Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
04 September 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Charl Devenish
Jon Jacobson
Delivering the 31st Sophia Gray Memorial Lecture and Exhibition in Bloemfontein, was Jon Jacobson from Metropolis Design in Cape Town.

What is inside and what is outside? What is coming alive in the light? Minimalism. Hugeness. Shadows. Soft. Art. Complex. Conversation. Ambiguity. Clarity. All phrases and words used by the most recent Sophia Gray laureate, Jon Jacobson from Metropolis Design in Cape Town, to describe aspects of his work.

He delivered the 31st Sophia Gray memorial lecture in Bloemfontein. The name of his lecture at this prestigious event, organised by the UUFS Department of Architecture, was in [de] finite. Jacobson is the first graduate in the department’s MArch with Design.

Nature plays a big role in many of his projects, with a blurred distinction between the inside and the outside of the structures he builds. His designs fulfil the desire of a union with nature. 

A detailed investigation

Jacobson creates places and spaces to celebrate being. “Architecture is undeniably art, but it is also embodied in the completeness of the lived moment,” he says. 

Every project starts with a detailed investigation. “What social theory will we engage with? How progressive is it? What attitude will we take to the environment, to the theory of family? What other personal concerns will we be worried about? It is important to engage critically with this information. Important to build a philosophical base for each project,” says Jacobson.

He also believes it is important to consciously ensure that form follows idea with the same intensity that it follows function and that it does not blindly follow other form. 

At Metropolis, Jon and his team are client centred in their approach to design. Jon explains the process: “Some of the content is brought from the client’s personal and social aspiration and some from contemporary architecture culture, but the most potent component is the hidden set of ideas that emerge from our own engagements with the living world such as popular science, geology, art, music, literature, philosophy, theology, mysticism, and many others. And this emerges in the hidden sense of the word, in its architecture content.”

Content approach to design

In house design, Jon categorises the content that informs the architecture of the house: content pertaining to the individual, their philosophy, values and beliefs, content derived from culture, architecture and the arts, passion, religion, politics, and content referring to the natural world and its processes. Content from each of these spheres is present in any of his work. 

Jon says a major implication of a content approach to design is that it requires a design framework that is largely operative at a level of idea rather than at the level of form. This contributes to creating architecture rather than just buildings. 

His design method allows conscious control over the relationship between the ideas, the forms, and the poetics of the projects. “And at any point in the building process, it is possible to trace back and to critically assess whether any particular form is aligning with the core ideas of the project,” Jon indicates. 

Jon’s first taste of grappling with the infinite of architecture was with a garden pavilion he built for rest and relaxation. “For the first time I felt that we integrated planning, content, sight, programme, structure, and materiality into one unified whole that was expressed with a minimum of means and that was more than just the sum of its part,” he states.

He strongly believes that the individual is at the centre of every architectural project. He says the belief systems, type of social needs, family dynamics, physical habits, and spatial practices of their clients need to be investigated in detail in order to facilitate a meaningful spatial experience.

He continues: “We see our role as designers to saturate the environment with the meaning that enhances our clients’ daily experience in every possible way – from the ergonomic and the practical to the spiritual. In the process, the logics and tradition of architecture and the ego of the architect sometimes need to make way for human need and aspiration.”


News Archive

Middle East activists speak about peace on the Bloemfontein Campus
2012-03-15

 

Bassem Eid (left) and Benjamin Pogrund discuss the situation in the Middle East.
Photo: Johan Roux
15 March 2012

Peace is a big word in the Middle East, particularly amongst Israelis and Palestinians. After years of conflict, people yearn for peace; they want an end to the killings and the uncertainty. The problem is that both sides are actively doing things that undermine the prospect of peace. There is also double talk, lies and evasion with each side pointing fingers. This was the word from Benjamin Pogrund, an Israeli peace activist, addressing staff and students on the Bloemfontein Campus of the University of the Free State. He and fellow peace activist Bassem Eid, a Palestinian, visited the campus to speak about the situation in the Middle East.

Both men agreed that peace efforts were hindered by the Israeli and the Palestinian leaders. According to Pogrund, neither the Palestinians, nor the Israelis are leading the way in accepting that the conflict must end.
 
“Both Israeli and Palestinian leaders say let us get together with no pre-conditions. Then the Israeli leaders say, Jerusalem we cannot share, that is not for negotiation. And, they say to the Palestinians you must recognise Israel as a Jewish state. So, what they say is unless you agree to these pre-conditions there can be no talks without pre-conditions.
 
“And the Palestinians in turn say the settlement construction must cease immediately, and unless that happened, there is no point in meeting. And they say we will never acknowledge you as a Jewish state so do not even bother talking about it. And we insist on the right of return of Palestinian refugees. So they also say unless you acknowledge these pre-conditions there is no point in meeting with our pre-conditions. So as you can gather each side blames the other side, each side points the finger and says you are responsible for the lack of progress.”
 
Pogrund said both the Israelis and the Palestinians could demand legitimacy in that part of the world.
 
“Both Jewish and Arabs can say we have history on our side. We have religion on our side, culture.”
 
To compare Israel to Apartheid South Africa is wrong, he said.
 
“It is an occupation, it is repression, but it is not Apartheid.”
 
Eid, who is the director of the Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group, said the Palestinians were close to having a complete independent Palestinian state from 1994 to 1999.
 
“But in one rocket former Israeli Prime minister Ariel Sharon destroyed it.”
 
He said Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip in 2005 did not bring political unity.
 
“We, the Palestinians, were supposed to start building the infrastructure of the Gaza Strip but unfortunately Hamas started dancing on that Israeli disengagement and considered it as their own success because of their military resistance against the occupation.” He also said Hamas is satisfied with its hold in the Gaza Strip and Fatah is also very satisfied with its hold in the West Bank. According to Eid, it is convenient for the Israelis that the Palestinians are separated.

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept