An “Artificial Science” of Architecture

Philip Steadman

 

Question 1: Steadman States, “One might venture the proposition that more can be learned about the process of design of artifacts by studying those objects directly, than by studying the designer’s actions.” He goes on to relate this to the study of composition in literature and critiques of paintings. Can one truly understand how an architect designed a structure by purely analyzing the finished product? There are many different factors involved within the design process. One could analyze and critique the structure on a “surface” level, but could they really understand the design at a deeper level than that?

 

Question 2: “Spacemate” is an interesting tool developed for the analysis of structure. Was it ever adopted by anybody other than Berghauser Pont and Haupt?

 

Question 3: Morphospace could be implemented into the design process at the conceptual level to allow one to find new forms that were not yet thought of. At the time of this research paper, were there any other generative models that architects were using to find form? Or was this the first “form finding” tool?

 

“Even More Than Architecture”

Richard Coyne

 

Question 1: Coyne discusses how he would give his students texts by Kafka, Calvino, Hegel, Poe, Joyce, etc. but he would never give them texts about microclimate, servicing, planning, structures etc… Is this a problem within architecture?… That students are learning to become designers but the other elements that shape architecture are de-emphasized? Is this because institutions know that once entering the professional field, students will learn the more specific or technical aspects of architecture. Or is it more so that institutions are more interested in creating designers?

 

Question 2: It is interesting when Coyne starts to talk about what needs to be researched and if it needs to be problem-solving. Does architectural research need to solve a problem?

 

Question 3: I’ve written in previous posts about architects and their role as a multi-faceted designer. Somebody who needs to be disciplined in many fields of study. Are architects masters of design and amateurs in other fields? Or are architects diverse in that one may be a master of design but mediocre at environmental analysis, whereas another architect might be a master of environmental analysis but not design.