Dear Sir: You asked two very relevant questions:
1)
”… should
we not be convincing the public of our sincerity? Maybe our efforts are
misdirected and not focused on repairing the theses of LeCorbusier and Wright.”
2) “…The question
in my mind is whether our professionalism has been and will continue to be
compromised by out sourcing to others?”
My answer to both questions is yes, and I don't mean to
be impertinent. We are all reluctant to part with money if we don’t believe in
benefit from the expense. It doesn’t mean that we’re right. It’s a function of
perception. If the public is convinced of value, they may even be willing to
mandate the service. This depends on the argument. I think you can tell that I
don’t believe the argument is adequate at the present time.
Architecture will continue to be compromised by
outsourcing until it convinces the public of its unique ability to provide
benefit equal to cost and value.
I’m sending you my argument to support the claim that
architecture will provide public benefit when it expands its point of view and
adopts the tools needed to create the knowledge required.
I sent Mike an older copy of this argument. It has
many facets and is part of Chapter 6 in the book I’m working on. I asked him to
only use it with attribution. I’m sending you updated text for your review
because of your interest, and I also ask that you only use it with attribution.
I’ve returned to Chapter 6 because of the current AIAKnowledgeNet
discussion.
CH 6: <<NAME
TO BE REVISED>>
The lesson from Chapters 3 and 5 was that a generic
forecast model can predict development capacity and intensity for any specific
activity when an activity module is attached to translate unique
characteristics into the common values expected by the master equation in an
architectural algorithm.
PROPOSITIONS
These algorithm examples were based on the following
propositions:
Scope
1) That
the planet is not a world without end
2) That
our finite planet is protected by a thin veil of atmosphere at risk
3) That
this planet is a source of life that can be polluted, depleted and consumed
4) That
pollution, depletion and consumption are characteristics of a parasite that
lacks a symbiotic relationship with its host.
5) That
we are faced with two worlds on a single planet: the Built Domain and the
Natural Domain.
6) That
the Natural Domain is an unstable source of life in an infinite, unstable
universe
7) That
the Built Domain includes the Shelter, Movement, Open Space and Life Support
Divisions.
8) That
the Built Domain is slowly consuming the Natural Domain with sprawl.
9) That
a sprawling Built Domain includes a Shelter Division that is an aggregation of
individual projects.
10) That
shelter capacity is also referred to as development capacity or building
capacity in total square feet per acre.
11) That
development capacity introduces various levels of intensity within the Shelter
Division of the Built Domain.
12) That
development capacity and intensity measurement, evaluation and prediction will
allow us to evaluate our ability to shelter growing populations within a
geographically limited Built Domain while protecting their quality of life.
13) That
the ability to measure and evaluate shelter capacity and intensity can produce
knowledge to defend design decisions in a scientific language.
Architecture
1) That
architecture defines a strategy to achieve an owner goal. This goal, when
constructed, becomes part of the Shelter Division of the Built Domain. (This
strategy is called “design” by architects and involves the correlation of work
by many allied professions to produce a contract for bidding and construction
of a shelter project. The project is a prototype designed to suit the unique
requirements of the owner.)
2) That
the majority of shelter projects are not currently defined by architects.
3) That
architecture includes the context, composition, form, function and appearance
of a shelter project strategy.
4) That
shelter projects aggregate to form the Shelter Division of the Built Domain.
5) That
the Shelter Division must accommodate growing populations within geographic
limits to protect their source of life
6) That
the shelter capacity of a limited Built Domain is equal to the capacity of its
constituent parts
7) That
shelter capacity alternatives emerge from architectural design decisions to
produce intensity options.
8) That
a new ability to measure, evaluate, and forecast development capacity and
intensity is based on architectural algorithms.
9) That
architectural language can be used to evaluate development capacity and
intensity decisions.
10) That
the ability to measure and evaluate development capacity and intensity will
produce knowledge
11) That
invisible development capacity and intensity design decisions create a
foundation for the context, composition, form, function and appearance of
architectural solutions.
12) That
architectural form, function and appearance must blossom from symbiotic
policies and solutions.
13) That
the physical appearance, social activity and economic stability of a Built
Domain will reflect the city design policies and shelter projects created.
14) That
these policies and projects are needed to achieve the third leg in the holy
trinity of city planning (The original term was “welfare”. Unfortunately, the
term has become political. The term “quality of life” seems to have become a
replacement.)
Architectural
Imperative
An architectural strategy must combine with a planning
strategy to achieve economic stability and an improved quality of life within a
limited Built Domain. Nothing less than shelter and survival is at stake.
Observations
1) We
can solve climate change and still consume the planet with growth called
“sprawl”.
