
Carla and I both have large extended families in Cape Breton (I’ve got about 15 aunts and uncles and somewhere around 30 cousins on my Mom’s side alone), and some of them like to stop by periodically to check out the project. None of them have much interest in contemporary architecture. Their reactions most commonly involve some variation on the phrase ‘it certainly is different!’ Some seem enthusiastic and impressed, though I always imagine they’re just trying to be supportive. Others don’t say much at all.
I haven’t had much direct contact with other designers of any stripe since we arrived in Nova Scotia, and it’s a strange experience to find myself in a place like Mabou trying to explain what I’m doing without recourse to the usual archi-speak terms or concepts. It’s useless to talk about wrappers and cores, or served and servant spaces, or all the other terms I can use when speaking to other designers. As a result I’ve been thinking about the way architects conceptualize things, and how closely those things should relate to the real process of building and making.
In my mind there’s a spectrum between, say, Daniel Libeskind and Louis Kahn. At one end is the purely formal, where abstraction is complete: a building is a crystal, and how it is made is, to the architect, almost literally immaterial. At the other end is the systems-based, where construction technology is illustrated in the form itself – the separations between building systems are fetishized and nothing is purely decorative.
Looking at my building as it is now, covered in OSB (and looking strangely more naked than it did a week ago), it seems closer to the former position than the latter – and, philosophically speaking, that is somewhere I never expected to find myself. I was trained to think of things in terms of systems, and to me this design is an assembly of three parts – the service core or ‘tower’, the plywood-clad ‘crow’s nest’, and the shingled ‘sleeve’. But they’re all made in exactly the same way as parts of the same inextricable mass of studs, joists and sheathing. The differences between them will be visible mainly in terms of finishes. Maybe that’s OK. To me, there is still something deeply satisfying about a space that can be seen clearly in terms of just a few constituent parts – even if it’s all just cosmetic.
- Geoff