Comments on: Driftwood by AA Unit 2

By: Jonathan Polkest

Jonathan Polkest — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 15:54:46 +0000

I try checking out the sculptural developments each year in Londons Bedford Square, I like the sort of abstracted or mutated but somehow remaining a utility object that each of these seem to embrace, The current piece by Danecia Sibingo is wonderful for the curiously harmonic aura it seems to generate, I thought this and still do even though the name Driftwood , which I have subsequently learned as the title seems unworthy of such a poetic structure – maybe its just me.

By: pooja

pooja — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:00:15 +0000

Seems like a first year basic design project.

By: OLGV.

OLGV. — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 12:03:32 +0000

Regarding the difference between “pavilion” and “sculpture”, I would say that what makes a pavilion, pavilion is when that sculpture became or start to define a space, …a human inhabited and reported sculpture.
A pavilion is a bridge between sculpture and a classic architectural product / a house…
Regarding this particular pavilion, indeed, I would also enjoyed to be more “honest”, without such a contrast between structure/technical part and the final look.

By: Luis

Luis — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:48:10 +0000

I do agree that it looks more like a sculpture than anything, although that is not the concerning issue. I was at the review of the final 3 projects and have to say that I was inmensely disappointed by the jury’s commentaries, and eventually their decision. There was another project which exhibted much more potential but as it comes down to nowadays ‘pretty’ renderings are the selling point. In the end I hope the constructed form will look, if anything, similar to these ‘renderings’. The intended construction strategy will require much ‘hidden engineering’ as jack puts it, but also a lot of visible ones, which will be hard to detail let alone construct, and more than anything will detract a lot from the apparent smoothness of the form. In any case I hope they pull it off…

By: larry seow

larry seow — Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:01:54 +0000

like it! oh, the lamp post… does it like being in there?

By: fayez jamil

fayez jamil — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 21:24:14 +0000

does any body knows whats the software they are using ?

By: jack

jack — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:38:05 +0000

Anything that requires that much ‘hidden engineering’, (which has nothing to do with the exterior), is a bit ridiculous?

By: tanya telford - T

tanya telford - T — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 19:09:00 +0000

i really like this, ive just checked the scale (as shown in the pictures) – are people really going to be able to walk kind of under it & through it etc? if so i think its very graceful, organic and yet playful & even romantic ( there’s a faint sketch of what I seem to think/imagine is a couple walking through together) ………. really nice & i look forward to seeing it,

By: Chuck Anziulewicz

Chuck Anziulewicz — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 12:24:07 +0000

Luxury Larry makes an interesting point. At what point does something go from being a “sculpture” to being a “pavillion?” It seems like the term “pavillion” should be used for something that serves more of a purpose than just something one can stand underneath. It doesn’t seem to be wired for lights or any other interactive features. To me it seems no more of a pavillion than one of Alexander Calder’s stabiles.

That having been said, it is an attractive “object.”

By: Luxury Larry

Luxury Larry — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 10:53:52 +0000

It looks more like a sculpture than a pavilion to me. Nevertheless am excited to see it.