Cultiver un potager vertical cylindrique accessible par un escalier circulaire tournant autour. Le panoptisme s'exprime à travers la porosité du cylindre composé d'éléments verticaux ponctuels où viennent s'insérer les plantes. Le jardin et les utilisateurs eux-mêmes deviennent les sujets de l'observation à travers ce parcours montant. Le parcours devient donc le générateur de la pièce.
Basing our work on the previously defined groups, we decided to achieve a certain centrality within the protostructure, as moving from aperture to aperture to see each and every group defeats the purpose of having absolute vision on every single group from a single position. We therefore observed existing elements where the user is in direct relation with the object. Increasing the scale still allows for such an interrelation between two distinct structures.
The main goal was to make the previously designed space(s) infinitely smaller until it is based off a single point instead of a surface area. Of course, a secondary goal was set to reduce the amount of apertures but still be able to aim at (in the best case) all of the group areas.
Of course, absolute vision of each and every group, via a simple central object isn't enough. To maintain such a vision, one would need to cut whole cones out of the protostructure (which is evidentally not possible tectonically). Along with the "booled out" protostructure and the vision modifiers of the object, one gets the intended method of viewing.
An analysis of the vision cones towards every other room area proved to be very difficult to interpret within a two dimensional drawing. We therefore made a simplified 3D model of the protostructure along with 60° vision cones pointing towards each group point. This helped us define common groups as well as exact positioning of certain apertures.
We decided to develop a specific form of observation/surveillance per general program of the other groups in our studio. For example, group 2, a garden - group 3, a bathing room - group 6, a cliff hanging refuge. These groups all share a common general program of repose. Not only that, but these three groups are aligned when viewed from a central position in the protostructure (cf the three aligned/connected "windows" in the below photo). These three aforementioned groups will be observed in a transparent manner. This means that the users of these rooms will be able to see the surveyor and vice-versa. The general program of repose is therefore hindered by the apparent observation.
The next group cluster is 1, physical and mental activity - 7, staircase/circulation - 9, transitional space. These three groups, as they all involve movement will be observed with a hybrid auditory and visual aperture to ensure that movement can be tracked by simple listening (therefore allowing the visual observation of a whole other area at the same time), and to still ensure that, if required, the surveyor is still able to visually confirm any possible movement.
Groups 8 and 10 (observing the view of the lake and multiple function room respectively) will be subject to one way observation but for different reasons. In the first case, room 8 is subject to counter-observation as the general program is far too similar. In the second case, the one way observation is to ensure that what can happen in this room (as the general program of said room is that anything can happen) will happen.
Finally, the last group (number 5). This room is designed to be a space for a writer. The subversive nature of such a program defines it as a point of interest. Control over such an area by observational means renders the users unable to resist the panopticon system. As per Foucault's definition such a system causes the users to control themselves under the suspicion of constant surveillance - even if such surveillance is unavailable due to lack of surveyor or by simple lack of visual connection with the area. The sheer harshness of the panopticon used as a tool to break into the already rigidly defined balloon frame that is the protostructure.
A similar study as the above was executed directly on the protostructure model in an attempt to test the visual obstruction of certain elements of the balloon frame in the eventuality of cutting into the protostructure and replacing the structural bars with another form. A temporary anchor was added to the model, taking into account average eye height to ensure a higher accuracy.
Test cuts were made on a protostructure fragment model.
Finally, different apertures were defined based on the above microprograms. This time, the exact form is not defined as it varies depending on location. Instead, each aperture has to fulfill certain criteria (one-way, two-way, large opening, small opening, etc) per location. This way, the design of each element can be relatively lax allowing for easier interconnection and coverage.
First test of the full room model, each window is designed independently following rules we established from the studies of the protostructure. Preliminary assembly using a secondary frame to hold up the apertures.
The notion of the site becomes an instrument of the gaze, a reinvention of the visionary and voyeuristic processes to exceed the individual in observation.
A normalisation of the aperture facade parts was done based on a proportion study of the protostructure. We then attempted to combine the individual facade parts together to acheive a form that corresponds to the requirements of being able to see every single other project position in this very protostructure.