Arch390/790 Visible Certainty
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
SARUP
Chris Cornelius, Associate Professor
16 April 2009
writing-drawing-building_revised
During our discussion in this evening's class, I sketched this diagram as a way of understanding the relationship between theory and practice. Let me know what you think.
I have posted a revised image in response to Ryan O's comment.
I'm wondering if there's directionality to the diagram? Is the area of the triangle a gradient from one field to the other or does the diagram operate in a clock-wise cycle?
I don't believe there is a direction implied in this diagram and/or concept. I do believe that it is very difficult to do all three of these in equal measure. Le Corbusier comes close.
perhaps, the diagram is in its 'nuetral state' right now. If, for example, a building, designer, or even firm was categorized, or applied to the diagram its form would change and have a bias, direction or emphasis...
this would require a dynamic diagram (using processing language? or analog i guess), and a rating system based on the diagram for each person, firm or building...
I agree that the diagram implies an order of things. I think that between building and writing is history/criticism. History implies a temporal order on the bottom chord from right to left suggesting the construction is a precondition to the writing? ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Do RFI's or spec-writing fall into the writing category, or are they a function of the act of building.
The diagram is not meant to imply that building is a precondition to writing. Writing, in many cases is the primary vehicle for theory. In that regard, one could use the inner triangle to connect history/criticism to theory.
RFIs and spec writing, while technically writing, are more closely allied with building. They are the allographical, that is, notational texts to be carried out by contractors in order to build.
6 comments:
what falls between building and writing? hmmm.
I'm wondering if there's directionality to the diagram? Is the area of the triangle a gradient from one field to the other or does the diagram operate in a clock-wise cycle?
I don't believe there is a direction implied in this diagram and/or concept. I do believe that it is very difficult to do all three of these in equal measure. Le Corbusier comes close.
perhaps, the diagram is in its 'nuetral state' right now. If, for example, a building, designer, or even firm was categorized, or applied to the diagram its form would change and have a bias, direction or emphasis...
this would require a dynamic diagram (using processing language? or analog i guess), and a rating system based on the diagram for each person, firm or building...
I agree that the diagram implies an order of things.
I think that between building and writing is history/criticism. History implies a temporal order on the bottom chord from right to left suggesting the construction is a precondition to the writing?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Do RFI's or spec-writing fall into the writing category, or are they a function of the act of building.
The diagram is not meant to imply that building is a precondition to writing. Writing, in many cases is the primary vehicle for theory. In that regard, one could use the inner triangle to connect history/criticism to theory.
RFIs and spec writing, while technically writing, are more closely allied with building. They are the allographical, that is, notational texts to be carried out by contractors in order to build.
Post a Comment