mom.arq.ufmg.br

(English) Cyberarchitecture: VirtualArchitecture Beyond Real Space Metaphor(2000)

25 min read original

Ana Paula Baltazar dos Santos

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the use of the metaphor of real space in cyberspace.

Starting by identifying two kinds of architecture, one of physical space

and one of digital space, this paper shows how the social aspects of

architecture lead to the concept of place beyond three-dimensional space.

Then it evaluates the current use of space as a poor metaphor in

cyberspace and proposes a broader understanding of this metaphor with

regards to the concept of place. Cyberarchitecture is then considered as a

possible interface, as a virtual architecture beyond the real space

metaphor.

INTRODUCTION

It is possible nowadays to identify two different kinds of space: the one

we live in (the built physical world) and the other we navigate in (the

World Wide Web). For both spaces there is a possible architecture, which

has been generically treated as three-dimensional space. It is important

at this point to make it clear that the architecture of the physical world is

built in the three dimensions of space, but it can also be simulated before

being built in three-dimensional digital space. This is called virtual

space, which has been modelled using CAD packages, and is nothing more

than potential physical architecture which is to be built in the near future.

The use of desktop computers, and immersive virtual reality, to simulate

and pre-evaluate potential architecture, are excellent tools, but they can

not be taken for virtual architecture. Another fact that also brings

http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520estevam

confusion between real and virtual architecture is that most of the 3D

worlds of the Internet make appeals to physical space as a metaphor, in an

attempt to create an extension of the real world into the virtual world.

Actually, the use of computers in architectural practice, and the use of

architecture to create digital spaces to be navigated within computers,

have been mixed and misunderstood creating a vast field of

interrelations which in fact do not exist. It is important to consider the

impacts of virtual architecture on the real architecture and vice-versa,

although as yet these interrelationships are not clear enough.

It is already possible to realise some of the impacts of the use of computers

in architectural product, as shown in the image on the next page of the

design for The New Capitol Building for The New Capital formless

form. This design is based on the idea of conveying a transparent view of

politics in Japan, aimed at acheving a real political change through the

building. The concept of visibility from outside and on the inside is only

possible if the building was to be broadcast live on TV and then being

inserted into the context of the whole of society, all over Japan. It would

not only be built in a specific plot, but it is designed to be seen from

everybodys home. The new ways of evaluating the context of insertion of

the building is a very important consequence of the coexistence of virtual

and real worlds. Apart from that, which is an impact of the virtual into the

real, it is worth noticing the appearance of this building. This

summarises the impacts of computer graphics on the design process. The

computer was used as a tool during the design process and the final form

is not usually seen in the real world; but this is a design for a possible

building and must not be taken as an impossible building.

According to Ken Sakamura architecture is understood in its relations to

computers under the difference between the possible and the

impossible, though he also considers both of them as virtual

architecture and emphasises the difference with regards to conception

and realisation. The difference between the possible and the

impossible can be helpful to clarify if architecture has been related to the

physical world the possible building, or to the digital world which

estevam

estevam

allows the impossible building. Possible buildings enclose every

conception, simulation or achievement towards physical architecture,

while impossible buildings make reference to the potential of

architecture on the Internet. The latter, the potential of architecture out

of the physical space (the impossible building), is the focus of this paper.

Once they can exist and be used in the digital world of the Internet as a

social space, impossible buildings are no longer impossible architecture.

In order to understand the potential of architecture in cyberspace, it is

now essential to establish the distinction between three-dimensional

space and the social space of architecture.

ARCHITECTURE AS SOCIAL SPACE

Architecture has been defined in many different ways by many different

people architects or not. Most of these definitions are related to its

three-dimensionality, to its physical features. A classic example is Le

Corbusier: for him architecture was the masterly, correct and

magnificent play of masses brought together in light. This aesthetic

feature of architecture did not encompass the whole idea of architecture

found in Le Corbusiers buildings, but it brought the idea that

architecture was more than merely functionalism a serious issue

discussed during the modernist phase. It seems that definitions of

architecture are used in order to suit specific contexts. Here

architecture will be discussed as both possible and impossible buildings,

as a place, as a social space.

Hiroyuki Suzuki considers architecture as the art of creating places,

and brings with this assertion the possible difference between space and

place. For him, western culture considers architecture as a mechanism of

creating spaces, which can be moved without regard to the context in

which it is based. The space is seen as a mere three-dimensional building,

a self-sufficient space . On the other hand, he considers the oriental

meaning of architecture as the art of creating places. Apart from his

oriental point of view of the western understanding of architecture,

which is particularly simplistic, his emphasis on space as something

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

without context and the possibility of place as something broader than

that, opens the way towards the social space of architecture. Thus, place

would be space related to culture, history and context, and architecture

would create a social space. In his words, architecture can be regarded

as a domain midway between relics and gardens.

One of the most beautiful discussions of the origins of architecture is that

provided by Vitruvius, when he identifies it with the origins of language.

As Prez-Gmez explains, in a moving passage that recreates the

beginning of humanity, this Roman writer describes how some thickly

crowded trees, tossed around by storms and winds and rubbing their

branches against one another caught fire. Men first ran away like

animals, terrified by the fury of the blaze. Eventually they approached the

quieter fire and realised that it kept them warm. They subsequently

added more wood to the fire and learn to keep it going. As a result of this

social event, they stayed together and uttered their first words, learning

to name the reconciliatory act that had kept them alive. With this initial

poetic naming came the poiesis of architecture, the possibility of making.

It should be noted that they did not steal the fire from the gods. This

architectural action was an act of affirmation taking place in a space that

was, from its inception, social, i.e., cultural and linguistic. Both

Vitruvius and Prez-Gmez also identify architecture as a social space, as

a place . More than just the dimensions of space it is important to

consider the context in which this three-dimensional space is inserted.

This context is a social one. It puts together what can be called the five

dimensions of architecture. Thus, architecture works as an interface

between man and society.

The Five Dimensions of Architecture

Future Systems describe this image (Living Quarters in India, 1981) with

the phrase never featured in architectural magazines pointing to it as

architecture. What makes it architecture is also what makes it a place

the meaning with which the space is invested by its peculiar usage.

Architecture as place is more than a three-dimensional space, it needs a

broader understanding with regards to the way men dwell. The poiesis of

estevam

estevam

estevam

architecture (the possibility of making) is depicted in this picture and so

is the social need of inhabiting. The way people appropriate these tubular

spaces discloses real time interaction as one of the main features of

architecture. As a lived space, architecture is an event and it will always

depend on time and peoples interactions. It would never be an absolute

space; it is always relative to its social context. Besides the three-

dimensions of space there are also the dimensions of time and behaviour.

It is possible to consider the five dimensions of architecture from the

point of view of the final product and from the point of view of the

conceptualisation (both physical and digital). From the point of view of

the final product, architecture can be considered a place, which

encompasses the dimensions of time and behaviour. As a lived space,

architecture needs to be inhabited, and time is part of this lived

interaction as are peoples behaviour.

From the point of view of the conceptualisation, architecture, which is

by its nature a three-dimensional art, has in the last 500 years evolved to a

stage where nearly all of the design exploration and visualisation occur in

any of a number of two-dimensional media. These media do not

effectively portray the experiential quality of approaching, entering, and

moving through an architectural space, an aspect which is primary to any

design. This is due to the apparent gap between two-dimensional

representation and three-dimensional product. Actually, the gap is much

bigger, as there is a lack of two other dimensions, which are needed in

order to approach, enter and move through the architectural space.

These are the dimensions of time and behaviour, which lost their place of

relevance in architectural design since the Renaissance, with the

establishment of the perspectival paradigm.

Once architects began to resolve the whole design through drawings,

architecture was simulated in its three-dimensionality, but at the same

time, architectural design lost its human scale planning and its

temporality. The loss of the dimensions of depth, time and behaviour,

with the two-dimensional projections allowed by perspective methods, is

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

not something irreversible nowadays. Plan, section, elevation,

perspective, axonometric () were perhaps appropriate to the cycles or

epicycles of Ptolomaic, Copernic and Galilean universe. () It can be

readily seen that the plan is dead because its worldview is obsolete. It is

possible to envisage a new process of design using computers, which

incorporates time and behaviour. It would overcome the perspectival

paradigm and could be used to design both possible and impossible

buildings.

COMPUTERS AND ARCHITECTURE

Computers have begun to be used in architecture in the 50s. According

to Bruegmann at first it appeared that the computer had little to offer a

visual art like architecture, except perhaps in the areas of structural

calculations and bookkeeping. It was, in fact, through the back door, via

the structural-engineering department and business offices of large

architecture-engineering (AE) firms that the computer first entered the

world of architecture. In the early 60s, due to invention of interactive

computer graphics, as shown by the image on the left (the first interactive

computer developed in MIT in the 60s), it was possible to start thinking

of using computers to aid design.

The first big conference in computers in architecture took place in 1964

at the Boston Architectural Centre, and according to Bruegmann , the

mood was euphoric. It seemed that as soon as suitable systems could be

marketed at a reasonable price, every architect could design directly on

the computer. In 1964 the expectations around the replacement of the

traditional process of design were already big, and some researches

indicated new ways of using computers beyond representation .

Unfortunately, the equipment was very expensive and these

investigations did not bring any real innovation to the design process.

In the 70s reaction occurred against modernism (in general) and in

particular the use of computers. So it is just in the 80s that computers

returned to the architectural scene, with more accessible prices and also

with CAD (computer aided design) software. The evolution of software

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

was great, but it is still possible to compare the designs produced

nowadays with the designs produced in the Renaissance with the

establishment of perspectival paradigm as demonstrated by

Michelangelos drawings for the Laurencian library in Florence (shown

on the left). This suggests that there is no alteration concerning the way

architecture is produced from the Renaissance until today, even with the

current use of the most sophisticated computers. CAD packages have

added nothing substantial to the way contemporary architects work. The

packages available for architecture, in general, just emulate traditional

methods of creation and representation of architecture. The general use

of computer graphics in architecture just make it easier to visualise and

investigate new geometry, but it does not bring anything beyond

perspective.

Today a new demand for computers and architecture has been

established. It can be viewed from two main points of view: the inclusion

of the dimensions of time and behaviour into the design conception and

the creation of places to be navigated within the computer. In completely

different ways, these two kinds of association between computers and

architecture are entirely related to the social dimension of space, be it

physical or digital.

With regards to the inclusion of the dimensions of time and behaviour

into the design process, it can be said that there is already some research

towards it. A close example is that of the software package being

developed by Michael Bell during his PhD at the Computer Science

department at University College London. His software is an Immersive

three-dimensional CAD, which enables the user to perform design using

a head mounted display. In other words, this software brings the user to

the same space as his design, where the design can be thought and

executed in stereoscopic three-dimensional vision, without the

limitation of the plan, and with the involvement of the whole body (the

image on the left depicts an avatar creating a hose). There is a lot to be

developed in this direction, but it is a good example of how it is possible to

overcome the perspectival paradigm. Prez-Gmez considers the loss of

estevam

estevam

estevam

depth, as men perceive it, as one of the great faults imposed by

perspective. Perspective, as the one point of view simplification of the

three-dimensional space, causes the split between space and time and

consequently separates men from the possibility of interaction. What

Michael Bells software allows is the reconciliation of space and time, by

placing depth, length and breadth in relation to the human body as a

whole, superseding the simplistic one eye view of perspective and its

representation in a two-dimensional medium.

The creation of places to be navigated within the computer has not often

been considered as an architectural task. Most of the web designers are

programmers or people involved with communication, without any

background in the creation of places. It has become very common to

find the three-dimensional worlds of the Internet bearing a remarkable

resemblance to physical space. From the digital worlds depicted into the

movies of the beginning of the 90s to the most recent VRML and 3D

worlds, such as ActiveWorlds shown on the left, all these spaces carry a

very strong trace of classic architecture, meant to be possible buildings.

As Marcos Novak points out, cyberspace requires a liquid architecture, it

is a transphyisical space, and there is no need to worry about Newtonian

laws. These impossible buildings are then possible architecture and the

metaphor of space is needed, although as yet it has not been explored in its

potential.

THE REAL SPACE AS A POOR METAPHOR IN

CYBERSPACE

Virtual worlds are becoming out of focus mirrors of physical space. Most

of the elements used to build these worlds are rough representations of

elements taken from physical space. It is possible to argue the need for

bricks, glass or even roofs and trees, as shown in the image of TalkWorld ,

although most of these 3D worlds not only use this kind of material, but

also make them available for their users to build their own architecture

within the world. Apart from technical problems due to the computer

memory required for the insertion of large numbers of polygons, and the

rendering of them in real time, this appliance of physical space as

estevam

estevam

estevam

metaphor does not seem to be the proper one. There is no need for

weather protection, there is no need for strong structures, there is no

need for glass windows. In fact, there is no need for these rough

representations of reality, although it could be justified for helping with

recognition and orientation, but this only really applies in the case of first

time and novice users.

Evaluating many of the 3D worlds, it is possible to identify the massive use

of three-dimensional space, as much in material terms as pointed out

above as in conceptual terms. The conceptual metaphor of three-

dimensional space, is what led to the material metaphor, and so it needs

closer attention. Three-dimensional space is always used in the physical

world to protect men from inclemency and also to allow privacy, thereby

dividing the world into internal and external spaces. The group of private

spaces, known as suburbs, towns, cities, counties, countries and so forth,

is the known public environment, through which people move. The

distance between these spaces is responsible for the establishment of

different societies. Every society then is related to one specific location

and also to some common personal interests. Geographical distance

plays an important role joining and separating people and also making

societies conform. On the Internet, geographical distance does not play

this role anymore; as only personal interests will guide people in making

their choices.

The concept of moving through space, and also the concept of private and

public space has been unquestionably used to create digital space. In this

way, both 2D and 3D worlds are extremely limited by the possibility of

moving through pre-determined data. Two-dimensional Web pages are

based on browsing kinds of movement, whilst 3D environments create a

parallel world as an extension of the real. It is easy to make a direct

relation between moving through real space and moving through virtual

space, and at first sight it seems great to be able to meet people all around

the world without any geographic barrier in a new but known

environment. Actually, this is a big step towards the establishment of

new and different societies, but it also ties up the potential of cyberspace.

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

It does not allow any possibility for approaching cyberspace beyond the

physical space metaphor, and the so-called virtual world has not been

virtual but rather a representation of the real.

Hiroyuki Suzuki believes that the presuppositions of virtual reality have

been based on spaces rather than on places and he indicates that the

attempt to create virtual reality seems to assume that the world can be

understood as space. Neither real nor virtual worlds can be understood

as space, in the sense of three-dimensional physical construction, but

must be seen as place, social space, the space invested with meaning,

where time and behaviour are essential. The metaphor of space in virtual

environments can be stronger than it is today, it can evolve beyond the

concepts of physical space.

THE POTENTIAL OF SOCIAL SPACE IN CYBERSPACE

The metaphor of space has been used in computer language in two ways.

Firstly, as an attempt to adapt the computer to human patterns, computer

designers give their inventions names such as windows, scrolling and

spread sheets, etc. Secondly, there is the characterisation of the new

societys need for dwelling through the many metaphors used, such as web

site, home page, virtual city, virtual community, and so forth. The direct

application of such terms from real space into the virtual one is not the

best way of providing a dwelling atmosphere in cyberspace. In fact,

many of the terms are not applicable without geographical reference, as it

is community, which would define cyberspaces society.

According to Michael Heim , community derives from comunitas, which

were created around the medieval monasteries , related to the world

religions. Community is then a social group of people joined around a

physical space, which is geographically limited and based. The primary

concept of community is based on stability and physical proximity. Apart

from being a group, the cybersociety is not stable or physically located.

As Heim reminds us, the very term electronic community is problematic

because it masks the ephemeral, and even alienating features of

everything electronic. This new society is not a community in the old

estevam

estevam

estevam

sense of the word; it is dynamic and flexible; it does not grow around a

physical space, but it is growing spontaneously without any physical

barrier except the screen of computers. The use of space as metaphor can

tie up the growth of cybersociety if it is not treated carefully as a set of

selected features, instead of directly using physical space

representations.

As indicated before, every inhabited space would depend on at least five

dimensions: the three-dimensions of physical space and the dimensions

of time and behaviour. In this way, the space would be considered a place

due to its social context. In order to provide cybersociety with a place, it

is necessary to understand the qualities of real places. Cyberplace would

not merely have the three-dimensions of physical space and the

dimensions of time and behaviour, it would still ends up being a

representation of real space. More than that, it is important to create a

new phenomenon instead of representing a previous one. According to

Heidegger , phenomenology means () to let that which shows itself be

seen from itself in the very way in which it shows itself from itself. For

him, representation is not phenomenological once it does not show itself

from itself, but it shows something else from itself, or announces this

something else through itself. As a phenomenon, cyberplace would take

the idea of social space, its five dimensions, and rework them towards a

new place.

