Building and exhibition layout: Sainsbury Wing compared with Castlevecchio
This weeks reading focuses on comparing two museum/ gallery layouts/ designs, the Sainsbury Wing and Castlevecchio. In particular the reading looks at specific elements such as perspective, arrangement and routes. All three of these are very useful elements to remember when designing a building with such a purpose as the examples, but they are also elements which require identification within all building typologies.
The reading has encouraged me to consider these elements and how I might apply them myself. For example, the use of perspective plays hand in hand with one of my favourite aspects of architecture, light. I have had a fascination with light and the way that it works for a long time and perspective can combine to make intriguing use with it. The power of perspective can shift the whole atmosphere of a room. It can encourage people into a place, or push people away. However it can also be used from an artistic approach too. I enjoy the use of perspective very much and it is an idea which I would be willing to allow influence my own designs, so long as the purpose is fitting. I do not want the perspective element to be used as a gimmick. I would like to use it lure the eye to places and encourage the users of the space to go in certain directions to investigate and explore.
This leads me on routes. The two example builds have very differing approaches to how visitors should explore the spaces, essentially representing the extremes of either open spaces to meander through, of closed corridors to direct you. I believe there are definite arguments supporting both sides of this and the reading has only reinforced that. However I don't think that there is a set winner. There is not an ultimate answer that fits every situation. This is often the case with architecture. Different buildings with different sites and designed for different reasons will require different approaches. The atmosphere and intent of the design will hold a lot of influence in how people are encouraged to interact with the spaces. As architects, it is up to us to decide on how is best to emphasise this.
Finally, arrangement. Of course these examples make use of arrangement in a different way to most typologies in that the artwork being displayed is there for the purpose of being viewed. The reason for the museum/ gallery is to encourage people to view the works and take it all in. However, I believe that such approaches as are used in galleries can be applied to even a normal house. Arranging furniture, rooms and structural elements can be key in creating an effective space which achieves its goals.
Combining all three of these elements together creates a powerful set of ideas to follow when designing. Of course these are only three aspects of a much larger picture, but they set some clear guidelines and encourage some admirable approaches to follow in my own work.
The reading has encouraged me to consider these elements and how I might apply them myself. For example, the use of perspective plays hand in hand with one of my favourite aspects of architecture, light. I have had a fascination with light and the way that it works for a long time and perspective can combine to make intriguing use with it. The power of perspective can shift the whole atmosphere of a room. It can encourage people into a place, or push people away. However it can also be used from an artistic approach too. I enjoy the use of perspective very much and it is an idea which I would be willing to allow influence my own designs, so long as the purpose is fitting. I do not want the perspective element to be used as a gimmick. I would like to use it lure the eye to places and encourage the users of the space to go in certain directions to investigate and explore.
This leads me on routes. The two example builds have very differing approaches to how visitors should explore the spaces, essentially representing the extremes of either open spaces to meander through, of closed corridors to direct you. I believe there are definite arguments supporting both sides of this and the reading has only reinforced that. However I don't think that there is a set winner. There is not an ultimate answer that fits every situation. This is often the case with architecture. Different buildings with different sites and designed for different reasons will require different approaches. The atmosphere and intent of the design will hold a lot of influence in how people are encouraged to interact with the spaces. As architects, it is up to us to decide on how is best to emphasise this.
Finally, arrangement. Of course these examples make use of arrangement in a different way to most typologies in that the artwork being displayed is there for the purpose of being viewed. The reason for the museum/ gallery is to encourage people to view the works and take it all in. However, I believe that such approaches as are used in galleries can be applied to even a normal house. Arranging furniture, rooms and structural elements can be key in creating an effective space which achieves its goals.
Combining all three of these elements together creates a powerful set of ideas to follow when designing. Of course these are only three aspects of a much larger picture, but they set some clear guidelines and encourage some admirable approaches to follow in my own work.
Tzortzi, K. (2004). Building and exhibition layout: Sainsbury Wing compared with Castlevecchio. Cambridge University Press.