users feel close to the ground plane while the structure only meets the ground on either endsCANtilever CANyonstructure hidden within the layers of can substrate allowing archivist to continue to work below the cantilevering bridge. The metal trusses are by-products of the cans, much like how a wooden path is the by-product of a tree.Typical Archivist Trailnatural path created by excavation and discoverysteps into the pool Murky Hot Springs Mercury CreekFig.66. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Archivist Trail Diagrammatic Section. 2020. 114115 116trash/ toxic landfillsas a site problemMAIN PARADOX : SITElandfill as a national park and anthropoligcal researchproject : landscape interventionman-made landfill as the neo natures tohograhhqsite use program environment material FURTHER CONTRADICTIONSPROBLEMLOGICCONCEPTlandfillsiteuseprogramsite + programsite + program + usemountaindisposal area archiveas a “natural” topographic landscapeact as an accumulation or  storage of historical recorddump parkenvironmentmaterial dangerous safeused discarded trash raw precious materiallandfill national parkas anthropological studiestrash landscape as something precious we aim to conserveprecious trash paradoxical programminglandfill of archival opportunities and anthropoligical researchlandfill as a national park when our trash consumption takes over, and archelogical research and outdoor leisure activity now takes place in a location once undesirable and deemed uselessCONTRADICTIONDEVICE MAKES SENSEFig.67. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Logic. 2020. 115 Fig.68. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Landfill National Park Framework. 2020. 116117 118You tuck the National Park Map back in and skim through to the middle o^ the bournal$ to qour surhrise...Fig.69. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Next Entry. 2020. 118119 120Fig.70. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. To Your Surprise. 2020. 118121 122Fig.71. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Fallen Photographs. 2020. 122123 124A met uh oith a long time ^riend A havent seen in a ohile. Oe studied together and use to spend hours going to museums and galleries everqohere. Oeve been to the Douvre$ the N9$ gallerq hohhing in ;helsea qou name it. A never had true ahhreciations ^or sculhtures like the <avid or his ^avourite$ Eonets OaterOhat A love about galleries are the ^rames. Not just the frames that surround the piece of art but the architectural frames or thresholds oithin the gallerq. Lheq are the most epciting elemental hart in epheriencing the hiece. Thesholds in galleries frame pieces but contradictorily they not only enclose the piece but also act as an opening or entrance way into the hiece.This boutique gallery just off of some Main st had a cool ephibition going on. At had a lot o^ everyday things but if I really think about it I reallq havent seen anq o^ them in a ohileIt seems absurd to celebrate something that is often seen as one of the banalities and a given in the everqdaq li^e. :ut oe havent changed in a sense that oe still like to fetishize or celebrate what we deem as precious and rare; even if the things we deem to be that changes as resource continue to dehlete at this rate.Fig.72. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Narrative. 2020. 124125 126threshold is a paradox ...as a container and a non-containerFig.73. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Threshold as a Paradox. 2020. 126REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHTREDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHT127 128DAF=9J HJG?J=KKAGF L@JGM?@ D9Q=JK G> L@J=K@GD<KFig.74. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Layers of Thresholds. 2020. 128129 130L@J=K@GD< LQH= ) 2D vertical plane that displays soil that exists on the 2D horizontal planeSoil depletion occurs when components that contributes to the fertility are removed and not replacedFig.75. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 1 Axon. 2020. 129 Fig.76. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Soil. 2020. 130131 132THRESHOLD TYPE 2: 3D plane acts as a containermain cause of soil depletion is lack of a vital component: phosphorous. An element that glows crimson red is contained in the insetting plane to nourish the wheatFig.77. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 2 Axon. 2020. 131 Fig.78. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Phsophorous. 2020. 132133 134glass case shown “in the round” contains the remaining gas that makes up our ozone that protects usTHRESHOLD TYPE 3Enclosued box that acts as a display caseFig.79. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 3 Axon. 2020. 133 Fig.80. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Ozone. 2020. 134135 136THRESHOLD TYPE 43D interactive threshold that one can enterFig.81. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum Threshold 4 Axon. 2020. 136137 1389t the Únal hart o^ the gallerq oas this installation$ o^ epherimental threshold that highlighted something A thought as a guarantee$ the normal$ the banal the everqdaq. An this room oere cubes o^ . bq . resin blocks oith these bodilq shapes hollowed out. We went into a two person cube and while it was pretty transparent and we could see each other as if we were sitting on either side of a dinner table$ there oas a certain unattainable and unreachable iualitq to each other that highlighted the banalities of everyday interacts that we need but is taken away from us. Fig.82. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Installation Narrative. 2020. 138139 140I was told the gallery changes everyday and the museum staff rotates the resin blocks around but they have key plans where the distance betoeen too thresholds are aloaqs . ahart as oell as the spaces between the cubes. Different cube orientations like a long and linear one oith + threshold mimics oaiting in line$ ohile one )( long box with two thresholds gives a shared experience of two people conversing while social distancing.Fig.83. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Installation Diagrammatic Plan. 2020. 140141 142project : gallery through thresholdsrapid rate of depleting resourcesgallery for the rare banality - comoditizing the naturally occuringmonumentalizing the everyday object MAIN PARADOX : PROGRAMprogram use function form siteFURTHER CONTRADICTIONSPROBLEMLOGICCONCEPTCONTRADICTIONDEVICE MAKES SENSEprogram output of human creativitynaturally occuring resourcethings we value innately vs superficallyfine art / historically significant itemsbanality of everydaythe everyday becomes sacred/near extinctionuse human curated place naturally uncurated placefate ultimately controlled by humansfunction intellectual survival contribute to human progress as a species. thesholds paradoxically as a container but also an anti-containerform contained uncontainablehumans participants of the ecosystemcurating the naturally uncontainablegallery of the natural resourcemonumentalizing naturally occuringsiteusergallery - within an envelopenature - outside the envelopesite + program + useFig.84. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Logic. 2020. 141 Fig.85. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Framework. 2020. 142143 144Tired of picking up loose pages of photographs and mahs that arent tahed to the bournal$ qou skim until you reach the end where the pages feel thin and nothing seems to be shoved in...Fig.86. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Last Entry. 2020. 144145 146Today I canoed to the apex of an old deserted and submerged city looking onto the new development that is quickly underway. The premise seems interesting; ocean life is so often thought of separate from land life but if we really think about it, we are a part of a greater vertical stratification of program between land and the ocean. This floating new colony will become our new cities as sea level continues to climb at such an unprecedented rate, submerging all of our major cities in the coming months maybe years. Hopefully, this promise of a mixed use tower in the ocean won’t contribute to the bigger problem of habitat desecration for our selfish needs. Maybe this mixed use tower can create a symbiotic relationship between land life and oceanic life. Fig.87. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Narrative. 2020. 146REDACTED FOR DIGITAL PUBLICATION DUE TO COPYRIGHT141 142project : gallery through thresholdsrapid rate of depleting resourcesgallery for the rare banality - comoditizing the naturally occuringmonumentalizing the everyday object MAIN PARADOX : PROGRAMprogram use function form siteFURTHER CONTRADICTIONSPROBLEMLOGICCONCEPTCONTRADICTIONDEVICE MAKES SENSEprogram output of human creativitynaturally occuring resourcethings we value innately vs superficallyfine art / historically significant itemsbanality of everydaythe everyday becomes sacred/near extinctionuse human curated place naturally uncurated placefate ultimately controlled by humansfunction intellectual survival contribute to human progress as a species. thesholds paradoxically as a container but also an anti-containerform contained uncontainablehumans participants of the ecosystemcurating the naturally uncontainablegallery of the natural resourcemonumentalizing naturally occuringsiteusergallery - within an envelopenature - outside the envelopesite + program + useFig.84. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Logic. 2020. 141 Fig.85. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Museum of the Banal Framework. 2020. 142147 148horizontally adjacent + vertically stackedLANDOCEANICshared plane sea levelhorirontallq adbacent and verticallq stackedstratification of programLANDOCEANICshared plane sea levelPIRVATE to  PUBLIC to PRIVATERetailParksEpipelagic Mesopelagic Bathypelagic Abyssopelagic Hadalpelagic CivicOfficeResidentialstratiÚcation o^ hrogramFig.88. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 1. 2020. 147 Fig.89. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 2. 2020. 148149 150titleLANDOCEANICshared plane sea levelRetailParksEpipelagic Mesopelagic Bathypelagic Abyssopelagic Hadalpelagic CivicOfficeResidentialeliminating the horizontal plane that divides the two users vertically stackedLANDOCEANICshared plane sea levelRetailParksEpipelagic Mesopelagic Bathypelagic Abyssopelagic Hadalpelagic CivicOfficeResidentialverticallq adbacentFig.90. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 3. 2020. 149 Fig.91. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Section Diagram 4. 2020. 150151 152Decommissioned subway below provide foundation for the land life above and structure to encourage coral life to provide habitat for oceanic life belowRETAILModules scavenged from submerging cities become a start point to re-start civilizationFig.92. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 1. 2020. 151 Fig.93. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 1. 2020. 152153 154OFFICEModules scavenged from submerging cities become a start point to re-start civilizationRESIDENTIALModules scavenged from submerging cities become a start point to re-start civilizationFig.94. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 2. 2020. 153 Fig.95. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Axon 3. 2020. 154155 1562030PLANEOCEANICLANDocean floorPHASE 1current scenario20302040PLANEOCEANICLANDocean floorPHASE 1 PHASE 2as sea level continues to rise$ `umans race against time to ceep eppanding upoardsFig.96. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-1. 2020. 155 Fig.97. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-2. 2020. 156157 15820302050PLANE2040OCEANICocean floorPHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3LANDeventually we run out of space to build upK`e imagines an alternative scenario$ one t`at maq truly create a mixed use tower eliminating the strata between the two usersFig.98. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram A-3. 2020. 157159 1609s sea level continues to rise and is predicted to submerge t`e modules$ metals$ glass and plastics are stripped to create structural columns so t`e tower can continue to expand upwardsFig.99. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 2. 2020. 160161 162Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Fig.100. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 1. 2020. 161 Fig.101. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 2. 2020. 162163 164Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Fig.102. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 3. 2020. 163 Fig.103. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 4. 2020. 164165 166Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Fig.104. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 5. 2020. 165 Fig.105. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 6. 2020. 166167 168Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Fig.106. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 7. 2020. 167 Fig.107. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 8. 2020. 168169 170Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Jesearc` s`oos concrete `as t`e abilitq to beneÚt oceanic food diversitq bq providing s`elter t`at doesnt `arm t`e oceanic environment as oell as increase food diversitq& ;reating `abitats for :lue mussels$ +(-,( tqpes of invertebrates suc` as s`rimp$ crab oorms etc& L`is intervention as t`e abilitq to increase food diversitq bq ,((p per siuare foot&Fig.108. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 9. 2020. 169 Fig.109. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Modules Elevation 10. 2020. 