2) Economic
growth is currently symbolized by physical sprawl sheltering social and
economic conflict.
3) Improved
knowledge can help us learn to shelter the activities of growing populations
within geographic limits that protect:
a. Their source of life from extinction,
b. Their quality of life from excessive
intensity, and
c. Their economic life from misallocation of
land use activity that produces financial instability
4) Design
matters because we must learn to live within geographic limits and function
symbiotically. (Form and appearance must eventually follow symbiotic function.
This is the message of hope from Louis Sullivan and Frank Lloyd Wright. It is a
level of awareness that can lead to a Symbiotic Period of collaborative effort.
5) The Symbiotic Period will be symbolized by the compostion, context, capacity, intensity, function, form and appearance of city design divisions within a limited Built Domain.
In This Book
You will learn how to
measure, evaluate and forecast development capacity and intensity for six
architectural design categories with a credible scientific language. These
categories encompass the generic spectrum of available shelter options within
the Built Domain.
The Implications
The appearance of planning,
city design, urban design and architectural project goals will be judged by many
related professions. The physical, social and economic success of these efforts
will be evaluated by the population. If successful, the results will symbolize
a new period of symbiotic awareness in our attempts to protect the public
health, safety and welfare.
Follow-Up
Thank you for your kind response. I omitted much from
Chapter 6 and hope you will find that this work should be required reading for
architects as well as city planners, geographers, landscape architects, real
estate developers and so on. Architects must bridge the gap to public benefit
with a common language capable of building credible knowledge. The
architectural archives of all architects represent a treasure trove of
information that must be translated and evaluated before it can be applied by
architectural practitioners. I am 71 years old and was once a member of the
AIA, AICP and NCARB. I agree with everything you say from a lifetime of
experience and commitment. My work on the architectural algorithms for this
book is done. I just have to explain it and this is taking a great deal of
time.
Your third paragraph is something I wish I had
written. The greatest unrecognized lesson learned in architecture is
correlation. This is leadership, but leadership needs a goal worthy of the
effort. Architects are leaders that have limited objectives. Think of it in
military terms and it becomes easier to understand. In WWII the goal was set by
Roosevelt and Congress. The strategy was created by Marshall, Eisenhower and
central command. The objectives were achieved by field commanders. In
architecture the policy goal is missing and there is no central command
strategy that will convince the population of public benefit, in my opinion.
This leaves field commanders (architects) defining strategies to achieve
limited objectives with no policy goal and strategy. It is like Patton roaming
Europe with no direction.
You said, "My concern is that we are too timid to
stand up for what is right and correct. Also, that by abdicating our leadership
role we give the creativity which is part of our professionalism to others LESS
talented." There are two important points here and I’ll take them in
reverse order.
An architectural education improves the ability to
reason. The claim that architects have more talent does not sell on Main
Street. Talent is applied to reason to create form and appearance. Architects
have not focused on their ability to reason nor sold it to the general public
because their language is inadequate and they ignore programming as the
starting point for architectural reason. Their explanation of solutions is weak
as a result and this weakens their competitive position in the marketplace.
Their strength will come from a universal goal, a universal strategy, and a
language that does not depend on emotion when addressing the public.
What is “right and correct” is a political issue that defines the
nature of a culture. Religion often has a modified version and the two reflect
the conflicted nature of man.
Regarding timidity, architects have a very limited marketplace of work
opportunities and a negative reference can have a very damaging impact. They
work at the pleasure of partners as draftsmen and women after graduating from
years of education. (Call it an “apprenticeship” or an associate AIA member if
you like, but graduation from college as an apprentice is an abuse of the
intelligence and ability they bring to the table.) Their opportunity to become
a partner is extremely limited and partially a function of a very uncertain
economy. It is no wonder they are timid. These are very real problems that need
to be addressed by the format of professional education and practice.
I like your terms “inward knowledge” and “excitement of
discovery”. I also agree with your municipal government frustration having once
been a local Director of Development and a Deputy Director of the Ohio
Department of Transportation. Inward knowledge requires a public explanation
with an adequate language. This is what my book is about. Excitement of discovery
is why we remain committed to the world of architecture, and it requires a
combination of reason and appearance that has not been explained with an
adequate language.
I’ve gone on long enough, but you raise questions that are at the
heart of the need to “reposition” architecture as one of many armies needed to
shelter growing populations within a limited Built Domain that protects their
quality and source of life – the Natural Domain. Reason will lead to success.
Talent will symbolize success. The secret is a new level of awareness,
knowledge and language that can overcome timidity, entrenched interest, and
lack of interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment