Armature and Pod
 
 
evolution 1989 - 2004:
from Captital Holding to Vanderbilt
to Master’s to RDS
 
 
There aremore than 15 years between the concept of the POD andArmature system and what will be its full realization in a built project. In many respects this seems like a long time. Yet, now that were are getting some environments built with full Armatures, two things become apparent: first, how radical the Armature concept really is and second, how much most people like the result. In fact, there is has been great enthusiasm expressed for these environments.
 
The enthusiasm for the completed results coupled with the still existing resistance to investing in Armature remains a mystery. The work environment is still in the grip of utilitarianism. This misapplication of the concept practical convinces people that the environment does not “matter” (if you will forgive the pun) and that it has no relationship to human health and productivity. Therefore, plane workspaces with little amenity, glaring lights, no prospect and refuge - in sum, no organic quality - is practical.
 
Of course, I reject this approach to environment making [link]. I do not believe it is practical nor economical to ask people to work in boxes that are without meaning, flexibility, adaptability, interest, natural materials or any sense of fun and interactivity - in other words, all the qualities that we associate with life. Why would we think that we can live in these artificial boxes that have no aspects that in any way relate to life as we know it.
 
 
 

Matt Taylor
Nashville
November 11, 2004

 
 

SolutionBox voice of this document:
ENGINEERING • STRATEGY• CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT

 

posted: November 11, 2004

revised: November 30, 2004
• 20041111.337990.mt • 20041130.645410.mt •

(note: this document is about 5% finished)

Copyright© Matt Taylor, 2004

IP Statement and Policy

 

Search For:
Match:  Any word All words Exact phrase
Sound-alike matching
Dated:
From: ,
To: ,
Within: 
Show:   results   summaries
Sort by: