proposed couse syllabus

Upload: aarti-pal

Post on 03-Jun-2018

214 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/12/2019 Proposed Couse Syllabus

    1/4

    Kristina Luce

    A Proposal for a 3-Credit Hour History Elective for the M.Arch. Program Called:

    The History of Architectural Drawing and

    Its Implications for Design

    Course Description:

    This course is designed to familiarize architecture students with the historical precedent

    of their own design techniques. On a concrete level, it is an examination of the historyarchitectural drawing including the development of the triadic system (plan, section and

    elevation). We will deal with the Classical use of drawing, but our exploration begins in earnestduring the 13

    thcentury as scalar drawing emerges. We will examine the shifting techniques of

    drawing as it takes on a more and more determinant role in architecture (as the profession

    became distinct from masonry/building and drawing becomes the architects representative onsite), and we will question what drawing conventions reveal about the role of the architect during

    various periods.

    On an abstract level, this course is an examination of the innate creativity within

    representational systems. Like other forms of representation (for instance, perspective or

    photography), architectural drawing techniques are the result of intensely creative historic efforts

    to solve the problem of representation. As architectural design incurs different problems thanthe making of a naturalized image, architectural drawing exhibits different traits from these other

    forms of representation. We can look at drawings evolution as the alternating selection and

    rejection of these distinguishing traits. Moreover, this selection process can reveal how architectsconceptualize the problem they are trying to solve because drawing technique influences

    ideation. Drawing types evolved in response to the conception of the architectural problem, but

    they also shape how the architectural problem can be conceived. (e.g. Is architecture a problem

    of form and its arrangements, or of space and its?) These predilections, both periodic andindividual, are reflected by how design is represented.

    Perhaps most interestingly, drawing is not solely an historic problem. It continues to be

    the hallmark of the architect. The most basic premise of this course is the proposition (after

    Robin Evans) that drawing is the principle locus of conjecture in architecture. Therefore, we will

    also explore the geometric and conceptual frameworks that the conventions of architecturaldrawing impose on design, and we will question how representational techniques mold

    excogitation: how they can simultaneously facilitate, inspire and limit creativity. This awareness

    can inform a students use of contemporary processes of design. Therefore, this course will alsoask students to question their own location of architecture and to define possible auxiliary routes

    towards their own ideals of creativity in design.

    Our readings will draw from a variety of fields including: logic, psychology, art history,

    and of course, architectural history.

  • 8/12/2019 Proposed Couse Syllabus

    2/4

    Kristina Luce

    Course Objectives:

    Upon completing this course, the student will1. be familiar with the common conventions of architectural drawing and be able to cite

    historic examples of their use

    2. be able to associate drawing conventions with periods during which the conventions were

    established, revived or emphasized3. be aware of the frameworks that representational practices place on ideation and be able

    to cite historic examples where understanding an architects representational system

    influences the interpretation of the building.

    4. will identify the framework of his/her graphic techniques which in turn influences design

    outcomes, and will propose alternate techniques which may be fruitful for his/her

    process.

    Assignments:

    1. Drawing Project (20%):As a group, produce an elevation (orthogonal or oblique) using either the linear or radial

    proposed Brunelleschi technique. Document your procedure using photography, sketchesand/or diagrams to explain both your mensuration and drawing technique. Check the

    accuracy of your drawing with several traditional measurements of crucial distances, but donot use these distances to correct your drawing. Teams will then be paired and students

    will resolve a scalar plan from the two drawings (construzione legittima in reverse). Provide

    a short essay evaluating your experience with respect to other techniques you have learned toproduce drawings of existing conditions. (Were the experiences equivalent? Did you learn

    more/less about the building using the Brunelleschi technique? Do you believe that you see

    the building differently than you would have if you had documented it using traditionalmeasuring techniques?)

    2. Historical Research Project (40%):

    Using Wolfgang Jungs essay on Borromini as a model, write a 10-15 page essay examining

    drawing and its link design. You may adjust the scale on either side of this equation (i.e. youmay examine one drawing, several drawings from one architect, or a drawing convention of

    the period vis a vis one design, one architects work or a shared concern of one period of

    architecture). However, you must relate how these two aspects inform one another.

    Alternatively, you may choose to discuss what a particular drawing type which we do notmay reveal, in relation to other types of drawing, tells us about the role of the architect during

    this period. Present your findings to the class during a brief (10 minute) presentation.

    3. Self-Analysis Project (20%):

    Analyze one of your own designs based on the presentation drawings you created. Ideally,

    you will have determined the presentation requirements largely on your own, however, if youdo not have a project where this is the case, you may analyze how the presentation

    requirements molded your understanding of the design problem. What does this project

    reveal about your architectural intent and how might you better engage your consciousintentions through the explicit choice of drawing techniques?

    4. Reading and Participation in Class Discussion (20%)

    2

  • 8/12/2019 Proposed Couse Syllabus

    3/4

    Kristina Luce

    Preliminary Course Organization:

    Assignment Modules: 3 Weeks Total

    Drawing Project: Two Weeks

    I have designed this project to engage students with early mensuration and drawing

    techniques in order to form a counter-point to their internalized understanding of scalar

    drawing. I believe this exercise will demonstrate the active creativity that was involved inthe early drawing techniques better than reading alone. The exercise is based on an

    extension of Jehane Kuhns hypothesis of Brunelleschis technique. Students will be

    divided initially into four groups to produce four drawings of the same building: linearorthogonal and oblique elevations as well as radial versions of these. Groups will then be

    re-assembled to construct a building footprint. A short reflective essay will be required of

    each student, and we will examine the techniques and differing results as a class.

