do diagrams really matter?
In this essay Stan Allen argues and states a lot of architects' portfolios, theory and practice who do use diagrams to create architecture. He goes into various types of them. Similar to corner he does believe they are not just a single statement but rather they transposition ideas rather than translating them. Diagrams are generative and create new ideas. He even goes as far as dividing the diagrams into stages of generating ideas, creation and communication. All the bell and whistle about diagramming or mapping is wonderful and i believe its a great tool to initiate design. With diagramming one is trying to gather all of information/data that surround their project, compare relationships and discover new information that might help you design more actively. I think the more difficult bridge to cross is applying one's diagram and relationship to the design. The diagrams can help but eventually they not going to be formal generation for one's design.
Stan Allen describes diagramming in a very dense mater creating a rhetoric which is not very legible from everyone. This is the struggle of architecture creating a credible profession next to science based professions. its seems like more and more architects/architectural theorist write in such a dense manner in order to claim a higher standard for architecture in society. so architecture theory wont be the nightstand reading for everyone. therefore architecture language/ rhetoric become more and more exclusive and only we can understand and talk about among our selves, excluding the engineers, doctors and lawyers. Are we benefiting from this exclusive language? just remember Mr. Allen's does describes "diagram architecture travels light, leaving the heavy stuff behind"
really?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I agree completely about the exclusivity that architects and arch theorists are creating.
I agree with you that diagramming is a good tool to initiate design and even to further it. I suppose some architectural design, such as programming happens almost exclusively through diagrams.
One thing I've learned in school is that every field has it's own technical jargon. It's true that many people are architectural hobbyists; I say let them in.
Complicated communication or design doesn't fulfill its true potential. If I have to make something harder to understand just to give it credence, then I think I'm wasting my energy.
Good design, like clear communication, is understandable. People can look at it and know that it works, or exist in a space and feel different. Of course there are exception related to personal taste, but in general, when something works people know even if they can't articulate it. The designers role isn't to confuse, it's to creatively solve problems.
The difference between someone with design training and someone without lies mainly in the ability to articulate intention and use design tools: diagrams.
Post a Comment