Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Articles

Vol. 4 No. 1 (2024)

On 'sticky' interior: Agglutinating as an interplay strategy for building adaptation

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7454/arsnet.v4i1.96
Published
2024-04-30
Article downloads
142
Submitted
2024-03-05
Accepted
2024-04-22

Abstract

This paper is an exploration into the idea of agglutinating as a building adaptation strategy. This paper examines agglutinating as a potential operation to address the interplay and affective relations between spatial elements, creating a 'sticky' interior which merges or combines these elements. The study in this paper addresses agglutination as the process of re-reading the site in evocative and productive ways, rediscovering the underlying architectural logic which generates new ideas. The study is based on a fourth-year interior architecture design studio project at the Universitas Indonesia, which focuses on various experiments in regard to the theme of adaptative reuse. The experimentation allows for a deep understanding of the agglutination operations and the resulting sticky interior, discovering the interplay between different layers of contexts, substances, contaminants, and temporalities. Through the agglutinating process, a series of affective qualities of the sticky interior are figured as a variety of adaptive operations: as zones of contact and encounter, as a channelling of bodily and spatial experiences, and as the interplay of preserved connection between objects, functions, as well as values. The glutinous capacity of spatial composition nurtures the project's dynamic through which playful and provocative design experimentations are performed.

References

  1. Ahmed, S. (2010). Happy object. In M. Gregg & G. J. Seigworth (Eds.), The affect theory reader (pp. 29–51). Duke University Press.

  2. Atmodiwirjo, P., & Yatmo, Y. A. (2022). Responsive interior: Tactics for adaptation and resilience. Interiority, 5(2), 133–136. https://doi.org/10.7454/in.v5i2.238

  3. Baudrillard, J. (1996). The system of objects. Verso.

  4. Berger, M. (2018). Death of the architect: Appropriation and interior architecture. In G. Marinic (Ed.), The interior architecture theory reader (pp. 343–350). Routledge.

  5. Brooker, G. (2006). Infected interiors: Remodelling contaminated buildings. IDEA Journal, 7(1), 1–13. https://journal.idea-edu.com/index.php/home/article/view/158

  6. Brooker, G. (2018). The dialectics of appropriation. In G. Marinic (Ed.), The interior architecture theory reader (pp. 351–359). Routledge.

  7. Brooker, G., & Stone, S. (2004). Rereadings: Interior architecture and the design principles of remodelling existing buildings. RIBA Publishing.

  8. Brooker, G., & Stone, S. (2009). Basics interior architecture 04: Elements/objects. AVA Publishing.

  9. de Vega, E. I. P. (2010). Experiencing built space: Affect and movement. Proceedings of the European Society for Aesthetics, 2, 386–409.

  10. Gregg, M., & Seigworth, G. J. (2010). The affect theory reader. Duke University Press.

  11. Kidd-Nakai, A. (2015). Architecture, affect and architectural practice [Doctoral dissertation, Victoria University of Wellington]. Te-Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington Open Access. https://doi.org/10.26686/wgtn.17012831.v1 

  12. Kidd, A., & Smitheram, J. (2014). Designing for affect through affective matter. Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts, 15(15), 82–92. https://doi.org/10.24135/ijara.v0i0.479

  13. Kidd, A., & Smitheram, J. (2016). Kerstin Thompson Architects: Exploring affect in interior’s sticky design process. Interiors, 7(2–3), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/20419112.2016.1191147

  14. Leveratto, J. (2020). Learning from interiors: Toward a multiscalar approach to adaptivity. International Journal of Interior Architecture + Spatial Design, 6, 8–15.

  15. Massumi, B. (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Duke University Press.

  16. Merriam-Webster. (n.d). Agglutination. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agglutination

  17. McCarthy, C. (2005). Toward a definition of interiority. Space and Culture, 8(2), 112–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1206331205275020

  18. Plevoets, B., & Cleempoel, K. V. (2011). Adaptive reuse as a strategy towards conservation of cultural heritage: A literature review. WIT Transactions on The Built Environment, 118, 155–164. https://doi.org/10.2495/STR110131

  19. Plevoets, B., & Cleempoel, K. V. (2019). Adaptive reuse of the built heritage: Concepts and cases of an emerging discipline. Taylor & Francis.

  20. Popo Danes Architect. (n.d.). Roemah Langko. http://popodanes.com/index.php/project-detail/91/Roemah-Langko

  21. Scott, F. (2008). On altering architecture. Routledge.

  22. Thrift, N. (2004). Intensities of feeling: Towards a spatial politics of affect. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 86(1), 57–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00154.x

  23. Zumthor, P. (2006). Atmospheres: Architectural environments, surrounding objects. Birkhäuser.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.