Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Representation of Construction

2009; Routledge; Volume: 14; Issue: 3 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/13264820903341647

1755-0475

Sam Ridgway,

Design Education and Practice

Abstract The creation of more meaningful, sensory and ethical buildings might be encouraged by rethinking construction teaching in relation to architectural representation. Among other things, this means questioning the supposed neutral and technical relationship between drawings, particularly working drawings, and buildings. This productive relationship results from the desire for efficiency and certainty, but its current dominance has almost totally extinguished the ability of architects to engage in symbolic, architectural representation. Construction courses are the ideal place to re-introduce some critical thinking about what our drawings and building really represent. Notes 1. Alberto Pérez-Gómez, "Questions of Representation: The Poetic Origins of Architecture", Architectural Research Quarterly, 9, 3/4 (2005): 217. 2. Jean-Pierre Adam, Roman Building: Materials & Techniques, London: B.T. Batsford, 1994, p. 168. 3. Marco Frascari, "A Reflection on Paper and its Virtues", in Marco Frascari, Jonathan Hale and Bradley Starkey (eds.), From Models to Drawings: Imagination and Representation in Architecture, Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2007, p. 25. 4. Alberto Pérez-Gómez and Louise Pelletier, Architectural Representation and the Perspective Hinge, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1997, pp. 7, 8. 5. Sergio Louis Sanabria, "From Gothic to Renaissance Stereotomy: The Design Methods of Philibert de l'Orme and Alonzo de Vandelvira", Technology and Culture, 30, 2 (April, 1989): 267. 6. Alberto Pérez-Gómez, Architecture and the Crisis of Modern Science, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1983, p. 279. 7. Robin Evans, "Architectural Projection", in Eve Blau and Edward Kaufman (eds.), Architecture and its Image: Four Centuries of Architectural Representation, Works from the Collection of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, Canadian Centre for Architecture, 1989, p. 28. 8. Pérez-Gómez and Pelletier, Architectural Representation, p. 135. 9. Pérez-Gómez, Architecture and the Crisis, p. 280. 10. Pérez-Gómez, Architecture and the Crisis, p. 280. 11. Pérez-Gómez, Architecture and the Crisis, p. 289. 12. Pérez-Gómez and Pelletier, Architectural Representation, p. 5. 13. Dalibor Vesely, Architecture in the Age of Divided Representation: The Question of Creativity in the Shadow of Production, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2004, p. 242. 14. Robert Bruegmann, "The Pencil and Electronic Sketchboard: Architectural Representation and the Computer", in Eve Blau and Edward Kaufman (eds.), Architecture and Its Image: Four Centuries of Architectural Representation, Works From the Collection of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, Canadian Centre for Architecture, distributed by Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989, p. 141. 15. Bruegman, ''The Pencil and Electronic Sketchboard'', p. 141. 16. William Mitchell, "Introduction", in Malcolm McCullough, William Mitchell and Patrick Purcell (eds.), The Electronic Design Studio: Architectural Knowledge and Media in the Computer Age, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990, p. 1. 17. Pérez-Gómez, "Questions of Representation", p. 217. 18. Marco Frascari, "Introduction", in Frascari et al., From Models to Drawings, p. 2. 19. Vesely, Architecture in the Age of Divided Representation, pp. 241, 242. 20. Pérez-Gómez and Pelletier, Architectural Representation, p. 3. 21. Chuck Eastman, Paul Teicholz, Rafael Sacks and Kathleen Liston, "Managing BIM Technology in the Building Industry", available at http://www.aecbytes. com/viewpoint/2008/issue_35. html (accessed 20 June 2009). 22. Vesely, Architecture in the Age of Divided Representation, p. 248. 23. Sam Ridgway, "Drawing Construction: Reflections on the Work of Alberto Pérez-Gómez", Architectural Theory Review, 11, 2 (November 2006): 85–100. 24. Marco Frascari, Monsters of Architecture: Anthropomorphism in Architectural Theory, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1991, p. 95. 25. Frascari, Monsters of Architecture, pp. 92–93. 26. Frascari, "Introduction", From Models to Drawings, p. 7. 27. Daniel Willis, "Seven Strategies for Making Architecture", in The Emerald City and Other Essays on the Architectural Imagination, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1999, p. 284. 28. Frascari, Monsters of Architecture, p. 90. 29. Willis, "Seven Strategies for Making Architecture", p. 233. 30. Willis, ''Seven Strategies for Making Architecture'', p. 233. 31. Willis, "Seven Strategies for Making Architecture", p. 234. 32. Willis details this in Strategy One, referring to the extremely ritualized and socialized nature of Japanese building production, the key to which is mutual trust between the architect, builder and client. He writes that, "even though Japanese firms use the same sorts of instrumental drawings as their American counterparts, the social process of building construction prevents the building from becoming conceptualized as a representation of the drawings". The final construction results from an interpretive collaboration between the architect, builder and component manufacturers. Willis, ''Seven Strategies for Making Architecture'', p. 207. 33. Willis, "Seven Strategies for Making Architecture", p. 236.