Ancona

1 Alex Ancona Professor Malcolm Campbell English 1103 5 December 2012 Has Drawing Gone the Way of the Dodo Bird? Technologys Effects on the Use of Drawing in Architecture Architecture is something that surrounds us everywhere we go. From the grocery store and church, to school and work, the buildings that we move past and through all define architecture in their own ways. Some are poor designs, the product of cheapness and demand, while others are masterpieces and considerably, works of art. The wellknown buildings of Frank Lloyd Wright, dotting the American landscape, and others from a more modern age, like the skyscrapers of the great cities have something in common. They all underwent an excruciating and extremely tedious design process that begins in most cases with an idea in the form of a drawing. But today, instead of using pencil and paper, most architects are turning to the benefits of computers and the latest software to assist in the design of a building. These programs have their perks, like quickening design processes and allowing more elaborate forms (previously inconceivable and crazy shapes), but could they lead to the downfall of drawing in the practice of Architecture? With computers doing all the work, why use pencil and paper? Drawing, although somewhat old-fashioned, still is necessary and an indispensible tool because of its significant role in the process of architecture. What could a piece of paper and a pencil possibly be useful for? For as long as buildings have been in existence, drawing has been used to plan and develop their

Ancona 2 designs. From the simple diagram to the up close detail, drawings represent what we see and show information that otherwise might be invisible, offering insight into an architects inspiration and ideas. As an architecture student myself drawing is a way to visualize and view the effects of the design choices I have made. The value of doing drawings is that one can see the affects of a decision before going into production of a final design. Brock Read summarizes Robert D. Otts, dean of Catholic University of Americas School of Architecture, words in an article from The Chronicle of Higher Education, Hand modeling and even hand drawing, he argues, teach young architects valuable lessons: to think carefully about every planning decision, to design clean and functional buildings, and to appreciate the nuances of shadow and shape (Read). Even from my own experiences, this couldnt be more accurate; drawings are a way for me to work out a problem. It enables the architect to come up with as many or as few iterations of a project as they need in order to end with the best design possible. It is more than just pencil and paper; drawings are a way of thinking. According to practicing architect, Michael Graves in Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing, published in the New York Times, Drawings are not just end products: they are part of the thought process of architectural design. Drawings express the interaction of our minds, eyes and hands (Graves). The easiest way to see what I am thinking as a student is to draw. Just as writers jot down ideas and scribble outlines, architects draw to make note of ideas. Graves goes on further to define the three types of drawings he does, the referential sketch, the preparatory study and the definitive drawing, each with their own purpose and uses (Graves). Definitive drawings are the clean, crisp lines on fancy glossy paper you see hanging on the walls of studios or presented before a client. They are the ones that win

Ancona 3 over a panel of judges deciding who to hire or the drawings that document the plans for a historic building now demolished. The Definitive drawing is the most readable of all drawings, and usually includes the most detail. Most of us would refer to these as blueprints. However, a plan of a building is only one possibility. Definitive drawings can offer looks inside buildings, through sections, and illustrate the finished space in a rendered drawing. Because many architects wish to present the most beautiful work, definitive drawings are almost universally produced on the computer nowadays (Graves). It is my opinion as an architect student that the easiest way to convey a design to an audience is clarity. Computers offer clarity and consistency that sometimes hand drawings cant, unless meticulously drafted. No matter which method of creation, surely an architect doesnt just begin and end with a definitive drawing. Architecture is a process and with drawing at its core, it is no surprise that something else must come before. A referential sketch may be the beginning for a design, an idea seen elsewhere, a source of inspiration. It is these drawings that many architects return to later countless times for a place to start in the design process. Michael Graves says about this type of drawing, The referential sketch serves as a visual diary, a record of an architects discoveryIts not likely to represent reality, but rather to capture an idea (Graves). Even in my own studies of architecture here at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, referential sketches have their place. We draw the most important concept so that when finished with a design, and in comparison between the two, one can look and ask, did I do what the diagram shows? Referential sketches are used as guides to avoid unnecessary embellishments and design distractions. They protect against a

