3 ms·

+1 for Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. It's superb. I'd add A Pattern Language to the list. It's actually been very appropriately valued by the program

by nkoren 14y ago

+1 for Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain. It's superb. I'd add A Pattern Language to the list. It's actually been very appropriately valued by the programming community, but massively undervalued by its intended audience of architects and urban planners. Should've been the architecture and planning book of the 20th century; instead most design professionals have never heard of it. Their loss!

brudgers 14y ago
A Pattern Language is often a required text for at least one studio course in US architectural schools. There are, however, practical issues with Alexander's approach at a professional level. Some are perhaps subtle to a layperson - most architectural projects are typically driven by the client's commercial concerns, e.g. a firehouse apparatus bay is designed for trucks not human habitation and a restaurant is designed to turn over customers not cause them to linger for six hours. On the other hand, some are obvious - planners do not have the ability to limit existing communities to a few thousand people. This isn't to say that Alexander cannot inform a design. In fact, many architects look at his work during the process. But the kind of project which will look like the images in his book is rare simply because many of these patterns are best implemented "at run-time" by the user, rather than at "compile time" by the architect or planner. Finally, I would say that what the programming community got from A Pattern Language is not Christopher Alexander, but Richard P. Gabriel. [http://www.dreamsongs.com/ http://www.dreamsongs.com/]
- 1123581321 14y ago
  I've had this conversation with architects and city planners and they all say this. Only a narrow band of the patterns are in the architect's area of practice; as an obvious example, the architect does not organize the whole world at once a la Pattern 1. Most of an architect's income depends on perpetuating the poor design of modern communities with each individual building. There is just no money in refusing to build anything but a useful space except when being commissioned by an eccentric or some other rare project. That leaves only the arrangement of the interiors which is hampered by code and depends on the taste of the building's occupier in respect to the uses of rooms and selection of furniture. Alexander's patterns must be adopted by the occupiers of buildings so they can work their way backwards to the architects and city planners that don't or won't consider them.
  - brudgers 14y ago
    "I've had this conversation with architects and city planners and they all say this." Now you are having a conversation with one who isn't. The analogy between architectural patterns and software patterns is more akin to the way in which software patterns are not relevant to an application programmer in regards to the structure of black boxes such as third party libraries or the OS kernel. Architectural design depends on OPM (other people's money) to execute. Urban planning not writing a web app. It's maintaining legacy spaghetti code in within an institution with entrenched interests. Brasilias only come along every hundred years or so, and your average joe doesn't get appointed. But just about every one of the major urban planning patterns is standard consideration in most contemporary municipal planning departments [in the US]. Politics and money of course tend to have an influence over outcomes, of course. On the architectural side, a lot of A Pattern Language is not directly applicable to most architectural commissions because it is focused on domestic architecture rather than commercial. Banks don't offer a place to apply, "The couple's realm." Incidentally, complaining about the impact of building codes has probably been going on for nearly FOUR millennia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi
    - 1123581321 14y ago
      Yes, I agree with you. I actually didn't have software in mind when I wrote my post, but the differences you note are important. Planning is indeed a mess. However, there are 'breaks' between 100-year plans and building-scale architecture such as neighborhood development, block-level revitalization projects, etc., which don't offer a greenfield opportunity but do allow a planner to make some important choices. Ideally, well-designed rooms would create an opportunity for homes, clusters of homes, streets, clusters of streets and business districts, and up and up. Obviously it is unlikely. The reason it's unlikely is the patterns are so opposed to how things are done. You mention the bank. Commercial is actually addressed, but there is no place in Alexander for an isolated, cold, commercial bank branch that requires a commute for its employees. Alexander's vision for our work is too radical to happen right now.
dalys 14y ago
I haven't read Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, but someone has uploaded a two hour long instructional video with Betty Edwards with the same title on YouTube, which might be of some interest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctkRwRDdajo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctkRwRDdajo

by nkoren 14y ago

brudgers 14y ago

A Pattern Language is often a required text for at least one studio course in US architectural schools. There are, however, practical issues with Alexander's approach at a professional level. Some are perhaps subtle to a layperson - most architectural projects are typically driven by the client's commercial concerns, e.g. a firehouse apparatus bay is designed for trucks not human habitation and a restaurant is designed to turn over customers not cause them to linger for six hours. On the other hand, some are obvious - planners do not have the ability to limit existing communities to a few thousand people. This isn't to say that Alexander cannot inform a design. In fact, many architects look at his work during the process. But the kind of project which will look like the images in his book is rare simply because many of these patterns are best implemented "at run-time" by the user, rather than at "compile time" by the architect or planner. Finally, I would say that what the programming community got from A Pattern Language is not Christopher Alexander, but Richard P. Gabriel. [http://www.dreamsongs.com/ http://www.dreamsongs.com/]

1123581321 14y ago
I've had this conversation with architects and city planners and they all say this. Only a narrow band of the patterns are in the architect's area of practice; as an obvious example, the architect does not organize the whole world at once a la Pattern 1. Most of an architect's income depends on perpetuating the poor design of modern communities with each individual building. There is just no money in refusing to build anything but a useful space except when being commissioned by an eccentric or some other rare project. That leaves only the arrangement of the interiors which is hampered by code and depends on the taste of the building's occupier in respect to the uses of rooms and selection of furniture. Alexander's patterns must be adopted by the occupiers of buildings so they can work their way backwards to the architects and city planners that don't or won't consider them.
- brudgers 14y ago
  "I've had this conversation with architects and city planners and they all say this." Now you are having a conversation with one who isn't. The analogy between architectural patterns and software patterns is more akin to the way in which software patterns are not relevant to an application programmer in regards to the structure of black boxes such as third party libraries or the OS kernel. Architectural design depends on OPM (other people's money) to execute. Urban planning not writing a web app. It's maintaining legacy spaghetti code in within an institution with entrenched interests. Brasilias only come along every hundred years or so, and your average joe doesn't get appointed. But just about every one of the major urban planning patterns is standard consideration in most contemporary municipal planning departments [in the US]. Politics and money of course tend to have an influence over outcomes, of course. On the architectural side, a lot of A Pattern Language is not directly applicable to most architectural commissions because it is focused on domestic architecture rather than commercial. Banks don't offer a place to apply, "The couple's realm." Incidentally, complaining about the impact of building codes has probably been going on for nearly FOUR millennia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi
  - 1123581321 14y ago
    Yes, I agree with you. I actually didn't have software in mind when I wrote my post, but the differences you note are important. Planning is indeed a mess. However, there are 'breaks' between 100-year plans and building-scale architecture such as neighborhood development, block-level revitalization projects, etc., which don't offer a greenfield opportunity but do allow a planner to make some important choices. Ideally, well-designed rooms would create an opportunity for homes, clusters of homes, streets, clusters of streets and business districts, and up and up. Obviously it is unlikely. The reason it's unlikely is the patterns are so opposed to how things are done. You mention the bank. Commercial is actually addressed, but there is no place in Alexander for an isolated, cold, commercial bank branch that requires a commute for its employees. Alexander's vision for our work is too radical to happen right now.

dalys 14y ago

I haven't read Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain, but someone has uploaded a two hour long instructional video with Betty Edwards with the same title on YouTube, which might be of some interest. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctkRwRDdajo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctkRwRDdajo