ARK600: History, theory and method 3.

By Mattias Jonsson
Examiner: Jonas Lundberg

0
Table of contents

History.................................................................................................................................. 2
Theory: Approaching Reality ............................................................................................ 4
Method ................................................................................................................................ 5
Manifesto: Manifest Your Architectural Skill ................................................................... 6
Reflection ............................................................................................................................ 7
Bibliography ....................................................................................................................... 8

1
History

Introduction
We have gone from mainly expressing ourselves in words to expressing ourselves in
words and in visual. Learning perspective and xylography the projected image has been a
strong tool for a long time. We are now during the Second Digital Turn; computers have
now become so powerful that we can represent and express ourselves in completely new
ways with ease. Mario Carpo argues (Mario Carpo, 2017) that the projected image as a
media representation is about to be replaced. This article is set to investigate how Mario
Carpos arguments is holding up today.

Before the Renaissance we mainly expressed ourselves in words. Making drawings was
hard and time consuming. No two artists can use geometrical rules to make the exact
same copy of the same object and at the same time allow for different viewers to extract
the exact same data/material from it. So, the problem of depicting reality is an old
problem.

The paragone between the arts was a debate during the Renaissance which art of painting
and sculpturing was superior to the other. A painting can represent all distances and all
materials, even water, glass, or clouds. A sculpture can be superior in other instances. A
painting is inferior when representing complex shapes, one cannot manage to notate all
possible sections of an extraordinarily complex shape.

Today with our powerful computers we can solve the problems they discussed during the
Renaissance. Files and documents that would fill a whole hard drive just some 20-30 years
ago can now be stored in one’s cellphone. We can now scan in whole buildings, notate
every inch of them and instantly make blueprints of them. Today when the technology is
cheap, powerful, and easy to use the shift from 2D-representations to 3D-representations
is happening rapidly. The paragone between the arts was about sculpturing vs painting.
With sculptures being superior when making complex shapes but very time consuming
and paintings being superior as they can be made faster and they can represent all
materials, shapes, and colors. Now computers can make artificial sculptures that can be
made into drawings and/or paintings in the blink of an eye.

Conclusion
It seems that Mario Carpos statements is coming more and more true as days go by. We
see how virtual reality is booming, large companies are using interactive 3D-models to
present their works and therefore these technologies are pushing illustrations as media
representation to the side. The next question should be that when we have most of the
technology we ever dreamt of, how do we use this technology. Just because 3D-
representations will become easier and easier to do, how will this affect the skill of the
architect? Mario Carpo says (Carpo, 2017, p. 80):

“Today, at long last, the demise of projected images may be happening for good.”

2
This makes me wonder if this is something Mario Carpo wants to happen. And it raises the
question if Mario Carpo is a bit biased towards 3D-representations over images. Not
saying that 3D-representations are better, but maybe these technologies will complement
each other rather than 2D-representations being phased out completely.

3
Theory: Approaching Reality

In this article I will try to explore the role and what skills will be most important for the
future architect. My theory is that the future skill of an architect will be found in the history,
learning to draw with paper and pen will be more respectful and utilized in the toolkit of
the future architect.
Looking into the past, how the development of the architect has been and then trying to
visualize the future I will try to challenge this argument and see if it holds up

As we have seen thru history the fascination and striving to re-create reality have been with
us. We learned one-point perspective, two-point perspective and other skills to re-create
reality. We then seen the Second Digital Turn with complex shapes taking live. Things that
could not be created before or could but would be so time consuming it was regarded a
waste. Now computers have gained so much power we can create what we have in our
imagination and then re-create it with computers so one can almost not tell the difference
between the visualization and the real building.

Now, an architect needs a skill. An educated architect needs to be set apart from other
people. Because what is he or her, if he or her cannot do something that others can do?
When you hire someone, you want to hire someone that has proven him or herself
competent in that area. Now, how does an architect show him or herself competent in the
future? As computers continue to become faster and cheaper (Investopedia, 2019),
programs become more accessible and easier to use. We are going towards a future that
will allow for more and more uneducated people to create architecture easily. The ease of
how good and realistic we can create visualizations with today is astounding. And nothing
points at it will become harder or less accessible. (Arkitekten, 2020). The cost of hiring
someone that can make realistic visualizations will shrink as the programs continue to
become cheaper and more accessible.

Therefore, an architect needs to develop other skills. Using a pen is still superior over a
computer in many instances when it comes to learning (Times Higher Education, 2017).
So, I think we need to explore what makes a strong and skillful architect in the ages of
digitalization. Using a computer might be a good tool, maybe to good that it takes the skill
of an architect away. I think it is time that we understand this and not see it as a threat,
instead using this knowledge to move forward. Moving forward by looking backwards.
What skills did architects develop before we used computers? These skills are long lasting
and is not something you can take away from someone once they learned it.

