Ksenija Bulatović, Dr Ksenija Bunjak, Saša Naumović, Nikola Maravić, Sandra Persiani
The question of the representation has always followed every artistic work. Architecture as a creative activity in the domain of aesthetical has a certain specifics in the relation to other arts. This uniqueness can be traced back to the very ontology of architectural work. As a spatially and temporally defined construct of human reality, architectural work possesses a significant component of utilitarity. Regardless to its basic or acquired purpose it is, therefore, pragmatic in its essence. It is or it can partly be considered as a work of art and as a historical artifact and, thus, has its place in both aesthetical and narrative sphere of society (Bunjak, Panic, Pesic, 2012). As a historical artifact architectural work represents its époque and allows different analysis leading to deeper research of social history, cultural norms etc. As a work of art, on the other hand, it is subjected to the aesthetical evaluation. This is where the question of adequate representation comes to the scene. The already finished architecture work can easily be an element of aesthetical evaluation, but how do we evaluate ideas and experimental architecture? How much its representation influences evaluation and shapes the discussions around new ideas?
This paper will discuss the problems of representation of experimental architecture through history and will look closely into the Symbiotic Architecture – the authoring ongoing research project. In the Nature, an organism is never crystallized in one single shape. On contrary, it undertakes a constant process of metamorphosis providing indefinite range of possibilities. If an experimental architecture, such as Symbiotism, follows the same principle, then how do we represent it in order to properly comprehend it and discuss it?
Concept, Experimental, Symbiosis