HACKERS & PAINTINGS by Paul Graham
How are hackers and painters different from each other based on the article (not your ideas)?
Hackers & Painters by Paul Graham, says some people believe that hacking and painting are very different kinds of work. That hacking is cold, precise, and methodical, and that painting was the frenzied expression of some primal urge. There is also a big time lag in prestige. It’s like light from a distant star. Painting has prestige now because of great work people did five hundred years ago. Painters leave a trail of work behind. Each design builds on things learned in previous drawings. Graham claims that Hackers should act more like Painters and regularly start from scratch, instead of continuing to work for years on one project, and trying to incorporate all their later ideas as revisions.
How are hackers and painters similar to each other based on the article (not your ideas)?
Graham explains that hacking and painting have a lot in common because they are both makers. Hackers try to write interesting software, and for whom computers are just a medium of expression, as concrete is for architects or paint for painters. One learns to paint/hack through doing. Both are trying to make good things.
Are you a hacker or painter? Explain why?
I am both according to this article because I am learning architecture by doing what has been done before, I am a maker. I use the typical medium of paper and pencil to sketch design ideas as I also use computer software to finalize the building design. All problems are solved by doing; by trial and error.
QUESTIONS OF PERCEPTION
1) Select a lighting design project that inspires you most.
The South Bronx, New York “Gymnasium Bridge” 1977 by Steven Holl.
2) Describe the effect of lighting design elements in the selected project.
The elements of the project were meant to illuminate the night-space of the South Bronx, New York.
-How does the architect design the building and lighting?
Steven Holl’s Gymnasium Bridge was one of six proposals commissioned by the Wave Hill Center for a bridge between New York’s impoverished South Bronx neighborhoods and the parkland of Randall’s Island. The project, for four intersecting and overlapping bridges containing usable space as well as acting as passageways, was intended to foster economic development: in Holl’s scheme, community members would earn incomes by working on organized recreational activities housed in the bridges—rowing, ice skating, basketball, boxing, and so on—and these activities would in turn attract visitors and custom to the area. Thus the Gymnasium Bridge would not only serve a physical purpose but act as “a vehicle from which destitute persons can reenter society
-Does she use direct or indirect lighting?
-Does she use natural or electric lighting?
-Does she use the changes in brightness, in object color, or in color temperature (of light source)?
- Describe the purpose of designed lighting effect.
The predominance of the site plan reflects Holl’s belief that “architecture and site should have an experiential connection, a metaphysical link, a poetic link.” The darkness of the site contrasts with the luminosity of the structure, casting the bridge as a beacon of hope in the community.
-What does the architect want to achieve?
The Gymnasium Bridge would not only serve a physical purpose but act as a vehicle from which destitute persons can reenter society.
- Describe your own evaluation about the selected project?
-Was the project and lighting design effective and successful? If you think so, explain what makes the project successful.
As a proposal, the project seems to be successful. The design indeed looks like a beacon attracting visitors but also provides for those who live in the area to work, creating a self-sustaining culture. If it was built, I believe it would be successful.