A good example of this reworking of space concepts toward cyberplace is

that of the telephone. Telephone made possible for the first time a real

interaction between two people beyond physical space. This can be

considered the first virtual environment ever created, the first

cyberplace. Nowadays, the Internet allows a greater development of the

virtual place of communication begun by the telephone.

It is possible to find many little pointers towards cyberplace and most of

them are related to interaction, which makes men have the feeling of

presence without being physically present. Interaction is concerned

with time and behaviour and it is not necessarily based on three-

estevam

estevam

estevam

dimensions. Following the traces of interactive multimedia, in most

cases cyberspace cannot be said to be interactive. Both the World Wide

Web and interactive multimedia grew up from the same concept, or in

other words, they are the evolution of an old idea. In 1945, Vannevar Bush

brought up the idea of a personalised library, a device able to store books,

records and communications, and which is mechanised so that it may be

consulted with exceeding speed. This library grew into hypertext,

developed in 1960s by Ted Nelson . Hypertext, according to Nelson, is a

means of navigating through a textual document in a non-linear form, a

means of freeing information. The conceptual hypertext is an advanced

idea of non-linear (non-hierarchic) ways of accessing information and

could be used as a metaphor in cyberspace. In fact, the structure of

Internet is literally and not metaphorically hypertext based. The

structure itself is made up by texts with key words linking other texts, and

so on; but this is not what could be called a non-linear structure, it uses a

metaphor of real space move from one point to the other and takes

hypertext as its literal structure. A good and simple example of hypertext,

being spherical instead of linear, can be found in the search engines,

which make use of the key words not just as links, but so as to connect

many different things together, as they would never be in space. The

hypertext structure is totally related to interactivity. It is supposed to

offer the user a range of choice to interact with.

Another pointer towards interaction in cyberspace is the work of Anti-

Rom . This is a group whose intention is to be an antidote for the

boringness of contemporary interactive multimedia presentations. It is

possible to find as the central point of their investigation the object

oriented design. It means that every object acts as it was programmed to,

but what makes it different to the basic programming is the autonomous

way the objects deal with their own characteristics (possible behaviours).

Anti-Rom research gives many good examples. A simple one is a ball that

needs to be played with in order to move. In fact, the movement of the ball

is not pre-programmed, but rather its potential behaviour there is a

mathematical equation relating the possible movement to the speed and

estevam

direction of the cursor movement attached to the spherical properties of

the ball. This ball requires user interaction in order to work, and even

though it is two-dimensional it allows a certain degree of immersion.

Regarding cyberspace advances towards cyberplace it is crucial to take

drama into consideration, not because of its success as reality

representation, but because of the euphoria it is able to allow.

Cyberspace today is itself an object of euphoria, but children of today will

be the adults of tomorrow and something else will be needed in order to

avoid disphoria (despair, despondency). The element of involvement

that is able to arouse euphoria seems to be drama.

It is possible to summarise that: (i) drama can be considered the secret to

preserve users euphoria as a feature towards interaction. (ii) real

interaction is possible if the content is presented as transformation and

not as static information object oriented technology can make it

possible. (iii) the possibility of shifting from linear hypertext to spherical

ones eliminates the imposed hierarchy allowing more freedom towards a

real interactivity between the user and the phenomena, whilst also

allowing the shift from watching content to inhabiting it. All this leads

to the social features of space as a place of interaction, and this can be

joined together towards cyberarchitecture.

CYBERARCHITECTURE

The needs in the real world will keep changing with the growth of the

virtual world, but this can not be misunderstood by bringing digital to real

and real to digital without a careful understanding of the relevant impacts

caused in one by the other. A relevant impact of the virtual world into the

real world would be a change of human perception. Depriving people of

reality it would be possible for them to perceive reality in a broader way,

i.e. to stop paying attention to the controllable aspects of nature and to

focus on its spontaneous features; technology can contribute to a

transformation of our perception of nature rather than replacing our

estevam

estevam

perceptions. The aim of cyberarchitecture is not to replace, to extend or

to create a parallel reality, but rather to create a phenomenological

virtuality (another world) to satisfy different needs.

