What is this garbage?

Just Kidding. I just had to get that out. Really though, I don't know if my negative reaction to this reading is because reading this made me feel inadequate, or if I really do understand most of it, and just don't agree with its structure, meaning and vagueness. No matter what, it definitely left me with a feeling of not really getting it....was that embedded as a subversive purpose? Or are they just talking about construction documents?

Either way, personal insecurities aside, there is much to be talked about here. The most compelling (and most lucid) concept presented was that of "stealth diagrams" by Stan Allen. His deconstructions of architectural diagrammatic practice embodying the place between architectural ideas and their realization is powerful. "The diagram is not simply a reduction from an existing order. Its abstraction is instrumental, not an end in itself." As a 'transactional abstraction', diagrams are creative conduit—another medium for translation—an opportunity. Furthermore, his assertion of this conduit being invisible, or immaterial information being the fuel for the abstract machine is very interesting. It's about the creative energy that is inherently and invisibly embedded(or coded) into the product itself. It's provocative in suggesting that the material is a product of the immaterial, or that architecture is a means of actualizing the virtual.

In "Diagrams-Interactive Instruments in Operation", the concept of "the diagram as a visual tool designed to convey as much information in five minutes as would require whole days to imprint on the memory" makes a lot of sense. It would seem obvious then, that their capital comes from the 'invisible' codings that precede their realization. I would also agree with Stan Allen that this conceptual 'apparatus of conversion' is left unexamined. There are so many tools at an architects disposal to fuel this 'abstract machine', and if we can only find out the right ingredients and settings, we might just translate some damn good ideas into architecture. For me, working digitally still feels more like a bottleneck than an opportunity, because it forces me to continue to work in the virtual, which often feels too many steps away from formal realization. However, it can add another dimension as the conversation between iterations, even though in the end, you don't see it, you just see what it does.