Feb 16, 2014

Architectural formula.

A lot of things have to be theorized, tested and figured out in order to create an architectural project, depending on scale and nature of the project in question many months can be dedicated only to the creative process even before presenting a cohesive proposal of a project to the client. The means of creation, that is what happens during the 'figuring out stuff' in a project is a creative process, but are processes harmful for the creativity?

We have to understand that ideas in our heads rarely act as a linear road. Usually it's kind of the contrary; from point A to B, to C, to A again, and now C needs reworking, and B has gone missing from the whole equation, that is why many proposals of the same project have to be made.

Different revisions of ideas generate a variety of options of a project; if the creative process was a straight line we would just have to make models, and floor plans once.

Now with time is only logical to develop a way of scheduling and handling the design process in some sort of structure; the process of designing becomes a byproduct of experience and practice, rather than vice versa.
 Now is there a point where a seasoned designer polishes his or her design process so much that it becomes a recipe?

The possibility that, creative ideas can become mechanically produced is, not only not very romantic or appealing but kind of disheartening.
Does experience gets on the way of spontaneity?
Think of the example of an architect running a business, dealing with real projects, budgets and deadlines; to optimize the way ideas  and solutions for projects are produced is key to meet the demands of a firm.

Can an architect whose job is in essence create, also become imprisoned by repetition and systematization ?

No comments:

Post a Comment