---

‘A Two-Fold Movement’: Design Research as Dialectical Critique Practice, Murray Fraser

Fraser says, “design research is to act as a mechanism for a wider critique of architecture itself,” (220). Critique of what? How can a thesis do this?

“Counter-space is carving out new cultural and urban realities against the forces of power,” (Fraser, 225). What power? Is this truly important to the majority of architects? Is this present in every-day designs or are these just contemplations for academia?

“The narrow mindset of existing social hierarchies needed to be replaced […] by more inclusive hierarchies, and need a full-frontal critique of official architecture and the power relations it aims to produce and reproduce,” (Fraser, 231). What is an “inclusive social hierarchy” in architecture? How is it represented? What works show this?

---

A Way with Words: Feminists Writing Architectural Design Research, Jane Rendell

“It [architecture] engenders multiple modes of operation, which explore the boundaries of disciplinary knowledge in order to reveal and expose the workings of power,” (Rendell, 119). Does the workings of power need to be exposed, or is it already apparent? Why is it important to reveal/expose power? Why is this important to architecture?

“[…] the architecture design process is not solely an activity that leads to the making of a product, but is rather the location of the work itself,” (Rendell, 123). How do you design an architecture product without a specific location for it? Is it then meant to be built? If so, where is it’s “place”?

“Across the area of experimental and critical writing, new possibilities are being invented, often performative, which question the distanced objectivity of academic writing styles, this includes artists producing text-based works,” (Rendell, 130). Conceptual artists, such as Joseph Kosuth (below) have done this. How have architects done this, and why?

---