It is possible to use different devices in order to enhance realism in

cyberspace, but is it a real need? New devices and improvements are

always welcome, if they are affordable and standard or establish a

completely broad and new requirement, as happened when computer

graphics became popular, thereby establishing a minimum hardware and

software requirement. Actually, cybersociety has been growing by itself

due to its rich potential of content exchange. Following the pace of this

spread, hardware and software are also improving in order to make it

bigger and more successful. It is important to focus on the specific

features of place pointed out in this paper, not as a representation of the

real into the virtual, but as a conceptual way of building a potentially

virtual world in order to improve the content exchange.

There is a subtle line separating real and virtual possible and impossible

buildings if this line is not perceived, cyberspace can become a sequence

of representations of the external world inside the screen. This would tie

up, narrow and limit even more the potential of both worlds. If Paris or

London is recreated in cyberspace , it is possible to allow more people to

get there with an unbelievable speed and flexibility. But would people

prefer to go to virtual cities instead of going to real cities? Would they

feel more present in these representations than in real space? Is it

possible to consider these spaces as phenomena? According to the view

expressed through this paper the answer for all these questions is NO.

There is no need to create parallel worlds with reference to the real in

order to try to make the real more accessible. The potential of the virtual

world is much bigger than to represent and extend reality. Step by step

(but fast) the virtual world is naturally establishing different connections

with regards to those of the real world. More than chat rooms, MUDs and

MOOs, the communication is happening through the Net based on a new

concept. Instead of meeting people, it is possible to meet what people

think, to meet content. Even considering the possibility of meeting

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

peoples avatar, this is not a contact with a real person, but actually it is a

meeting with the representation of the way people want to be seen. This

content could be changeable, more dynamic and faced as event instead of

form. This possibility of transformation of content is one of the

demands for cyberarchitecture . In order to create a possible interface for

the cybersociety it is important to create a more pleasant way of making

the content available and meeting the content.

It has been made clear that architecture is not possible without place, be

it real or virtual. It is not possible to consider every aspect of real

architecture while trying to identify its virtual correspondent; but it is

possible to import the knowledge acquired from real architecture, which

has a huge history of dealing with social requirements and technological

evolution. Thus, place would be considered instead of space, and

cyberarchitecture would evolve towards cyberplace, creating a social

environment able to cope with its technological evolutions. It is of

cyberarchitecture interest the poiesis of architecture. As a phenomenon,

cyberarchitecture would avoid some of the mistaken ways of creating

virtual worlds as extensions of the real world, as mimesis of the real.

Likewise just as architecture is the interface between man and real

society, cyberarchitecture would be the computerised interface between

man and cybersociety. Cyberarchitecture can be foreseen as a step

towards overcoming the perspectival paradigm. It is thought that

architecture had its first moment before the Renaissance, when it was

built in loco; its second moment from the Renaissance to today, with the

establishment of perspective as paradigm; and it now envisages the

possibility of a third moment, overcoming the perspectival paradigm with

the inclusion of time and behaviour in its production process through

virtual environments. Both worlds, real and virtual, will coexist and

constantly feed each other. Then, there is a need for cyberarchitecture -

the architectural conception in virtual environments and there is also a

need for virtuality through information technology in real architecture.

REFERENCE LIST

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

estevam

Makato Sei Watanabe/Architects Office, The New Capitol Building in

The New Capital, In: The Virtual Architecture the Difference between

the Possible and the Impossible in Architecture, edited by Ken Sakamura

and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo University Digital Museum, 1997, 292-299

Sakamura, Ken, Introduction, In: The Virtual Architecture the

Difference between the Possible and the Impossible in Architecture,

edited by Ken Sakamura and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo University Digital

Museum, 1997, 1-3

Le Corbusier, Towards a New Architecture, Mineola, New York, Dover

Publlications, 1986, [First edited in 1931, Translation by Frederick

Etchells], 13

Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Architecture Without a Place, In: The Virtual

Architecture the Difference between the Possible and the Impossible

in Architecture, edited by Ken Sakamura and Hiroyuki Suzuki, Tokyo

University Digital Museum, 1997, 6-12.

Ibd., 12.

Ibd., 11. For him relics are recollection of history; gardens can not be

moved, but they can import and store elements from outside world. Then

he considers architecture beyond the concept of space as defined in the

western culture. He sees architecture as a place, as a site for storage of

culture, as a domain between relics and gardens.

