4 ms·
I found it full of substance, with the main takeaway that architects are designing for other architects instead of the people who use the building. I see plent
by dahdum 8y ago
I found it full of substance, with the main takeaway that architects are designing for other architects instead of the people who use the building.
I see plenty of parallels to software development, where there is a common tendency to design around engineering prowess instead of user experience.
- sewercake 8y agoIt's interesting. Apparently, in mid-to-late 20th century, the discipline of architecture was bursting with self-described architects who rarely, if ever, had buildings created. They instead focused on architectural 'theory', which meant anything from phenomenological approaches to space (Gaston Bachelard), to 'Architecture as Metaphor' (see book with same title by Kojin_Karatani, a critical theorist), hell, even theory-fiction (Benjamin H. Bratton). A whole generation (or two, three?) of theorists have spent lots of time intellectualizing and philosophizing what, for a long time, seemed to be a design-oriented, practical discipline. I wish I had sources for this -- it's only through informal conversations with practicing architects and theorists that I learned these things.