Mike Corbett and Evan Bartlett
Research Methodologies
16 Nov 2011
Practice –
Stan Allen (Intro)
1 - Allen states that “The practice of architecture tends to be messy and inconsistent precisely because it has to negotiate a reality that is itself messy and inconsistent.” What are the risks we, as architects, face when attempting to keep the “messy” intact? (XI – P.1)
2 - What is our responsibility, if any, as architects to challenge the protocols of normal practice? (XII – P.2)
3 - Is it a correct response to avoid “known situations” and “safe repetitions” inherent in following these protocols of normal practice? (XII – P.2)
4 - How does theory benefit architectural practice, and vice versa? (XIII – P.1)
5 - Allen speaks of architecture as a material practice as opposed to a discursive one.
What are the differences between these two
practices?
What makes architecture a material
practice?
6 - If meaning is not “something added” to architecture, where is meaning derived?
What gives architecture meaning?
As such, can or should there be only one
meaning?
7 - If meaning is a result of a “complex social exchange,” as Allen suggests, can there be static meaning in architecture, or more simply, does the meaning remain constant? (XIV – P.3)
8 - How have the “immaterial effects of film, new media, and graphic design” aided in the enlargement of architecture’s catalog of available techniques? (XVII – P.3)
9 - For Allen, the activity of writing is a part of his architectural practice. Is this a necessity?
What other disciplines might complement our
own practices? (XX – P.2)
Beautiful Evidence – Edward Tufte (Chapter 5)
10 - Is there more information that could be added to further enhance the narrative, and, subsequently make Minard’s map more successful?
11 - Is this the most effective way to portray or present the information Minard wishes to present?
No comments:
Post a Comment