Theory isn't Dead
Theory is a controversial topic within the realm of architecture. In my experiences, regarding the debate of the practicality of theory (mainly within the academic realm), students tend to think that theory has no place in practice due to “reality.” Whether this varies from cost constraints to client constraints and anything else in between, theory belongs in the classroom and in abstract books that only a few can decipher (according to these students). However, I don’t believe this is a valuable perspective for a designer. Theory isn’t irrelevant and overly eccentric. “Without some theoretical underpinning or narrative, architectural work will easily get lost in the overriding swamp of consumption” (Peter Raisbeck), essentially creating an endless loop of pragmatic architectural designs. Contrary to popular belief, theory within practice doesn’t mean it is too costly to pursue, too abstract to explain to a client, or not worth thinking about in the office. Without theory, architectural designers might as well be engineers.
Brooke, I agree that theory is the underpinning to quality architecture. Throughout time the most successful practices relates it's process to theory and understanding of how architecture impacts users.
ReplyDeleteBrooke,
ReplyDeleteI definitely think there needs to be a balance. Without theory, the practice isn't tested or improved, it simply accomplishes. But without the technical and pragmatic approach, the building doesn't always serve all of the users needs. I don't think it has to be all or nothing, I think we should take a little bit of both into the designs we put forth.
Brooke, I agree that theory does play a vital role in shaping our views as architects. Without theory, we would have no base on which we were even forming our opinions. It is up to us to be able to apply it appropriately in practice when applicable.
ReplyDelete