Cecil Balmond Lecture at UMich - Recap

Last Tuesday the MarJ and I once again hopped in the trusty xBox but this time pointed West, not as far west as our hearts yearn but western enough to notice a substantial change in license plate design. Our destination, Ann Arbor, Michigan home to the University of Michigan's Taubman College of Architecture and other good things to see and hear Cecil Balmond (of Ove Arup -AGU and UPenn) work his magic. We intentional sandbagged our journey with a couple extra hours to make up any confusing Google directions and to give some time for a greater exploration of UMich's program then we were allowed at Buffalo.

A couple of things were noticed immediately. Monica Ponce De Leon's (Of Office dA) posistion as dean of the Taubman College of Architecture is supplemented with an Associate Dean/Director and an Assistant Dean/Director, which was seemingly not offered to Steven Fong when he took the similar position at Kent State (and subsequently left). Secondly Ms. De Leon is lecturing all over the dang place as is illustrated in the hundreds of lecture posters that line the corridors of the school. Not that she is lecturing at every school on those posters but it came as a very noticeable difference between KSU and the last two schools I have visited in that there are lecture posters for lots of other schools on the walls, as if the school was striving for a non-insular learning experience. We didn't get a chance to talk to any of the students as we arrived on an open house day and most of the staff/students were busy with selling the school to prospective students and I didn't want to get mired. Instead we wandered the building, visited a gallery, looked lovingly upon the various lecture series (and is how I discovered a couple I couldn't find online) and then went out to walk some of the campus, which is tied together with a staggered series of open green spaces in a rather comfortable rambling way. I can imagine the campus is amazing to hang out on when the weather is nicer.

The Lecture:

Monica gave an amazing intro to Cecil. She seems like a genuinely nice and warm person which set the tone perfectly for Cecil's dry humor and deft sense of humanizing a rather difficult subject. The auditorium was packed with spill over to some back up spaces showing the lecture via closed circuit television. We got second row seats due to our pushy and uncompromising nature. For those there on account of the open house I can only say how lucky they are to be exposed to these sorts of ideas so early. Too early to understand but the intent and rigor should be now incubating in the back of those young noggins. If only I knew then...

I don't know how to properly sum up the Balmond lecture. He showed some built work and explained the thought process including a couple of Serpentine Galleries, the CCTV building and the pedestrian bridge in Coimbra, Portugal. He then walked the audience through the impetus behind a few unbuilt works and explained the purpose behind Ove Arup's Advanced Geometry Unit and his work at UPenn (H_edge) before giving us a glimpse of some unpublished work that he is currently working on based upon complex algorithmic interactions.

The intention behind a lot of the thinking of the projects, and arguing upon form based architecture versus architecture that strives for deeper exploration, was touched upon by Cecil but inherently augmented by the discussion. The overlying complexity of much of the forms was really nothing more than the scalable interpretation of a singular mathematical construct meaning that when a bias or intersection created an interstitial space/condition a revisiting of the original premise would allow for an intuitive solution that did not deviate from the overall scheme, resulting in very complex iterations that could be simply construed by understanding the basic premise. It was the complexity and simplicity, existing simultaneously that allowed for the natural discoveries to be made in the work and it was these experimentations that Cecil obviously savored. I was concerned that the MarJ, not being of architecture training, would find Cecil obtuse and confusing however her love of mathematics and Cecil's coherent lecture style gave us much to discuss on the 3 hour ride home. Obviously much of the audience wasn't ready for such heady discourse but it is sure to prove helpful in the coming studio years.

Throughout the lecture, however, Cecil's ability to concisely and clearly state his ideas (as illustrated in his written works) made the lecture experience quick paced and fluid. Illustrations deftly maneuvered the conversation through discussing the work with clients, contractors, other designers and the current audience. It was a sort of "happy learning" that made MarJ and I both realize we enjoy the lectures because you recieve the joy of learning something new and possibly exciting without the chore of having to recite/regurgitate it later (as if we were still in school). I don't know if Cecil's experience as an educator gave him experience in knowing how to easily discuss his ideas (and let his own excitement shine through) in a similar fashion to Dan Rockhill but I have noticed that educators seem to give better lectures than most "Design Professionals". They realize they have an audience there to listen to them care about what they are presenting about, they don't have to shock and awe the audience with made up architecture words that hinder the ability to understand a clear idea (those asking questions from the audience take note!).

Would I see him speak again? Undoubtedly, it was exciting and interesting and he presents fantastically. I feel very sorry for my friends who didn't get a chance to see him speak (cough) and hope they DO take the effort to catch him as soon as they can.

It was a fantastic lecture and I thank the University of Michigan for hosting it.