Longevity, Ephemerality, Impermanence and Flexibility

The concept or notion of flexibility is a double entendre or in other words, has a dual meaning when applied to design. By definition, flexibility is ‘being able to change to suit new conditions or situations’ although the word itself can be interpreted in both a practical or conceptual way. Practically, flexibility is a great creative method to incorporate into design as it can change the use and or appearance of a building, improving functionality and aesthetics. On the other hand, conceptually, it can be seen as a way for a design to establish an element of fluidity or continuity. This can be more the flexibility of how certain elements of a building can change and adapt in accordance with modern needs, similarly to the idea of palimpsest.

Longevity encompasses the premise of design as we as humans ultimately create buildings for a purpose, to act as a longstanding space that provides a contemporary use for those at the time- we design for the people. Stewart Brand’s theoretical viewpoint of the use of spaces acts as a metaphor that embodies the different so-called layers of a space. Narrowing it down to the individual elements, Brand labels these as site, structure, skin, services, space plan and stuff. Although leaving out the essential aspect which is people, or social which is fundamentally the root cause for design as a whole, this abstract concept defines the basic principles of a designed space. I think it is a priority to understand that design is a result of human needs at the time, suggesting that things change. Human needs throughout history have been a constantly changing topic, this poses the question are buildings permanent? If we build for human needs, and those needs hold a sense of ephemerality, then can the buildings we make really be considered permanent. Adaptations of existing buildings are arguably the most common form of modern building design, proving that design, although holding a sense of longevity, can be flexible and malleable in order to suit modern needs.

In regards to the way in which we represent our design ideas and concepts, Literature can be an efficient yet often overlooked means of communication for design. Rather than visualising a design through drawings, descriptive literature can be used in order to create a narrative and atmosphere in the same way that an atmospheric drawing can. 

I believe that it is a great way to explain in addition to drawings, however, I do not necessarily agree that they are an efficient replacement. Drawings have been an accurate means of conveying design since the origin of architecture in Mesopotamia. In my opinion, the language barrier of literature is a problem easily resolved by using drawings instead or at least in addition to written examples as it is a unanimous portrayal method. 

References:

Oxford Advanced Learning Dictionary, 7th edition, 2005, p590

Stewart Brand,1994, ‘How Buildings Learn, What Happens After They’re Built’

Edward Hollis, 2024, ‘Lives in Rooms, Rooms in Lives’