170171 1722030PLANEOCEANICLANDocean floorPHASE 1LANDcurrent scenarioEXPANDED PLANE20302040OCEANICLANDocean floorPHASE 1 PHASE 2LANDPUBLICbq eppanding t`e s`ared plane into a blocc$ it becomes t`e public zone in o`ic` land users and oceanic users s`are and eit`er ends of t`e bar are private programs for bot`& 9s sea level rises$ beloo t`e sea level$submerged pipels are noo sites for `abitat and food securitq for oceanic life& Meano`ile above t`e sea level located in t`e eppanded public plane are sites for farmingFig.110. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-1. 2020. 171 Fig.111. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-2. 2020. 172173 174corefishingfishingfish tankfish tankcorecowscowschickenchickeneggseggscorecowscowspigspigsFig.112. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Phase 2. 2020. 174175 176>irst level of food production above sea level are Ús`ing `oles and tancs o`ic` not onlq provides food but regulates t`e neo en`anced `abitat triggered bq t`e modules to ensure not one specie is over populated&L`e nept level includes coos and pigs all connected t`roug` one central coreFig.113. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 3. 2020. 175 Fig.114. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 4. 2020. 176177 178L`en comes coos and c`iccen in t`e oired domes& L`e individual domes are  all connected bq a interconnected netoorc t`at collects eggs from eac` dome and feeding it up t`e central core to t`e `umans living above&=ventuallq$ t`is infrastructure oill also be submerged as oe race against t`e rising sea level& L`e onlq oaq to avoid running out of airspace$ is to eppand doonoardsFig.115. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 5. 2020. 177 Fig.116. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 6. 2020. 178179 180H@9K= + J=F<=J <9A?J9M G> MAP=< MK= F=KKFig.117. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Phase 3. 2020. 180181 182203020352050EXPANDED PLANE2040ocean floorPHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3“PUBLIC” SYMBIOTIC FOOD SECURITYPRIVATEPRIVATE9s sea level continues to rise$ and t`e public band for land and oceanic animals eppands$ land and ocean animals seec to s`are t`e private bands above and beloo t`e eppanded plane& Fig.118. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-3. 2020. 182183 184Kimilarlq t`eq are used for t`e tubular netoorc t`at brings oceanic life above oater&Narious plastics are salvaged from H`ase ) to create lig`t oeig`t enclosures above and beloo t`e sea level as t`e structure moves aoaq from t`e center of mass& Fig.119. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 7. 2020. 183 Fig.120. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Axon 8. 2020. 184185 186L`e oceanic life lives oit`in t`e tubes t`at run t`roug` t`e `eig`t of t`e structure as a pressurized open sqstem into t`e ocean o`ile land life lives oit`in t`e plastic enclosure above and beloo sea level& 9s sea level continues to rise$ one daq t`e tooer maq be completelq submerged  but noo land and oceanic users are able to live independentlq unaffected t`e c`ange in sea level&20302035204020502070EXPANDED PLANE“PUBLIC” SYMBIOTIC FOOD SECURITYocean floorPRIVATEPHASE 3PRIVATEFig.121. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Scenario Diagram B-4. 2020. 186187 188Sea level riseMAIN PARADOX : USERSvertical stratification of horizontally adjacent usersvertically stacking land-life and oceanic-life in pursuit of a truly mixed use towerform function use site environmentFURTHER CONTRADICTIONSPROBLEMLOGICCONCEPTcontinuous stratification of the seemingly horizontally adjacent but really vertical programs vertically stacking land life and oceanic life amalgomating eac` users perception of level (function + site +userCONTRADICTIONDEVICE MAKES SENSElandsite water ocean as the new “ground plane”share public plane that gradually moves towards the privateshared symbiotic ecosystemvertical stratifications with horizontal zones with different usespublic to private programs from bottom-upfunction public to private from top-down(multiples of individual forms with slight variation)form(one vast horizontal form)land of individually identifiable  extrusionsvast horizontally seamless oceanland ecosystemuse oceanic ecosystems`ared level ( above level (environmental beloo level (vertically stacking seemingly horizontally adjacent dualshumans (land life)user fish (ocean life)Fig.122. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Logic. 2020. 187 Fig.123. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. SeaTower Framework. 2020. 188189 190Fig.124. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. You’ve Finished the Journal. 2020. 