4
Method

As laid out in the theory part, architects today put a lot of focus into visualization, creating
beautiful renders and maybe less in the key concepts of what architecture is.
My latest work in architecture was a housing project in Central Gothenburg. A city I have
lived in for over twenty years, and the plot I drew on is a plot I walked by maybe over 100
times. It is self-evident this will change one’s approach on how to create a building during
the process. Why gather information about the plot when it is an area you can walk around
in merely by closing your eyes? That is time consuming.

So, most of the time I use to gather information about the area, what other buildings is
there, who lives there etcetera? This is a common method used in architecture. Now as
stated above, this could seem like time wasted this time.

And with this said, most architecture students today work mainly on computers, a lot of
students do not feel extraordinarily confident drawing with pen and paper, and I am one
of them. Therefore, making sketches of a place one knows just by merely closing his eyes,
made the steps to create these sketches even bigger.

Working like this might create a good result in the end, but in the meantime, it skews up
the process. Not feeling comfortable making sketches, and not doing them as the leap
sometimes might be to big will make supervision of the project harder or getting input
from other people harder.

From the theory part I stated that architects need a skill. This is skills that should work all
time, on all projects for all clients. Just being good in programs might create good
projects in the end, but something is lost along the way. Being excellent with pen and
paper is a skill one never loses, it can help with communication as instant, quick sketches
improve the communication between the architect and the client.

In this project the computer programs have helped in some areas. It has been an ease to
understand the exact size of the plot. It has been easier to create good apartments by
having easy access to the Swedish Standard for Housing Design (SIS) and using this
quickly in AutoCAD.

So, with these observations being made; working further with this question I would like to
collect data from a randomized set of architecture students and/or professional architects
to see if my subjective experience is an objective truth. Collecting this data and trying to
quantify what is being lost in the ages of digitalization might give a better understanding
on how to handle the computer vs manual work question.

5
Manifesto: Manifest Your Architectural Skill
A manifesto describing the architect of the future

Architecture have gone from being a straightforward profession where the architect
mainly drew houses for the rich, created big landmarks in the city or made a huge city
plan. It was a high-status profession.

Some decades ago; up until recently it has been a confused profession looking for a way
forward in the ages of communication, knowledge relativism and shallowness. In this
period a lot of young architects felt that they existed in this limbo where the profession
stagnated. Almost everyone could handle the programs, they all made nice visualizations,
and showing their project to an audience had become extremely easy due to the
computational power. What is left for us to do? They thought to themselves.
Some started to investigate the history, almost becoming sentimental about how the
architects worked a long time ago. A lot of them felt regressive due to this.

“We can’t just do what they did!”

And they were right.

But it was not about working like the architects did one hundred or two hundred years
ago. It was about learning the history, understanding it and understand how it can be
implemented today. It was about learning what works, understanding it scientifically and
explaining it verbally.

Now, the future architects have once again taken control over their profession. They know
how materials work together like nobody else, they are excellent at representing their own
ideas, they are not drilled painters or visualizers necessarily, they are drilled at expressing
the vision that’s in their mind to as broad public as possible in their own way. They are not
questioned by engineers or painters or any other profession for that matter: “what can you
do that we can’t”. The future architect impresses these people instead. They show what
they can do that other people cannot, confidently, backed up by science and still humbly.

The software’s of the future is not created to give one-person advantage over the other, or
one company over another. They are standardized platforms that everyone can use. The
young, still a bit narcissistic architect filled with hubris just because he can make better
visualizations than his 70-year-old teacher have been put back into his place because this
is not what architecture is about anymore. It is also more about good communication and
working together. The polarizing times of 2010s has past and humbly understanding what
the broad public is asking for has become a virtue.

The architect of the future has once again become proud of his or her profession, all of this
could never happen if we were not able to define what architecture is. That was the
biggest problem. Not being able to answer that question made us all not understanding
what we were doing.

6
Reflection
In this course I learned a methodology on how to approach the thesis work, breaking it up
in small pieces. I learned a lot on how to approach the sometimes-hard distinction on how
you face subjective opinions versus other opinions and objective facts. All at the same time
while getting knowledge and understanding about the Second Digital Turn.

7
Bibliography

Carpo, M. (2017) The Second Digital Turn: Design Beyond Intelligence. Writing
Architecture.

Tardi, Carla. Investopedia (2019-09-05). Moore’s Law. Available:

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/mooreslaw.asp [2020-03-11]

Alvarez Veronica. Arkitekten (2020-03-03) Ökad efterfrågan på enklare renderingar

tränger bort visualiserare. Available: https://arkitekten.se/nyheter/okad-
efterfragan-pa-enklare-renderingar-tranger-bort-visualiserare/ [2020-04-11]

Bothwell Ellie. Times Higher Education (2017-02-13). Pen and paper ‘beats
computers for retaining knowledge’. Available:
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/pen-and-paper-beats-computers-
retaining-knowledge [2020-05-01]