    Paper Presentations: One Week

    Individual 10 minute presentations of results of the Historic Research Project

    Discussion Modules: 9 Weeks TotalWeekly readings and discussion in a seminar environment will be broken up into the following:

    Focus One: The history of drawing as it responds to/reflects the design problem

    Drawing before the 13th

    Century: Greek, Roman and Early Gothic Examples will bediscussed around a theme of the buildings conceived as typology and detail.

    Drawing before the 15th Century: The (re)emergence of early scalar plans and

    elevations will be discussed around a theme of buildings conceived through planarideation.

    Drawing during the 15th & 16th

    Centuries: The evolution of constructed perspective,triadic form, and the historic place of models in design will be discussed around a

    theme of 3-D negotiation/experimentation.

    Drawing during the 17th

    and 18th

    Centuries I: The power of projection, stereometry anddescriptive geometry will be discussed around a theme of spaces instrumentalization.

    Drawing during the 17th

    and 18th

    Centuries II: The codification of the triadic system andthe emergence of the rendered surface (sciography) will be discussed around the theme

    of the battle for depth.

    Drawing during the 19th

    Century: Perspective, isometric & axonometric drawings will

    be discussed around the themes of Formalism and Rationalism.

    Drawing during the Early 20th

    Century: The Modernist rejection of ornament as

    manifested by bold lines and the primacy of the plan will be discussed around thetheme of the rejection of draughtmanship.

    Drawing during the Late 20th

    Century: Digital permutations of drawing by computer

    programs will be discussed around the theme internal versus external visualization.

    Focus Two: Architectural Drawing Inflected by other Disciplines

    Symbolic Systems: The nuanced differences between the terms representation,substitution, and notation, as well as the difference between discursive and non-

    discursive systems will be discussed around the themes of percept and schema.

    If this outline can be maintained the final weeks discussion will attempt to amplify and

    synthesize the courses ideas around specific issues suggested by the students.

    3

  • 8/12/2019 Proposed Couse Syllabus

    4/4

    Kristina Luce

    4

    Preliminary Reading List:

    Readings for this course will consist of selection from a variety of texts, rather than the closereading of a few texts. Authors included among these selections include, but are not limited to:

    James Ackerman, Wolfgang Lotz, Reginald Bloomfield, Lothar Hassleberger, Robert Branner,

    Lon Shelby, Francois Bucher, Alberto Perez-Gomez, Robin Evans, Edward Robbins, Daniel

    Herbert, James Smith-Pierce, E.H. Gombrich, Jonathan Crary, Alfred Gell, Kathryn Henderson,Michael Brawne, Nelson Goodman, and Rudolf Arnheim. Some of the more critical selections are

    listed here:

    Ackerman, James. The Origins of Architectural Drawing in the Middle Ages and Renaissance, pgs 27-66

    in Origins, Imitation, Conventions: Representation in the Visual Arts.(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002).

    Arnheim, Rudolf. Chapter 8: Expression and Function, pgs 248-274 in The Dynamics of Architectural

    Form: Based on the 1975 Mary Duke Biddle Lectures at the Cooper Union. (Berkeley, CA: U of California

    Press, 1977).

    Evans, Robin. Selected Excerpts Translations from Drawing to Building and Other Essays.(Cambridge,

    MA: MIT Press, 1997), and Architectural Projection pgs in Blau, Eve and Kaufman, Edward, ed.Architecture and its Image: Four Centuries of Architectural Representation.(Cambridge, MA: MIT

    Press, 1989).

    Gell, Alfred and Eric Hirsch. Chapter 5: The Technology of Enchantment and the Enchantment ofTechnology, pgs 159-186 in The Art of Anthropology: Essay and Diagrams (Monographs on Social

    Anthropology, No. 67.) (London: Athlone Press, 1999).

    Gombrich, E.H. Selected Excerpts fromArt and Illusion: A Study in the Psychology of Pictorial

    Representation. (New York: Bollingen Foundation, 1961), and Meditations on a hobby horse, pgs 209-

    224 inMeditations on a hobby horse and other essays on the theory of art. (London: Phaidon. 1997).

    Goodman, Nelson. Section I:8 Realism, pgs 34-39, Section III:1-4 The Perfect Fake, The Answer, TheUnfakeable, The Reason, pgs 99-122, and Section V:9 Architecture, pgs 218-222, inLanguages of Art:

    An Approach to a Theory of Symbols. (New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co. Inc., 1968).

    Hassleberger, Lothar. The Construction Plans for the Temple of Apollo at Didyma. Scientific American.

    253 (1985): 126-132.

    Jung, Wolfgang. Tilting Volutes, Bending Cornices and Perplexing Angles and Planes, or How Borromini

    Might Have Given Architecture Over to the Anarchy of Imagination, pgs 91-122 in Ackerman, James

    and Jung, Wolfgang, eds. Conventions of Architectural Drawing: Representation and Misrpresentation,

    (Cambridge, MA: James Ackerman, 2000).

    Kuhn, Jehane R. Measured Appearances: Documentation and Design in Early Perspective Drawing.Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, Vol. 53 (1990), 114-132.

    Lotz, Wolfgang. The Rendering of the Interior in Architectural Drawings of the Renaissance, pgs 1-65

    in Studies in Italian Renaissance Architecture.(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1977).

    Pierce, James Smith. Architectural Drawings and the Intent of the Architect.Art Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1

    (Autumn, 1967), 48-59.