Let us remember that once this was a scenic view, people go there to enjoy the man-made lake, that was built by the Dutch in the 40s, to have fun with their family and the land surrounding it were easily sold as having good view to the water.

But, it was not necessarily legal, because even though the local government gave out permission to build houses and buildings, the area it self was not recommended to be a settlement, especially those on the brink of the reservoir.

As we could logically place into mind, the vast water body also hold potential of misgivings. The structure was old and even though it was built by the Dutch, it has been used to a maximum limit.

So the question lays: was it the nature being mad at us? Or was it us making wrong doings to nature that created this chaos?

And us, architects, builders who played as gods putting our labors into buildings, we shared the concequences. We should have warn them! Next time a costumer arrive at your door, don’t forget to ask what the surroundings were, if it is considered a high risk area to live in, suggest them to move out and sell the property. At least that what we could do…

As Moslems, we are obliged to pray 5 times daily, and for people who practically spend their entire day in malls, either as staff or visitor, this generates a need for Mushallas to accommodate this need. Unfortunately, as far as I know, there hasn’t been a shopping center that is able to provide its staff and visitors with a somewhat befitting Mushalla. The Mushallas I have prayed in, in these shopping centers, are usually hidden, next to the toilets, or occupy left-over spaces near, or in vehicle parking areas. To be honest, I don’t think that the places that I have mentioned are befitting to be holy spaces!

A part of me consider this a regular issue, as mall owners are generally non-Moslem, and thus it may be the case that they think “oh well, as long as I give them a place to pray in, then it’ll be ok…” but it’s not! What if I put chappels in parking lots? I bet they’ll have something to say as well!

So, why don’t we as architects, take a closer look at these public religious facilities…they play an important role in our lives, and I reckon that they deserve to be located on a much better spot.

Nanda

Word by word suffocated my lungs and so they hung there, limped and numbed. The scattered houses down bellow are a jungle of undeniable truths of how living squatters in Indonesia’s biggest city, Jakarta is conditioned. I am sure if you open the car window you would smell the bad odor rousing from down there. Haphazard developments of housing on unattended or under disputes of ownership lands are what had happened to form these squatters.

In contrast of the glamour cityscape, behind skyscrapers, beyond hope these funguses of development live and grow. They do not belong to no one, these slums we may call; belong to us as citizens of the world. They appear not only in Indonesia, but also in other cities and other countries; disguised in different names, favellas of Rio, shikumen settlements of Shanghai, kampung of  Indonesian cities, and many others.

This phenomenon is discussed thoroughly in Mike Davis’ Planet of Slums. There seem to be a laisez faire of mental by governments of these countries to let them grow. Unfortunately, there is not much can be done to improve their conditions due to many top bottom decisions that lack of attentions. Many of improvements program are misled and used not according to the inhabitants’ needs. Not to mention the mean strategy some of the capitalists are using when they want the land for a certain development.

So, is there a way out of this? Of course there is, if we would all sit together and listen! The need of these people can be assessed by a simple act of observing. May be they who sit up there do not need this, but we as planner do. Steps are more effective taken from bottom up approaches.

Use the inhabitants’ communal spirit. Most informal settlements everywhere around the globe have strong ties with their neighborhood.

Improvements can start with small things. Cleanliness of the settlements is a god start. Give these settlers the understanding of a healthier environment by keeping clean their living spaces.

Grow the feeling of common ownerships. Participatory planning in slum areas would be proven effective, because the inhabitants are also involved in the process. We need to let them know first of all, that this is for the common sake of everyone.

The United Nations in their reports mentioned that more than one billion people now live in the slums of the cities of the South. This is our chance to help creating betterment for citizens of tomorrow. So, step up to it, my fellow planners and architects!

Which one comes first, “form follows function”, or “function follows form”? This is just like how we can compare between egg and chicken, which one comes first, egg, or chicken?

Form follows function is a principle associated with modern architecture and industrial design in the 20th Century, which states that the shape of a building or object should be predicated by or based upon its intended function or purpose [wikipedia.org], and the other one is by the opposite. It doesn’t means as form follows function is the best answer for this, although an architect usually do the design process by creating the lay-out of the room and the arrangement first, and later designing the form of the building. Mies van der Rohe says that he did not stand against the form, but he think that form is a goal of the designing process. Rohe thinks that function follows form always end up with formalism, satisfied the building’s appearance from outside view, but we don’t know what will be happen inside.

But, many architects also do their design by not doing the same step, they design the form of the building first, and later design the lay-out next to be mixed up with that. Yes the building became magnificent, superb, and iconic, its appearance will looks like a sculpture. Tom Wright, one of the Atkin’s architect whom designed Burj Al Arab, said: “if you can draw a building with a few sweeps of the pen, and everyone recognizes not only structure but also associates it with a place on earth, you have gone a long way towards creating something iconic”. This is one of the examples of “function follows form” architect.

