Fractals Narrative

Chris Parrinello

So I ended my last blog with the concept of fractals. Many I assume are wondering what fractals actually are. Let me explain. Or try to.

A fractal is a rough geometric shape, (which does not fit the characteristics of Euclidean geometry) that can be split into parts which each represent the whole. Benoît Mandelbrot coined the term fractal, coming from the latin, fractus, meaning broken or fractured. These mathematical fractals are based on equations that use iteration, or feedback. Because they are self-similar, fractals are believed to be infinite in detail. Similar to Powers of Ten, you can infinitely zoom into, or out of, the shape.

Fractals can be found in several examples in nature. Some of these include, clouds, mountains, lightning bolts, coastlines, and snowflakes, crystals, river networks, waves, plants, and blood vessels. They can also be applied to areas such as computer generated images.

The fascination with the geometry of nature has long existed in man. Frank Lloyd Wright had strong beliefs in Nature and geometry. He felt that nature was the only body of God which mortal man could see. He sought to simplify the geometries found in nature and use them in his design. Wright's work very much foreshadows Mandelbrot's work in explaining nature's geometry. Fractal Architecture was spawned by marrying the principles of Wright’s organic architecture and Brunechelli’s desire for the larger architectural form be reflected in each of its constituent parts with the development of fractal science over the last 50 years. With the advent of computers the complex calculations required with fractal geometry are done within seconds. Fractal architecture is generated by applying fractal geometric principals to the design of architectural facades and form.

So now that I have spent the time explaining the laws of fractals, I would like to let you know that I'm not using them in any way for my project. Well this is somewhat of a lie. I am using them as a set of rules to be broken. This project is titled "Museum in Drag", meaning subversive, confusing, or contradicting. I have chosen to contradict the rules set forth by the geometry of nature. My last narrative talked about the russian doll idea. Each time you open a doll, you find the same one inside, only smaller. But what if you opened one, and the next one was something different?

To relate to fractals, if you look at the fractal, you would expect it to be broken down into the same self similar shape over and over. It is like a triangle being made up of several smaller triangles, which are each made up of several smaller triangles...etc. The contradiction of this would be something like a triangle made up of squares, which are made up of circles, which are made up of octagons...etc.

To relate now to the museum, I will explain the application of my concept. Think of the building as a fractal. Now instead of being able to break down the fractal (the building) into parts that resemble the whole, it would be broken down into distinct parts. Each of these parts is a separate space that has it's own characteristics. These could be form, shape, defined space, material, color, size etc. These spaces would be based on program, which is my next task. The only thing that would then relate these spaces to one another is thge movement from one to another. They would break the rules of fractals to contradict the geometry of nature.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9sfwrXpIIF8

Link to a video zooming into a fractal. It's very much like Powers of Ten (without the bad narration and creepy music.)

What a fractal looks like. If you could keep zooming in you would see the repetition of self similar shapes. I can show you guys an example of this in class. It's pretty cool.

Frank Lloyd Wright Plan based loosely on fractals.

Sierpinsky Triangle. (The expected way to break down a shape.)