//Post-jury
Issue [1] The House that I propose gives the opportunity of usage during whole year. Normally in the island; there is the situation of summer – full // winter – empty. One of the comments was ‘Why you cannot accept the island as it is; what happens if a house stays empty during winter?’ I basically can answer that I have no problem with this empty/full situation. But it is a different housing experiment which allows changing of users//usages//occupied spaces inside and around the house depending on identities and memories of the users and seasonal differences.
Issue [2] I am trying to redefine the parts of the spaces [rooms?] of the house with thresholds instead of sharp borders like doors. One of the comments was ‘Why a person wants to stay a place without any door or privacy?’ My answer would be the house won’t allow stable borders to users; the spaces flow into each other; it depends of occupation of the users. But of course it also creates the privacy. Maybe it can be defined as a communal house rather than a house with sharp borders between private areas. Also, I defined the house as a container of dreams/thoughts/memories of a dreamer.
Issue [3] Superposing of Ada houses give the opportunity of seeing thresholds and third places between superposed surfaces both horizontal and vertical. But probably creating a catalog of the thresholds that I’ve found would have been more useful to show directly my intention and the way I am montage-ing the house. I agree that it was one of the missing parts of my presentation.
Other than that, I found the example of ‘Chelsea Hotel’ very useful due to having continuously changing users and their memories/identities which are reflected to the rooms of the hotel. Also the interaction of the users at the common parts of the hotel [lobby, halls, balconies, staircase (!)] almost breaks the privacy between the rooms.
Buse Özçelik
transp[ ]se 
Buse, you have mentioned distinctive living motivations and memory-based adaptations on different seasonal periods. You should better expand and express to us with visualization methods. ”Who’ll prefer to come here in winter, or how much degree of spreading into you housing system can be seen by whole-year period inhanitants…?” You should strongly describe these scenario variations.
You’ve mentioned also non-borderization of your complex with don’t preferring to use ordinary seperation elements (door, seperation wall…) and integrating ground level differences, circulation elements as separator of rooms. You should well decide to which solution is the best way for which part. And we can easily recognize the your solution-related part relationship.
You should better explain the occupation of your system by inhabitants. For example, nobody will demand to occupying the interior space, if there’s cleanly designed/furnished. How can we understand ‘Here is suitable for inhabitant cycle and occupation’ via your spatial hints.
And you’ve taken some critical houses with includings and transformed them to product your new spatial language. Some points are unclear to understand: Which houses were choose for which reasons? You aren’t bring them together directly, how can you transform and translate in materially and spatially. Only modernist changings on facades can’t sufficient to change its identity. How can you combine these samples and what’re your spatial and material addings to current combination for producting your creation. In your sheets these couldn’t be read well from us, you should better present to us. Your project doesn’t mean only bringing them togehter.
You’ve hard cognitive notions and complex context in your analyzing stage, because of this, reader rapidly understand your spatial proposal from your axonometrics, drawing materials and visual collages, especially your 2d and 3d drawing seems like extremely confusing to easy understand.