Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

Architecture embodied in the completeness of the lived moment

04 September 2019 | Story Leonie Bolleurs | Photo Charl Devenish

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

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during Reconciliation Lecture

2014-03-05

“To forgive is not an obligation. It’s a choice.” – Prof Minow during the Third Annual Reconciliation Lecture entitled Forgiveness, Law and Justice.
Photo: Johan Roux

No one could have anticipated the atmosphere in which Prof Martha Minow would visit the Bloemfontein Campus. And no one could have predicted how apt the timing of her message would be. As this formidable Dean of Harvard University’s Law School stepped behind the podium, a latent tension edged through the crowded audience.

“The issue of getting along after conflict is urgent.”

With these few words, Prof Minow exposed the essence of not only her lecture, but also the central concern of the entire university community.

As an expert on issues surrounding racial justice, Prof Minow has worked across the globe in post-conflict societies. How can we prevent atrocities from happening? she asked. Her answer was an honest, “I don’t know.” What she is certain of, on the other hand, is that the usual practice of either silence or retribution does not work. “I think that silence produces rage – understandably – and retribution produces the cycle of violence. Rather than ignoring what happens, rather than retribution, it would be good to reach for something more.” This is where reconciliation comes in.

Prof Minow put forward the idea that forgiveness should accompany reconciliation efforts. She defined forgiveness as a conscious, deliberate decision to forego rightful grounds of resentment towards those who have committed a wrong. “To forgive then, in this definition, is not an obligation. It’s a choice. And it’s held by the one who was harmed,” she explained.

Letting go of resentment cannot be forced – not even by the law. What the law can do, though, is either to encourage or discourage forgiveness. Prof Minow showed how the law can construct adversarial processes that render forgiveness less likely, when indeed its intention was the opposite. “Or, law can give people chances to meet together in spaces where they may apologise and they may forgive,” she continued. This point introduced some surprising revelations about our Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC).

Indeed, studies do report ambivalence, disappointment and mixed views about the TRC. Whatever our views are on its success, Prof Minow reported that people across the world wonder how South African did it. “It may not work entirely inside the country; outside the country it’s had a huge effect. It’s a touchstone for transitional justice.”

The TRC “seems to have coincided with, and maybe contributed to, the relatively peaceful political transition to democracy that is, frankly, an absolute miracle.” What came as a surprise to many is this: the fact that the TRC has affected transitional justice efforts in forty jurisdictions, including Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia and Liberia. It has even inspired the creation of a TRC in Greensborough, North Carolina, in the United States.

There are no blueprints for solving conflict, though. “But the possibility of something other than criminal trials, something other than war, something other than silence – that’s why the TRC, I think, has been such an exemplar to the world,” she commended.

Court decision cannot rebuild a society, though. Only individuals can forgive. Only individuals can start with purposeful, daily decisions to forgive and forge a common future. Forgiveness is rather like kindness, she suggested. It’s a resource without limits. It’s not scarce like water or money. It’s within our reach. But if it’s forced, it’s not forgiveness.

“It is good,” Prof Minow warned, “to be cautious about the use of law to deliberately shape or manipulate the feelings of any individual. But it is no less important to admit that law does affect human beings, not just in its results, but in its process.” And then we must take responsibility for how we use that law.

“A government can judge, but only people can forgive.” As Prof Minow’s words lingered, the air suddenly seemed a bit more buoyant.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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