Stan Allen: Field Conditions (1997)

A field is nothing but a space that is not defined using points or units but variable conditions like purpose and activity. With the term field, Allen makes reference to mathematics and science- disciplines that require you to test and analyze "on site" in order to understand the variations within the series. Field conditions move from the one toward the many, from objects to fields. The term itself has dual meaning. Architects work not only in the office or studio but in the field: on site and in contact with its construction. “Field conditions” here implies the acceptance of the real variables and unpredictability thereby treating constraints as opportunity. 

Through the article, Allen explores the Classical concept of geometry - individual elements that are arranged in a certain fashion to create a whole. These when arranged in ratios using algebra create a geometric proportion. This whole, is meant to serve different needs, functions and services. Nevertheless, Allen believes that this whole must be created through a series or independent elements. Like Eisenman, he talks about how "syntax" should be observed and not imposed through these geometry. He says that a field can be expanded, virtually to infinity, without changing its inherent rules and syntax like in the Cordoba mosque.

Allen advocates for less formal strategies and control in the design process thereby allowing for a more fluid composition. He sort of contradicts himself by focusing more on the form even after advocating for fluidity. Designing with "fluid conditions and contextual logic" may provide new architectural formal strategies, but one must also be concerned with how designing in this method affects the users, clients and the site it exists in.

Sculptures, primarily seen as objects have begun to include the field. For its production, a set of random or intended field conditions are set that results in its final configuration. For instance, while working with a wire mesh or synthetic poured plastic, one cannot control the materials. Instead, we can only control the conditions within its field. In traditional perspective, architecture is regarded as an ‘object’, which is obviously border than ‘form’. In terms of visualization, architecture is compared to its surrounding space. Therefore, the development of architecture usually focuses on the overall form and shape. In contrary, ‘field condition’ refers to a loose arrangement of elements with their own individual identity preserved. This concept of field condition is seen is both urban as well as human scale. For instance, in urban scale, there is Eisenman's holocaust memorial (Fig1) where a field condition is inserted into a traditional figure/ground relationship. Whereas in human scale, there is Zago's detroit pavilion (Fig2) where a field condition creates the canopy, rethinking the typical figure/ground relationship of a building as an object in space.

Fig1:  Eisenman's holocaust memorial
Photo credit: https://www.amazon.fr/Holocaust-Memorial-Berlin-Eisenman-Architects/dp/3037780568

Fig2: Zago's detroit pavilion, Michigan
Photo credit: http://bustler.net/news/622/united-states-artists-announces-third-annual-usa-fellowships

Computation or rather complex scripts are requires to study such field conditions. The basic element of the field here is a vector (Fig3a). These vectors are an ideal tool to represent and study the field conditions. These vectors can be controlled and varied using scripts. Let's look at how we can control these vectors using a grasshopper script (Fig3b-3f). This script sort of alters the orientation of a field of objects based on the distance between each other, x,y and z-axis and based of several attractor points. This script serves as an apt base point to expand and enrich its functionality. 

Fig3a: Shows a basic Grasshopper script highlighting its parameters
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

Fig3b: Shows variations caused by changing width
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

Fig3c: Shows variations caused by changing length
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

Fig3d: Shows variations caused by changing angle
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

Fig3e: Shows variations caused by changing x-count
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

Fig3f: Shows variations caused by changing y-count
Photo credit: Aashika Shibu

In conclusions, the fairly new attitude of "field conditions" is an interesting and opportunistic method of approaching architecture. Nevertheless, we must ensure not to repeat the modernists attitude of "look what all we can do" but rather utilize it to its fullest potential. From the onset of its design process, we must consider the community, clients, users and also function before the form.