Architecture as a projection of multiplicities

Kristanti Dewi Paramita, Universitas Indonesia, Indonesia

Abstract

The architectural discussion of multiplicity moves beyond the preoccupation with architecture as a fixed, conclusive, and eternal entity. The collection of articles in this issue of ARSNET investigates the multidimensionality of architecture. The explorations in this issue span from the discussion of multi-layered meaning and temporalities of architecture, to the dynamic representation and spatial operation of multiplicities. Through inquiries on multiplicity-driven design methods, this issue projects the expanded and open field of architecture, appreciating the different forces and processes of society.

First Page

Last Page

References

Abudayyeh, R. (2021). The changing room: Towards an interior multiplicity. Interiors, 11(2–3), 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/20419112.2021.1962619

Allen, S. (2012). Field conditions. In M. Carpo (Ed.), The digital turn in architecture 1992—2012 (pp. 62–79). Wiley.

Amin, A. (2008). Collective culture and urban public space. City, 12(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604810801933495

Attiwill, S. (2012). Beyond building: Interior designs. Proceedings of IDEA Symposium 2012, Interior: A state of becoming (pp. 1–7). Curtin University.

Bergson, H. (2001). Time and free will: An essay on the immediate data of consciousness. Dover Publications.

Brighenti, A. M. (2014). The ambiguous multiplicities: Materials, episteme and politics of cluttered social formations. Palgrave Pivot.

Brighenti, A. M., & Kärrholm, M. (2020). Animated lands: Studies in territoriology. University of Nebraska Press.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). University of Minnesota Press.

Forty, A. (2004). Words and buildings: A vocabulary of modern architecture. Thames & Hudson.

Franck, K. A., & Stevens, Q. (2006). Loose space: Possibility and diversity in urban life. Routledge.

Kratz, C. A. (2011). Rhetorics of value: Constituting worth and meaning through cultural display. Visual Anthropology Review, 27(1), 21–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-7458.2011.01077.x

Lukasz, S., & Kaminer, T. (2007). Trans-disciplinarity: The singularities and multiplicities of architecture. Footprint, 1, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.7480/footprint.1.1.663

Lyster, C. (2016). Learning from logistics. Birkhäuser.

Mullarkey, J. C. (1995). Bergson’s method of multiplicity. Metaphilosophy, 26(3), 230–259.http://www.jstor.org/stable/24438894

Paramita, K. D., & Schneider, T. (2018). Passage territories: Reframing living spaces in contested contexts. Interiority, 1(2), 113–129. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v1i2.34

Sennett, R. (2019). Building and dwelling: Ethics for the city. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Warakanyaka, A. A. S., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2018). Tracing the progression of inhabitation through interior surface in Semarang Old Town. Interiority, 1(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v1i1.9

Yatmo, Y. A., Paramita, K. D., & Atmodiwirjo, P. (2020). Future landscape of Architecture: Data, Methods, and Programming. Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering Universitas Indonesia.