So yesterday we had the Communicating Science class for the semester. I had seen the videos and read what was asked, but I did not really know what was going to be asked of me during the session. Would I understand the improvisation style? Would I clam up and not engage?
What was fascinating was that everyone was willing to give the night a shot, and stayed positive about the whole event.
My biggest take-away from the whole event was how to communicate my “science” to another person. I am in architecture, and this skirts the line between an art and a science. My original story was not so interesting. After learning new methods about communicating with others, here is what came out of the last charade or exercise:
So architects are always a few degrees off-center. Some might call us odd. But it is that which allows us to flourish. I had a professor speak to us about a topic (she had not told us the subject, she just began to describe it). After a while she told us that it was a wall. She had used so many different words that none of us had used before to connect or describe a wall. I thought she was crazy, looking at a wall that way.
Funny things is: I study walls now.
She had been showing us how to describe and interact with something without preconceived notions of what a wall was or could be. Sure you can paint a wall white and have it be flat, but what kind of limit is that pushing, how is it different or engaging? I decided to study vegetated walls or simply: plants on walls.
How do these walls make us more comfortable in the space? How do the colors change our perception of the space. Do certain plants make a wall with greater depth? Why do we like some walls but not others?
My work is to look at and understand walls, so that I may later teach what I have learned to future students. That way they too can see walls in a different light and to continue to push the limits of architecture.