Let's be clear: alien construction has great advantages, but it is controversial with the skills during this period.

The so-called debate here is of course related to skills, but it does not refer to economics, but to the constructive logic brought by skills.

Let's talk about the advantages first.

Quote a few words from Kang:

"Needs are easy to meet, but desires are difficult to achieve."

"Necessity only comes from what is known, and it will never make demands on what is unknown."

"Before Beethoven wrote the Fifth Symphony, was it necessary in the world? Does Beethoven need it? Beethoven created under unknown desires, and now, the inevitability of the world follows. "

Let's not talk about rich space here, that's detail manipulation. I think we should discuss this topic from a macro perspective. Aliens construct not situations, but desires. Orthogonal system has been explored for so many years, "necessity" can be handled clearly, but "desire" is far from being satisfied. The purpose of nonlinear space is to explore the further realization of human desire. Although I haven't seen any substantial hope, it is necessary to satisfy more "desires".

Why is there an argument with skills during this period?

I just look at it from the perspective of an embarrassed architect, so suppose I want to plan a special-shaped building, and it's not skill difficulty or economy that limits me. I don't care how hard it is to realize the skills. As long as the host is willing to spend enough money, I don't care how much is wasted. What really defines me is the logical limitation brought by skill conditions.

Architects are never free to make plans, but are exploring various restrictions and limiting the direction of the plan to a very small scope. Culture, gardens, achievements, construction logic and so on. The mode of production formed by contemporary industrial skills is one of the most influential restrictions on architects since modernism.

The plan is not what I want, but what it should be.

Give a few examples.

When concrete first appeared, no architect knew how to express it because it had almost no character. Pei used it for flower carving decoration, Wright used it for building blocks, and Kang dared to use precast concrete before he invented how to use it. Then the concrete finally figured out two logics, and the builder breathed a sigh of relief.

One is template logic. Concrete has no shape, but it is endowed with shape, so to express the template, there are the expressions of the modulus of bolts and steel templates (as is common in fair-faced concrete, where those holes are the positions of bolts), the expression of splicing of wooden templates, and so on.

One is reinforced logic, as shown in Wright's Jensen company headquarters. Generally speaking, the specific situation is subject to its stress trend.

Bricks want to become arches.

It's Kang's famous saying again. The reason why brick becomes an arch is because when brick is used as a single material, it realizes its only possible span, and the way to build a roof is an arch.

Then what will become alien space?

Concrete?

Of course, you can force it to be what you want (the shape of concrete is also the most potential), but that is not necessarily what it "wants" to be. As mentioned above, concrete is subject to its formwork and steel bars, and there are only a few kinds and variants of nonlinear space that it really "wants" to become.

Steel?

It's really hard for such straightforward friends to use in so many nonlinear structures.

Since when does something want to become an alien space?

I am short-sighted and dare not jump to conclusions about future events. Only according to the current trend, I personally think that the hope of 3d printing and its material science will greatly and probably completely kill the current building system.

When 3d printing can be fully applied to buildings, builders will experience the same doubts as when concrete first arrived. What should this thing look like?

Further than concrete, 3D printing is separated from standardized industrial production, and the structure can be integrated, at least without the limitation of standardized components. Furniture can be printed and curved to build opposite rooms, and windows can be printed curved surfaces. There is no logical relationship between objects to frame what planners and report planners should look like.

In this environment, the construction industry will surely run rampant for some time. Then explore the frame and it should be like building the top.

Probably the foundation can't be found, and the traditional constructivism is dead, maybe.