Architecture can be seen not only as a living environment, but also as an object that creates connections, generates energy and triggers memories. The inception of physical architecture often starts from the development of a two-dimensional visual language; beginning with a mark, then a line, and so on. Architects continue to rely on two-dimensional drawings to convey information about the intended three-dimensional, physical constructs they design and eventually build. Architecture school teaches us that drawing is an integral mode of testing ideas and defining space. This framework for understanding three-dimensional space creates opportunities to explore drawing in terms of repetition and patterning, light, and shadow. However, working in the field of architecture, outside the utopian bubble of academia, there is a sense of loss. Work days are filled with innumerable mouse clicks and countless hours of computer aided drafting, leaving behind the rich two-dimensional explorations that were so prevalent during the architectural education. The architect must bury the artistic inclinations they honed in school.
But what if the architect had the opportunity, space and time to explore and test conceptual notions outside the confines of a stifling office environment? My art practice aims to explore ideas that stem from the confrontation between the tangible (constructed space) and the intangible (color, pattern, light). I wonder if there is a point in which a three-dimensional space merges with a two-dimensional construct (a line drawing, a cast shadow, and color, for example) thus shifting our perception of the built environment. We should ask ourselves, can we change space defined by tangible objects (walls, floor, ceiling) with the intangible (light, color, pattern)?