Thoughts on Digital Architectural Education: in search of a digital culture of architectural design

Antonis Papamanolis doctoral candidate, Katherine A. Liapi, Ph.D. associate professor University of Patras Department of Architecture

Abstract In his magnum opus, Truth and Method, published in 1960, the German philosopher Hans Georg Gadamer (1900 2002) argued that since the enlightenment, scientific research method in general has become increasingly interrelated with the methods and norms of the so called natural sciences. As a result, humanistic fields of research have suffered as they were forced to adopt the methodology, the tools and eventually, the philosophy of natural sciences. Accordingly, for architecture this trend meant nothing less than a process that reduced all that is worth knowing about the making of architecture to transparent productive knowledge (Vesely, D. 2004). It can be argued that this reduction remains one of the central issues that confront the so called digital or IT driven architectures of today. This is outlined by the problems arising from the integration of a medium, digital tools in this case, that deals primarily with quantifiable elements in an environment (architectural design) that must take into consideration elements that are impossible to reduce to quantifiable variables. The roots, as well as the repercussions of this inherent dichotomy in contemporary architecture is a matter that merits serious discussion, and can be traced to the gap that has appeared between architectural praxis and architectural theory (Hays, M. 2000). Faced with the present digital revolution it is useful to recall Mies Van der Rohe's observations, when faced with the new time imposed by the industrial/technological revolution. Mies stated that we must set new values and point out ultimate goals in order to gain new criteria. For the meaning and justification of each epoch, even the new one, lies only in providing conditions under which the spirit can exist (Neumeyer, F. 1994). The issues outlined by Mies, remain in many ways, the issues with which contemporary architecture, facing the challenges of the digital revolution of present times, has to deal with. Ultimately, the question of digital (or IT) architectures is not only a matter of what we design and how we design it as illustrated by various digital architecture theorists (Kolarevic B.2000, Lynn, G., 1999, Mitchell, W. 1990, etc) but also a matter of WHY we design (Martin, R. 2005). It can be theorized that the WHY can stem from the process of architectural education and the architectural culture it cultivates. As a result, it is crucial to examine the reaction of the architectural educational system vis a vis the introduction of the digital in architectural design. Kastoriadis, in his essay Psychoanalysis and the demand of autonomy (Kastoriadis, K. 1989) layed out the following principles that he considered of paramount importance to any educational system: a) An educational system that cannot logically answer the question of those subjected to its education why are we learning this? remains incomplete, and b) an educational system that does not afford the maximum possible independence to those educated, is bad. In this regard, if we take for granted the changes of the digital revolution in the field of architecture, we must ask ourselves if the processes of architectural education that are emerging in the wake of the digital are incomplete, or even bad. This line of thought is further discussed in the paper while emphasis is placed on issues related to architectural education in the digital era (Ascanowicz, A. 2007). The discussion in the paper poses questions regarding the integration of digital media in the design process and highlights the need for a re-evaluation of both the role of Information Technologies in architecture as well as the educational framework that supports it.

preface It is apparent today that despite the widespread implementation of information technologies in all aspects of the architectural field, their introduction in architectural education, both in theory as well as in practice remains haphazard, fragmented and lacking a holistic conceptual framework. This I believe is a crucial matter that merits further research, if digital architectural design education is to set its own criteria and values and avoid merely following trends that originate in other fields (i.e. software and hardware development, animation, engineering etc). At its conception it can be theorized that, digital, or information technology driven, architectures aimed (to a certain extent and mostly subconsciously it must be admitted) to inherit the incomplete project of modernity i.e. to develop objective science, universal morality and law, and autonomous art according to their inner logic (Habermas, p.9). Michael Benedikts cyberspace or Markos Novaks transarchitectures are typical examples of this. Digital media provided -in theory at least- an external, objective collaborator (Negreponte, 1970) on which architects would be able to rationally map the inner workings of the logic of architecture (Mitchell, 1990).However, it is apparent that despite theoretical advances and innovative methodologies, current digital architectural discourse falls short of defining a conceptual framework for IT driven architectures. The purpose of this paper is to examine the causes, conditions and consequences of the apparent inability of information driven technologies to facilitate the evolution of a new digital architecture. Highlighting the need of the architectural field as a whole to conceptualize digital media as more than a glorified pencil this research argues for the need of a digital architectural culture to transcend current theories and methodologies. Furthermore, this paper examines the architectural educational framework, as it plays a pivotal role in the emergence of architectural paideia (education or culture) be it digital or otherwise. The discussion in this paper poses questions regarding the preferred methodologies for tracing (both theoretically and through case studies) the various aspects involved in the transition of architectural design to the information age. These elements will I believe allow for a better understanding of the impact of information technologies in architectural design and support the proposal for necessary improvements to the architectural curriculum. Digital truths and methods In his magnum opus, Truth and method, published in 1960, the German philosopher Hans Georg Gadamer (1900 2002) argued that since the enlightenment, scientific research methods in general have been increasingly interrelated with the methods and norms of the so-called natural sciences. The logical self-reflection that accompanied the development of the human sciences in the nineteenth century is wholly governed by the model of natural sciences (Gadamer, p.3) . The inductive method, Gadamer continues, basic to all experimental sciences is therefore to be considered the sole valid methodology in all scientific fields, regardless of their object. As a result, humanistic fields of studies, among which one can count architecture, have suffered, forced to adopt the tools, methods, goals and ultimately philosophy of the natural science. In this effort to understand themselves by analogy to natural sciences the idealistic echo implied in the idea of Geist

