Rocker_Complexity_Project

Studio Rocker emphasizes in exploring the possibilities of Architecture by manipulating the idea of codes, how this entity is viewed in its original state and configuration to multiple possibilities of expressions. The code is not seen as an external factor that limits the performance of Architecture; it is used as the mediator to transform the basis of the discipline by being materialized or executed. It becomes distant to our traditional view of restriction of codes transcending to a variety of possible performances and results (such as structure and surface) that are controlled and originated by a set of rules and organizations that determines the after effect of this configuration. I was personally interested in the idea of patterns and repetition that this computational process provides. Having one original state of configuration transcending to a more complex and recoded effect that is given by repetition. Similar to Neumann’s UCC (1940’s) that reveals the idea of copy and construction that gave product to unstable patterns, in Rocker’s Recursions (2004) it becomes evident that the automata is revealed in the understanding of rules, repetition of these operations and the effect that causes by relating one to the other; contributing to a new generation. Interesting to see how the author compares these lines as generations because they behave exactly like the idea of generations, an organization that is transformed by the other. The result: a variety of patterns. It ends up to a modification of codes and rules that stimulate a new understanding in Architecture by computational mediums. The digital software breaks the boundary of the screen and provides not only a theoretical understanding of its function but also the multiple physical possibilities that it can produce: the architecture.

Deleuze’s complexity relates two different kinds of system or spaces that are not completely independent from the other; the smooth and the striated. The relationship is not considered restricted or controlled; it does not reveal an evident origin or a clear sequence of its development. Wolfram’s complexity becomes more choreographed and its development through time is controlled by a rule set that change and maintains a reference from its previous. It becomes more of an addition or a repetition of the original rule set that transcends to a more complicated system different from Deleuze’s complexity that is less systematic. I agree in most of the comments that these two perceptions (Deleuze and Wolfram) are similar to each other by creating a constant relationship with the changing events (rule set or spaces), in addition they are both progressive and developmental. Independent from one being less strained and manipulated than the other, they evolve to a different use of the space. They both generate a complexity that emerges by their common and constant relationships through time to another dimension that contains information from one stage to the other, one that becomes edited or altered independent from their consistency and origin.
The image: Zaha Hadid./ It's a digital media and a study for the Thames Gateway as an urban field, the project would be located in London, United Kingdom. This specific project reveals a similar discussion by having a rule set as an origin that follows development, an alteration of that development that leads to multiple possibilities and patterns of structure. They investigate 4 main building typologies throughout the urban area leading to a series of evolutions of these standard typologies that are placed in the site and experimented. The fusion of these typologies creates new possible structures. To see the animation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IksIyui84wE#