Ancona 4 Frankenstein product, the result of thoughtless additions without consultation of a drawing. When a drawing is done, it forces the artist to realize and actually see what they are looking at; they are recording and building information. The studio desks of many architects are probably not what would be expected. Other than ordered and organized, paper and sketches are the occupants, showing the chronology of drawing after drawing. They show a process that results in a personal, emotional connection with the work, (Graves) something that a computer just wont do. Technology results in a design that is done more by the computer itself than the architect. Graves supports this in saying, Buildings are no longer just designed visually and spatially; they are computed via interconnected databases (Graves). Architects have made it clear that technology has its benefits. It has spread into many of the firms across the country and is part of the education that many aspiring architects get. Besides well take any assistance we can get in shortening the work from an all-nighter to a couple of hours. The first reason that Architects use programs is just that. It is quicker! Computers, with their automated steps and processes assist the architect in almost every imaginable way. It can rotate a piece of the design, cut a section, show a certain viewanything the Architect wants, the computer can do it. But does the shorter amount of time spent actually designing mean that the thought is less? Architect and Assistant Professor at the University of Miami, Jacob Brillhart, says in an article from Classicist, The blind dependence on CAD and other software and other tools increases after architecture school as young designers continue to design things they do not understand. Working under severe time constraints, they make maximum use of the copy and paste commands, pulling details, elevations and wall sections from past projects

Ancona 5 and reassembling them (Brillhart). If a student can simply copy and paste, then why take the time to design something new? A problem with this sort of work is that the result is not architecture, but rather a pieced together puzzle of past projects. Brillhart says further, that the computers shortcuts unintentionally create a digital vacuum in terms of scale, diminish our understanding of designs, and weaken our editing process (Brillhart). With a computer one can simply input a few keystrokes and the task is instantaneously done, a drawing is done without once looking at the consequences and results. He goes on to add, When one draws, one understands and remembers; when one uses the right click command, one does neither (Brillhart). Although more efficient in a way, programs that replace drawing take away part of the architectural design process. So is drawing heading the way of the Dodo Bird? Is there a possibility that

computers will inevitably replace the pencil as the primary tool in an architects office? For some the answer seems quite obvious. Quoted in Planning with Pixels, Not Pencil, an article from the Chronicle for Higher Education, Paul S. Anderson says "The discipline could be in the midst of an enormous shiftI don't think this will necessarily happen, but I could certainly anticipate, 20 years from now, never seeing anyone drawing by hand (Read). With additional methods in design technology being introduced and used in the architectural field more commonly than ever before, its not difficult to see why this could be expected. Brock Read says in Planning with Pixels, Not Pencils that, Supporters of technology in collegiate architecture programs argue that their institutions must fight to stay relevant to a job market that all but demands technological know-how (Read). Preparation for the job market is definitely important, but is it worth giving up a skill such as

Ancona 6 drawing? Read writes on, They also worry that students who become enraptured with computers will miss lessons that can be taught only through hand drawing and model building (Read). The idea of leaving behind the primary skill in which architecture is based is a scary thought to some professionals as well. Michael Graves says, Architecture cannot divorce itself from drawing, no matter how impressive technology gets (Graves). But this doesnt mean that technology cannot have its place in the field with drawings. Jacob Brillhart supports this in saying, Software technologies, when used to supplement or expedite processes of design, are invaluable. The computer unquestionably belongs in schools and architectural offices. However, the fundamentals of architectural design are still rooted in hand drawing (Brillhart). Hopefully this remains true, as drawing has already played in important role in my Architecture education as well as being a rewarding experience, whether in design or observation. Drawing has been a form of expression; part of art for centuries and it is the combination of this age-old skill with the technologies of today that makes Architecture the interesting and intriguing field that it is. It is a balance between the two that will result in the best Architecture.

Ancona 7 Works Cited Brillhart, Jacob. Architectural Drawing in the Digital Age. Classicist. 9. (2010): 114121. Print. Graves, Michael. Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing. The New York Times 1 Sep. 2012. Web. Read, Brock. Planning With Pixels, Not Pencils. Chronicle of Higher Education 50.12 (2003): A29. Web.