(spirit) and of a science of Geist fades into the background (Gadamer p.3) 1 The problem lies, according to Gadamers line of thought, in the impossibility of grasping certain aspects (problems of thought) particular in humanistic fields if these are measured against the yardstick of a progressive knowledge of regularity. He argues that certain experiences (for example the sociohistorical world) cannot be raised to a scientific level through the method of natural sciences because they do not aim to confirm and extend universalized experiences in order to attain a universal law , rather understand how it happened that it is so. It can be argued that the introduction of information technologies in architecture highlights this discrepancy between scientific means and ends. Furthermore, the ascendancy of digital tools in architectural design facilitates and accelerates the process described above, namely the alignment of digital architectural research with the norms of natural sciences. Ultimately, the above signify the culmination of a process that reduced all that is worth knowing about architecture to transparent, productive knowledge(Vesely 2004). In other words, as a consequence of the predominance of natural science methodology, it can be argued that the scope of architectural thought has been diluted and restricted to objective knowledge. As a result, a certain spirituality (along the lines of Gadamers geist quoted above) that is implied in architectural oeuvre (setting architecture apart from the craft of building) is eclipsed, as non applicable to a natural science mode of thought. Quantifiable and non quantifiable elements This reduction of architecture to transparent productive knowledge remains a central issue in todays IT driven architectures. The digital media of information technologies - themselves a tool of the natural sciences- operate based on quantifiable elements. On the contrary, the environment in which they are called to operate (architectural synthesis) is a process that to a large extent operates based on concepts that are not readily (if at all) reduced to quantifiable- elements necessary for digital manipulation. As a consequence it can be argued that the introduction of information technologies media tends to favor certain aspects of architectural design (those that are more suited to digitalization) over others, those that cannot be reduced to quantifiable elements. A question therefore can be raised regarding the nature of the aspects of architectural synthesis that are marginalized by the introduction of digital design methods, as well as the examination of the repercussions of this discrimination on the resulting architectural artifact. Faced with the new (digital) time that is upon us, it is useful to recall Mies van der Rohes observations, regarding a different new era, that of the industrial revolution 80 years ago. Mies Van der Rohe argued that confronted with the emergence of a new time, (a pure given) what are crucial are not the methods of building that say nothing spiritually but the task of setting new values and ultimate goals in order to gain new criteria. Mies concludes For the meaning and justification of each epoch, even the new one, lies only in providing conditions under which the spirit can exist. It can be argued that this call for an architectural project of the spirit (one is reminded of Heideggers concept of dwelling), is echoed the dilemmas of the current IT epoch. It can also be suggested that digital tools, despite all their computational power cannot, in their present implementation supply the desired meaning and justification.
1

geisteswissenschaften is German for human sciences, literally sciences of the spirit

Digital culture of architectural design It appears therefore that certain questions raised regarding information technologies in architectural design escape the scope of current digital design methodologies. William Mitchell underlined this by underlining the urgent need for a comprehensive rigorously developed computational theory of design (Mitchell, 1990). The roots of this missing architectural language (Summerson, 1957) can be traced to the fragmentation of architectural culture and its replacement by architectural theory and architectural praxis as autonomous entities [Hays]. Max Stakhouse, quoted by Vesely, supplies a vivid image of the results of this fragmentation When individuals and groups develop a link between their own imagination and their own reason that serves their own ends, and are not fundamentally concerned with the overall shape of society, fragmentation inevitably ensues. Everyone emotionally or intellectually, politically or economically grabs his fragment which is partially real and creates a total reality with it. The splintered identities, competing ideologies, the fractured parties and the glaring, cluttered advertising of competing businesses assault the person and the society from a thousand sides (Stackhouse 1972). One can only wonder whether the spaces projected by todays digital architectures are but a further (spatial) reflection of this general process of fragmentation. Illuminating this aspect of architecture is Frederic Jamesons description of the Los Angeles Bonaventura Hotel by J.Portman. In this postmodern mega-structure, Jameson reads the manifestation of the disorientation and fragmentation of postmodern man and society. At this point it must be said that architectures role as something more than a spatial configuration (i.e. architectural space as the projection of the ideals and values of each society) is a subject that would require an in depth analysis, beyond the scope of the current research. For the purposes of this paper, it suffices to remark that the structures and spaces projected by digital architectural designs -as well as their sociopolitical implicationsmerit a comprehensive, rigorously developed computational theory of design as part of an equally comprehensive digital architectural culture of design.

I.T. architectural education Furthermore, it can be argued that the digital architectural culture required to assert ourselves vis a vis the new digital age can stem from architectural education. In this context, the relationship within the education environment between (digital) architectural theory and praxis can also be examined . Kastoriadis, in his essay Psychoanalysis and the demand of autonomy (1989) laid out the following principles he considered of paramount importance to any educational system a. An educational system that cannot rationally answer the logical question of those subjected to its education why must we learn that? remains incomplete b. An educational system that does not afford the maximum possible degree of freedom to those educated is bad. In this regard, if we take for granted the changes affected by information technologies in the field of architecture, and recognize the need for a comprehensive digital design culture that can stem from

architectural education, we must ask ourselves if the processes of architectural training emerging in the wake of the digital revolution are incomplete, or even bad. How, what and why we (digitally) design In the current debate about digital architectural education it is important to remember that information technology driven (or digital) architectures revolve around the basic tenet that how we design ultimately effects what we design (Kolarevic, 2000). Two interrelated aspects of this tenet in my opinion are of special interest to the educational process. The first is the effect of information technology driven methods on WHY we design. Digital media, being tools of the natural sciences are ill equipped to tackle such questions that are essentially of a humanistic nature. As a result, the opportunities for introducing critical thought regarding architectural artifacts in a digital media dominated design process are limited. Furthermore, digital architectural research, itself geared towards transparent, productive knowledge falls short of giving any convincing answers to questions of a critical nature (Martin, 2005). This leads to the second aspect worth noting in current digital discourse. Namely the reification of the digital, the consideration of an abstraction or an object as if it had living existence. Digital media remain in final analysis a technology, utterly devoid of any spiritual meaning or purpose. Therefore, attempts to infuse meaning to digital architectural artifacts by means of the information technologies applied during their production are doomed to failure (Goulthorpe, 2003). The two interrelated issues of lack of criticality and the digital reification are in my opinion important challenges architectural education must face. It remains open to discussion what are the strategies by which the architectural educational framework can first describe these issues then analyze and finally implement them. Also worth noting are what will be the effects of this implementation on the architectural curriculum. Axes of research Goal of the proposed research is to outline of the effects of information technologies on the educational processes of architectural design. It can be stated that this is primarily a problem of definition. William Mitchell argued, quoting the infamous modernist motto form follows function that such sentences remain meaningless so far as we cannot agree what form, function, or for that matter follows mean (Mitchell 1990). Digital methodologies find themselves I believe in a similar cul de sac, and, it follows, the first task is a comprehensive (to quote Mitchell again) architectural definition of the terms digital, Information technologies, educational processes, digital architectural design and so forth. It is my opinion, as stated above, that these problems of definition can be tackled within the conceptual framework of a culture of digital architectural design. Such a culture inevitably means a turn towards humanistic sciences in order to counterbalance the described hegemony via the digital- of natural science methodology. Once a digital architectural terminology has been defined, one that does not depend either on loans from other scientific fields or on traditional architectural conventions, further questions can be raised regarding the

a. The effects of Information technologies in the design processes of architectural education. b. Precise description of the individual design processes mostly affected by IT. c. The changes effected on the resulting architectural artifact.