Prez-Gmez, Alberto, The Space of Architecture: Meaning as Presence

and Representation, In: Questions of Perception-Phenomenology of

Architecture, edited by Steven Holl, Juhani Pallasmaa and Alberto Prez-

Gmez, Tokyo, a+u architecture and urbanism, July, 1994, [special issue],

9

the notion of place summarised by Professor Philip Tabor (The Bartlett

School of Architecture, UCL): place = space invested with meaning

Future Systems, For Inspiration Only, London, Academy Editions, 1996,

80.

Zobel, Richard W. The Representation of Experience in Architectural

Design, In: Presence, volume 4, number 3, Cambridge, MIT, summer 1995,

254.

Novak, Marcos, Transmitting Architecture: The Transphysical City, In:

CTheory, 29 November 1995 [http://www.ctheory.com/a34-

transmitting_arch.html]

Bruegmann, Robert, The Pencil and the Electronic Sketchboard:

Architectural Representation and the Computer, In: Architecture and its

Image, edited by Eve Blau and Edward Kaufman, Cambridge, MIT Press,

1989, 139

Ibd., 140

Some researchers, as Nicholas Negroponte, believed that architects

would be able to reproduce an artificial intelligence able to solve all

objective problems imposed by architecture. He developed the software

called Urban 5, which allowed everyone to input text data and the

computer generated cubic shapes that could be manipulated by the user.

Later on some experiences took place in England using computers to

generate architectural forms, and some hospitals and schools were built;

Geoffrey Broadbent hardly criticises the resultant architecture defending

architects creativity which he believes to be incomparable to what

computers were able to generate.

Cabral Filho, Jos dos Santos & Santos, Ana Paula Baltazar, Arquitetura e

Computadores Enquanto Instrumentos ticos, In: Boletim culum,

Campinas, Faupuccamp, number 10, [special number], year 2, September

1997, Brazil

Michael Bells home page: http://www.cs.ucl.ac.uk/staff/m.bell/

human body representation in virtual environments

Prez-Gmez, Alberto, The Space of Architecture: Meaning as Presence

and Representation, 20-21

www.activeworlds.com

Novak, Marcos, Transmitting Architecture: The Transphysical City

www.etchinghill.com

Virtual does not oppose to real, but according to Gilles Deleuze

classifications, virtual belongs to the category of event and needs to be

actualised, whilst potential things are those belonging to the category of

substance and are able to be realised. Then, virtual architecture would

be physical or digital, depending on its capability of being an event, of

happening, and not merely being materialised (realised) as a

representation or pre-programmed set of potential features.

Suzuki, Hiroyuki, Architecture Without a Place, 6-12.

Ibd., 12

dwelling as being-in-the-world (according to Heidegger) expressed as a

need in both physical and digital worlds

Heim, Michael, Virtual Reality and the Tea Ceremony, In: The Virtual

Dimension: Architecture, Representation and Crash Culture, edited by

John Beckmann, New York, Princeton Architectural Press, 1998, 156-177

Ibd., 160

Ibd., 160

Heidegger, Martin, Being and Time, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1990,

[Translated by John Macquarrie & Edward Robinson], 58.

Bush, Vannevar. As We May Think, Reprinted in Communication

Bulletin, March 1988, 35-40, originally published in Atlantic Monthly, July

1945.

Ted Nelsons homepage: http://www.xanadu.net/

Anti-Roms home page: http://www.antirom.com

In conversation with Bruno Latour he developed the argument of

euphoria and disphoria as two possible sensations before

transformations allowed by new technologies and he also suggested

euphoric responses as the key towards satisfactory results.

Ibd., 167

standard is considered as which can be used without restricting other

people access or even without the need of changing the whole equipment.

Some interesting researches are recreating these cities, but here, it is not

going to be considered the aim of these other researches

Como citar esse artigo:

BALTAZAR DOS SANTOS, Ana Paula . Cyberarchitecture: Virtual

Architecture Beyond Real Space Metaphor. In: Greenwich 2000

International Symposium Digital Creativity: Architecture, Landscape,

Design, 2000, Londres. Greenwich 2000 Digital Creativity Symposium.

London : The University of Greenwich, 2000.

Original URL:

http://www.mom.arq.ufmg.br/lagear/?page_id=520