Another example of “function follows form” architect is Frank Gehry. Look at his work at MIT Strata Center. Iconic building with deconstructs style. But what happen next, MIT Sued Gehry much for that design. They said that accumulations of snow and ice have fallen dangerously from window boxes and other areas of its roofs, blocking emergency exits and causing damage. Totally disaster! Gehry did not follow the rule here, as Rohe already said above, we don’t know what will be happen inside.

I myself also do both of these designs process, following my clients’ order. I put one of the examples above, I called it: “The maestro’s house”. I like this one; it looks like an iconic building. Yes I think all of you know that it comes from the idea of a grand piano’s form. How bout you?

Andie Wicaksono

Architect, Urban Designer.

No, this article does not mean that I am unemployed and in desperate need of a job. The title simply tries to convey the question of: “who in society really needs an architect’s services?” Some of you might answer “high-paying clients, of course!”, others might be less picky and accept any job opportunity that comes along. Sure, architects are human too (are we not?), and therefore we are always in the need of materialistic fulfilling (tell me if we don’t! Food on our tables, clothes on our backs, and roofs over our heads…face it, we need them!) However, if we really think about it, then the only people who can feed us are those who are able to afford our services. So, what about those who can’t afford us?

Returning to the basic definition of what an architect is; a master builder is what an architect is to some (even in Chinese the word used to describe architects literally means master builder! ??? jianzhushi – jian: build/construct, zhu: build/construct, shi: master), and some dude/dudette who draws houses for a living to others. People can call us whatever they want, and we as architects, can also come up with our own ideas about what an architect is supposed to be. We’re basically people who (supposedly) know how to build properly. What does that mean? It means that we are supposed to be able to create something that works properly according to its needs and function(s). A house, for example, is a dwelling place. Therefore the house should house its inhabitants, fulfilling their physical and emotional needs to the fullest. An office block should be able to encourage a safe and comfortable environment for people who conduct their activities there. The list can go on and on endlessly, and you’ll all fall asleep by the time you reach halfway through the list!) So I presume that everyone knows what I mean by now. A good architect knows how to optimize every inch of space that have been given to them to toy around with. A bad architect (like me) can’t really do so, resulting in poor quality designs (and in the end become critics on how good design is supposed to be like – this is so me!) Notice how I put up space as the parameter to a good design? That’s because aesthetics is a very difficult parameter to measure (beauty is in the eye of the beholder or beauty is a relative thing, but ugliness is obvious!). Another reasons why I chose space as parameter to determine whether a design is good or not, is because space has a direct impact on users. Find it hard to comprehend? Well I wrote this article on my 9300 (with its mini-qwerty-keypad) instead of my notebook (because I’m trying to import some files), while my hands are the size of a bear’s paw! Small workspace+gigantic paws=a lot of pain! The importance of space in this issue is obvious; it determines the degree of comfort and pleasure.

Jumping back to the question at hand; Who needs an architect’s services? The rich who are able to afford our services will always be able to enjoy good design (great design even!). Where as the less fortunate will never be able to enjoy even the lowest quality design, since they don’t have the luxury to use our services. Wait a bit; why does it seem like I’m stereotyping us (architects) as expensive creatures? Because most people (in Indonesia) think of us as expensive service providers that only the rich can afford! Another reason is that most people tend to think that it’s a waste of resources to use an architect to design (their) homes, and that everyone is an expert when it comes to building a house. Well, nobody is! Not even us architects! (Face it, we’re not God…we’re just playing God!) So what does it have to do with space and everything? What is my point? Allow me to take the house as an example as it’s something that we are all (naturally, very) familiar with. The point is, that a well designed house can guarantee the health and comfort of its inhabitants. Why so? Air circulation and sufficient natural lighting is a couple of reasons that I had in mind when I wrote this article. If a house is well designed, then it should perform well as climate modifier regardless of the size of the land it stands on. Failure to circulate air properly, will result in bad indoor air quality, ultimately putting the inhabitants in the risk of catching a disease. That would lead then to less productivity. Remember how our PE teachers used to tell us “Within a healthy body lies a healthy soul.”? This is kind of like that; “within a healthy house lives a healthy family”. So, if an architect’s duty is to manipulate space in such a way that the space becomes fit to contain activities, then certainly everyone has the right to have the luxury of our services, not just the rich and famous.

If this article is a bit difficult to understand, please feel free to send me an email through p_navitas@yahoo.com, we can discuss/argue there hehehe….

Save our nation!

related article: http://ar-chi-tect.org/architect-job-description