d. By what means can architectural education respond to and integrate the emerging digital design trends. A crucial point of the research is the need for practical data on the introduction of digital media in the design process. In order to successfully implement IT in architectural synthesis, it can be argued that it is of vital importance -based on the aforementioned theoretical background to analyze actual case studies. It is therefore a second challenge to set up digital studio experiments (Asanowicz, 1998, 2003, 2007), where the integration of digital media in the educational process can be put under close scrutiny. The conditions, parameters and methods of such experimental studios also remain a matter that requires serious debate (Akin, 2005). Outline of Goals The direction this research wishes to take will be towards the emergence of a genuine digital architecture project (Habermas, 1981)], through a process of transcoding 2 (Jameson, 1981) of IT and synthesis within the architectural education framework. Through paradigms of digital architectural education processes as well as theoretical analysis results of the research are expected to aid in a. The critical reevaluation of the architectural curriculum regarding the integration of information technologies in architectural synthesis. b. Providing data regarding IT specifications and requirements stemming from actual design education needs.

Transcoding - the invention of a set of terms, the strategic choice of a language, such that the same terminology can be used to analyze and articulate two quite distinct types of objects or texts, or two very different levels of structural reality -New theoretical discourse is produced by the setting in active equivalence of two preexisting codes, which thereby in a kind of molecular ion exchange, become a new one. What must be understood is that the new code (or metacode) can in no way be considered as a synthesis between the previous pair It is rather a question of linking two sets of terms in such a way that each can express and indeed interpret the other

References Akin, O., 2005. Mixing Domains: Architecture plus software engineering. Digital Design: The Quest for New Paradigms.23rd eCAADe Conference Proceedings Asanowicz, A.,2007.Evolution of CAAD teaching methods. Predicting the Future [25th eCAADe Conference Proceedings . Asanowicz, A.,2003.Form follows media- experiences of Bialystok school of Architectural composition. Local Values in a Networked design world added value of computer aided architectural design, Stellingwerff, Martijn and Verbeke, Johan (Eds.)DUP Science - Delft University Press . Asanowicz, A., 1998. Approach to computer implementation in architectural Curriculum. Computerized Craftsmanship eCAADe Conference Proceedings. Baird, G.,1969.La dimension amoureuse in architecture. Meaning in architecture, Charles Jenks and George Baird (eds), New York: George Braziller. Cheng, N.,1997. Teaching CAD as a foreign language. CAADRIA 96 proceedings . Gadamer, H. G.,1975,Truth and method . Second, revised edition 2004 Continuum Press. Goulthorpe, M.,2003.Scott Points: exploring principles of digital creativity. Branko Kolarevic (ed) Architecture in the digital age, Taylor and Francis. Habermas, J. ,1981.Modern and postmodern architecture. In: M. Hays Architecture Theory since 1968. CBA 2000 Hays, M.,Architecture theory since 1968.CBA 2000 Jameson, F., 1981.The political unconscious . Ithaca: Cornell University Press Jameson, F., 1991 Postmodernism, or the cultural logic of late capitalism Verso Kastoriadis, K., 1989.Psychoanalysis and the demand of autonomy . Speeches in Greece. Ypsilon Kolarevic, B.,2000.Digital architectures. Eternity, Infinity and Virtuality in Architecture,Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Conference of the Association for Computer-Aided Design in Architecture Lefebvre,H.,1991.The production of space. In: M.Hays Architecture Theory since 1968. CBA 2000 Lynn, G.,1999. Animate Form. Princeton Architectural Press Martin, R., 2005.Critical of what?. Harvard design magazine Mitchell, W.,1990.The logic of architecture. MIT Press Negreponte, N.,1970.The architecture machine. MIT Press Novak, M.,1998. Transarchitectures and hypersurfaces. In S.Parella(ed) AD PROFILE 133:Hypersurface architecture II, London Academy Editions

Ponegratz C., Perebellini M.,2000. Natural born CAADesigners. Birkhuser Basel Sutherland, I.,1963.Sketchpad: A man-machine graphical communication system , Cambridge University Taffuri, M.,1969.Toward a critique of architectural ideology. In: M.Hays Architecture Theory since 1968. CBA 2000 Vesely, D.,2004.

Architecture in the age of divided representation. MIT Press