// 2 AM THOUGHTS
Of Design and Chess
There is more to both than meets the eye.
Let the balcony be placed here.
Yes! Now there’s enough light in the living room too. And a great view! But wait. The entrance door just opens into the living. There must be a buffer of sorts. Alright. Let me create a partition wall here. There.
Oh, wait.
The living feels smaller now. What if I remove this wall and extend the living into the dining? Yes. Definitely more spacious. But wait. I’ve lost that cozy nook by the balcony now. The client could very well use that space. I need to retain it. What if I stagger the balcony outwards a little more? Yes, definitely a good idea.
Oh no.
The structural grid will shift that way! Stop. You do not want to mess with the grid. Think of another option. Move the store room? (Do they need a store?) Shift the common toilet from here to there? A common toilet is always a good idea. Retain it there. But compromise the dresser in the bedroom?
No.
A dresser over the store. No. Maybe the store over the dresser.
No. They would be happy to have both. I just need to fit them in here.
As a student of architecture, these are only some of the thoughts that run through my mind while designing any given space. Thoughts that have become second-nature to me. Thoughts that help me debate over logical adjacency of spaces, constantly assess the functionality of my design and never let me lose sight of my goal. Thoughts that make me mentally note the risks involved in switching two spaces, their repercussions and gains.
Thoughts teach me that constraints are the spice of design.
At every stage of defining a space, an architect, or a designer in general is faced with many decisions that challenge him to make the most within a multitude of constraints. Often these constraints are ever-changing and impact each other. At every progression is a new challenge, bound by new constraints and a series of repercussions that the designer must anticipate to get the best of the bargain. It is through the course of this constant struggle that new ideas are formulated. Depending on what the designer makes of these, he may be motivated to proceed — or risk compromise.
Interestingly, the very crux of a game of chess is somewhat similar to this principle. World champion and noted philosopher, Emanuel Lasker deliberated that ‘chess is an ideal struggle — a struggle between two minds in the process of generating ideas.’
As the game unfolds, several constraints present themselves before the player. Depending upon the position of the pieces on the board, the limited movement of certain pieces and the risk of sacrifice may cause the player to assess all possibilities or take calculated risks before making a move. Often, this requires getting into the psyche of the opponent himself. Clever anticipation is key.
In essence, ideas, problems and solutions are actualized in a play of the rational and the deliberate between a player and his opponent. Nevertheless, the beauty of the game lies in its highly immersive experience. Not everybody may be able to appreciate the true aesthetics of the game- its aspiration to achieve success through rationality and deliberation. The elegance of tiding over constantly changing expectations, anticipations and surprises. The shrewd simplicity of its very complexities.
Design is no different.
It is an explorative struggle, yet surprisingly cathartic. There is a sense of entangled beauty in stumbling upon ideas while expecting to find a solution to a different problem altogether- and yet, having foreseen another that is bound to arise! It teases you at every point, forcing you to be sharply aware of your situation and your sensibilities; to strike a rational balance between aspirations and possibilities.
The real thrill of design is in the process, for there is never a definite outcome.
What unites both Design and Chess is the composition of a classic struggle that constantly motivates to achieve, through rationale and deliberate evaluation.
However, it is granted that a chess player deals with a highly dynamic situation involving moves by an equally gifted opponent; the situation changes with every move and provides no opportunity to undo. By comparison, a designer deals with a stiller environment. Although, it must be said that the designer’s moves are lasting and need to be endured for years to come.