190191 192AN INSIGHT INTO CONTRADICTIONSDefinitions: what is a paradox and what is paradoxicWhile prioritizing certain architectual devices before another is not new, finding the one to attach the main conceptual paradox to was key. Then implementing it at every level generated a paradoxical architectural project.Ultimately, the project of paradoxical architecture unraveled workable contradictions through a framework of architectural devices to rationalize a built form to address a quickly and exponetially accelerating socio-environmental problem.Current enivornmental or social situationCurrent enivornmental or social situationUsing paradoxical logic in architecture may result in the exact same typology or existig building in the future where an accelerated rate of change has changed the social or enviornmental landscape. CONCLUSION:Accelerated environmental or social situationAccelerated environmental or social situationCurrent Linear LogicProject XSelf -contradictory LogicCurrent Linear LogicSelf -contradictory LogicProject YProject ZPROBLEM LOGIC ARCHITECTUREKurprisinglq$ t`is approac` led to some probects t`at arent so absurd&&&Fig.125. Chang, Yau Ching Norain. Does Paradoxical Architectural Method lead to Paradoxical Architecture . 2020. 192193 194THE PROJECT OF PARADOXICAL ARCHITECTUREProject outcome: Why the journal?As mentioned previously the importance of the narrative to deliver the “truth” of the paradox is a huge part in the unveiling of the project. The predicate and the contradictions of the architectural paradox are accompanied by architectural drawings to demonstrate architectural ideas and interventions of the story and in this case a journal from an unknown traveler. Accompanied by those, are hybrid drawings that glitches and distorts in a series of incomplete images that has architectural qualities and quantifiers but has moments of blurriness to demonstrate the un-latch-on-able quality of a paradox. Use of “immaculate” architectural digital drawings, for example topographical site plans, metrically focused sections, will be pursed at a minimum to represent architectural intentions and the purpose of setting the scene outside of the narrative of Paradoxical Architecture. In the project of Paradoxical Architecture, representation of ideas that result in that should not be logical and linear but rather a series of experiments, layers, glitches, engaging in both the latent and the real. If Paradoxical Architecture is the contradiction of a duality in an architectural truth, then representation of such could be at minimum a hybrid drawing that binds the contradictions. A level of distortion will be required of the dualities; the ever-iterative images of the dualities of the mind, then the dualities of the real, but the re-interpreted by the mind should be the mode of representation. 195 196WORKS CITEDAbbey-Lambertz, Kate. “Watch Detroit Neighborhoods Fall Into Ruin With Google Street View.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 26  Mar. 2016, https://www.huffpost.com/entry/google-street-view-detroit-abandoned-homes-foreclosure.Baudrillard, Jean, et al. The Singular Objects of Architecture. University of Minnesota Press, 2005.Beall, Jc, et al. “Liar Paradox.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 12 Dec. 2016, https://plato.   stanford.edu/entries/liar-paradox/.Bhatia, Neeraj. Pamphlet Architecture 30: Coupling: Strategies for Infrastructural Opportunism. Princeton Architectural   Press, 2011.Crook, Lizzie. “BIG Opens CopenHill Power Plant in Copenhagen with Rooftop Ski Slope.” Dezeen, Dezeen, 9 Oct.    2019, https://www.dezeen.com/2019/10/08/big-copenhill-power-plant-ski-slope-copenhagen/?li_    source=LI&li_medium=bottom_block_1.Di Cosmo, Roberto, and Dale Miller. “Linear Logic.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 24    May 2019, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-linear/.Handy, Charles B. The Age of Paradox. Harvard Business School, 2003.Irvine, Andrew David, and Harry Deutsch. “Russell’s Paradox.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford    University, 9 Oct. 2016, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/russell-paradox/.Lewis, Paul, et al. Situation Normal... Princeton Architectural Press, 1999.Shapiro, Lionel, and Jc Beall. “Curry’s Paradox.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 19 Jan.    2018, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/curry-paradox/.Tschumi, Bernard. Architecture and Disjunction. MIT Press, 1996.Tschumi, Bernard. Event-Cities: (Praxis). The MIT Press, 1998.

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.42591.1-0390673/manifest

Comment

Related Items