I've made the point that design is much more than just architecture. However, walking through campus today reminded me of a wonderfully designed building that I'd like to share my thoughts about-- The Social Sciences and Humanities Building by Antoine Predock. Antoine Predock is an American architect as well as a landscape architect and interior designer. He designed the Social Sciences and Humanities Building at the University of California, Davis, in 1994.
The building is constructed of cement and aluminum panels, and cuts into the Davis horizon. It is nearly impossible to tell how many floors the building because of its drastic angels. With the exception of where the building meets its foundation, there aren’t any visible right angels anywhere on the building. The windows that speckle the building are not of continuous size or shape, and become nothing more than large irregular-shaped gaps cut out of the walls of the building’s towers. The spatial elements of foreground and background become interlinked and confused with each other. A tower in the foreground is connected to a tower in the background—depth seems to be contorted or exaggerated in some areas, and eliminated in others. Everything the viewer knows about perceptual space is discarded as the eye jumps from one architectural element to the next.
Most architects aim to make a building inviting and comprehensible. However, Predock attempts to accomplish the exact opposite with the Social Sciences and Humanities Building. Many buildings make use of a portico to show visitors where to enter the building. There is no portico at the Social Sciences and Humanities Building. There is no general meeting area. There is no interaction with the landscape around the building that draws the visitor to a particular location. In fact, there is no definite entrance for the Social Sciences and Humanities Building. Visitors are first taken aback by the irregular skyline of the building, and then confronted with the problem of how to even approach the building. The adventure begins at first sight.
The Social Sciences and Humanities Building is built to be confusing—very unlike the typical purpose of typical architecture. However, the building proves to be anything but typical. Predock didn’t place the building on a grid. It is because of this that the offices and rooms of the building lack any order and seem to have no organization behind them. Predock created hallways that crisscross but never meet, rooms that are next to each other but not adjoined and catwalks that lead to what seem to be illogical destinations.
The confusion of Predock’s Social Sciences and Humanities building is not without purpose however. This confusion is not like anything seen in architecture before. This confusion, more importantly, is not supposed to be like anything seen in architecture before. This is meant to catch the audience off guard. Without familiarity one has nothing to reference in order to make sense of such a building. And if one can’t make sense of the building they are forced to go and discover it for themselves—forced to evaluate a building through experience instead of past evaluations.
Predock’s building is about interaction and sensation—not about architectural elements. Predock isn’t attempting to convey the idea of quintessential architecture through his building. He is neither trying to make a statement about the past of architecture nor trying to make a statement about the future of architecture. Instead he is attempting to transmit an overall sensation from the building to the audience—something that will be interpreted differently by every individual.
