The character is a philosopher of the theory of Absurdity. This philosopher is a writer and a lecturer. Thus, his contribution to society is intellectual, educational, and cultural.
Two different methods of absurdity is explored.
The first method is a design in which absurdity is an end goal-aim. Where a structure is constituent of pointless spaces and volumes, unexpected and meaningless architectural elements, and irrational forms and special compositions.
The other method is an approach in which absurdity is a tool to challenge the conventional norms in architecture; where the circulation, special qualities, and architectonics challenges the set idea of what a house and a working place should be. Absurdity, in this case, is a way to free design from preset regulations and restrictions and to free it from the conformity of logic.
Through an absurd approach of design, where the expected image of a house and working space is modified and abrupted, the ritual of programs is examined and represented in a new typology.
Therefore, absurdity is a tool to solve the problem of contemporary architecture which has a major influence on society and humanity.
The design presented in the final jury questions the inclusivity and privacy of the house, where the house is no longer totally separate from the public.
The whole building is composed of spaces that are not totally enclosed and private, floating and connected within a structure of stairs and pathways that establish the circulation.
While moving within the structure, one finds him self in different moments of being inside and outside. Boundaries between what is inside and what is outside are blurred.
The private spaces are no longer separate from the public ones, where the visitor is forced to pass by private spaces (bedroom, living room) and interrupt its privacy (through visual accessibility) for him/her to reach public areas (lecture hall, office).
In other words, architectural absurdity playfully transgresses within the rules of building formation to create valid alternative assemblages while scrutinizing regulations.
What is interesting in the final design is the potential it holds. The architecture is displayed in a coherent manner yet without major restrictions to the inhabitant’s individuality and contribution.