Preliminary Working Handin: 22 Sept 14.15

because of time, we will do the presentation in 4 groups.

2 from Joubert + 2 from End

may you organise yourselves to facilitate the above

i suggest we met at 14 to load presentations on the computer

goodluck

Task_ 3.3

use the time to continue to work on your project.  remember we have a review panel coming in to look at the work on tues 22 sept.  start drawing

arpl 3012_contemporary approaches to urban design

Task_ 3.3

10.9.2015

Process

Look carefully at what is there, now, and then ask for reasons why?

The task is to detect multiple causes for and behind the current status quo to then envision and implement possible future change: identify actors and agents, rules and (ir) regulations, borders and boundaries, programmes and people, control and exclusion, urban and economic morphologies, landscapes and languages, green space and toxic environments. 

The project looks at Joubert + End Street parks in context rather than an isolated entity and uses the precincts as exiting parcel sections from and within the inner city of Johannesburg.  The idea is to construct an intellectual urban argument on basis of rigorous visual analysis.  The Objective/ Outcome of the study should be to support the model project of developing End Street + Joubert Park and to support the development of new guidelines for better performing parks and public spaces, for a multitude of city inhabitants, through the identification of all necessary base line data and information. Thus you need to imagine . . .

3 imagining

- develop a multitude of visions for the open spaces + boundaries that respond to the idea of an inclusive city and successfully merges formal and informal components;

- envision mixed-use, mixed-income, non-gated (sub) urban neighborhoods to live, play and work with pedestrian access and green spaces in the given context;

- consider the development of a public space system that is based on the use of public transport for a maximum variety of city users;

- integrate sustainable urban elements, consider the future of the triangle + open space;

- critique the existing city proposal documents through your vision;

- Simply ask: what if…

Visions have to be communicated in a graphic format (visual narrative).

Preliminary Working Handin: 22 sept 14.15

the story so far . . .

Stud no.	1 /5	2 /5	3.1 /15	3.2 /10	3.3 /10	3.4 /10	4 /15	5 /20	Oral /10
681501	4	4
464496	4	4
706899	4.5	4
389303	4.2	3.25
747084	4.9	4
753493	4.3	3.75
555609	2.5	3.25
707650	4.4	3.75
718168	4.5	3.25
735201	5	3.25
721517	2.7	3.5
707743	2.3	3.25
721032	3.3	4
712994	2.3	3.85

jerusalema – very good format with a great cover.  work demonstrates intro, body, conclusion + ref.  sourcing can be improved.  where were the images sourced from?  other than that, the essay is lyrical and flows, covering pertinent urban issues.  strong work.

the prestige – a very good paper with a strong cover.  paper has good structure; intro, plotting, unpacking, conclusion + refs.  image sourcing could have been more accurate.  overall, strong work.

fury road – paper lacks a decent cover page and references, but is overall a solid paper that is well written and makes an interesting read.  overall, strong work.

fast and the furious 7 – an acceptable paper with a terrible cover and no referencing.  paper fails to identify the author’s name except giving a student number.  why is this so?  in future, submitted work should contain an academic structure, as in an appropriate cover page, body text, conclusion + references.  a worthwhile read marred by a poor structure.

the giver – a good paper that lacks academic structure.  no cover page, no intro, no conclusion – just body text and references.  this is not sufficient.  the great pity is that a portion of this film was filmed on the wits campus.  none of the images reflect this.  why? a film of this nature needs more imagery to support the text.  that being said, the paper is worth read.

step up 5 – a very good submission with lyrical prose.  very good stuff.  the only glitch is that the images are not referenced.  this does not however take too much away from the strong paper with a powerful emotive narrative.  very strong work.

bad boys 2 – this is one of the few papers i had problems with.  from the minimalistic bland cover, to the lack of intro, to the stretch out images with contain no references, to a lack of conclusion and no references.  at this level, you are required to produce work which has an acceptable academic rigour.  cover the basics and the rest will follow.  unacceptable submission.  push your work harder.

kick-ass 2 – a very well written paper with poignant insight.  from the apt quotes to a proper intro to body and conclusion.  it’s a pity that there are no references.  the only image in the paper could have been used as a cover page and some illustrative images to supplement and enhance the body text.  overall, very strong, poetic work.  keep working like this.

the great gatsby – another paper which was problematic.  what’s with the cover page?  how can a paper which deals with a visual medium be rendered in this manner?  paper lacks academic structure apart from the well sourced 2 images which supplement the words.  no intro, no conclusion, but kudos for the references.  future projects need to dig deeper to be of an acceptable standard.  It is as if the Paper fumbled whilst looking for the key, in the twilight, to a door that is wide open.  disappointing work.

the grand budapest hotel – strong work.  strong layout.  strong structure.  in future, have a strong cover, intro and conclude the text.  the images chosen to complement the text are beyond the expectation.  well done.

die hard – a good submission which hits all right notes as in intro, body text, conclusion and references.  in future, design a cover page which will enhance the work and choose images that are legible and then reference them properly.  good work.

divergent – excellent submission.  excellent cover, excellent format which has an intro, body text, conclusion + references.  images are properly referenced and the 2 column layout is on point.  excellent work.

inception – a very good submission which would have been excellent if the paper articulated the structure more eloquently – as in intro, body, conclusion + refs.  in future, always make sure the basics are covered.  strong work.

crash – sublime work marred slightly by the lack of captions accompanying the images.   when using images, always try to supplement with text for richer access.