YOU CANNOT NOT DRAW HISTORY

I guess one fundamental motivation for this project is to give architecture students a format with which to overcome what I continue to see as the passive teaching of architectural history. I characterize this as a flashcard mentality; all you are expected to know is the name of a building when the image is flashed on the screen.  And that is woefully insufficient.

Quite simply, why weren’t and aren’t we drawing this history? Why weren’t we required to sketch the iconically famous buildings that we were supposed to be learning about? Why was and is it considered sufficient for students to look at a photograph of a building, and then be satisfied with their regurgitation of facts such as the time period, function, and name of architect?

The principal result of drawing transparent sketches of buildings, for me at least,  is that I now understand how they work. And by seeing thru the iconography, my brain is now free to make associations. Let’s use an example that has been discussed already, La Tourette by Le Corbusier. In these pages, I have tried to describe my process of understanding buildings using transparent drawing. The transparent nature of the drawing allows a synthesis of plan, section, elevation and perspective into one holistic understanding.

This information becomes internalized in you, and therefore opens the door to a myriad of associations to be made between La Tourette and other monasteries. We know that Le Corbusier traveled thru Greece as part of his Mediterranean and Near East travels. The Arkadi Monastery in Greece, as one example, has a basic plan (left)(1) that is remarkably associative to La Tourette (below).  You could easily fool someone by saying that the Arkadi plan is for La Tourette.

One might suggest that Corb copied this plan as a starting point.  Whether he did or didn’t is absolutely beside the point.

What is relevant is a three dimensional understanding of how the enclosure works.  Both of these buildings have a perimeter fabric, and interior courtyard, a chapel or church in the center, a break in the perimeter enclosure, etc.  I am convinced that without the holistic knowledge that springs from a comprehensive transparent understanding of a building, or any form for that matter, these associations are difficult to make.

Simply looking at a photograph of La Tourette, like the flash card on the left, does not reveal the complex interrelationships of the forms. It does not reveal the voids in the center of the building. It does not reveal possibly generative associations.  You may not even get that it is a rectangular perimeter fabric.

Yet these base associations and function are what we need to teach. This prime knowledge can only be fostered by drawing. Therefore, the study of architectural history should be mostly a drawing activity. And a transparent drawing is the most holistic tool that I know of with which to apply to this learning.

Is it beneficial to know eras, dates, and styles? Absolutely. But these do not help you when it is time to solve a problem. I know from experience the void that exists before pencil goes to paper. As a practicing architect, I understand that vague feeling of doubt that starts to creep in as a design thought starts to gain momentum. How does this fit in? What are the precedents? What might be resonant moves at this point? What is what I am starting to develop reminding me of?

It continues to be true that what you draw becomes internal. This internal knowledge is a fundamental data set that you will continually use and enrich. And this data set is woefully incomplete if it is derived from iconic photographs and drawings that are pretty pictures. How can you use that information, really? You can’t. Yet if you have in your mind a synthetic compilation of a building, if you have documented the plan, section and elevation in one drawing, now you have something. Now you have a working understanding.

In the words of Phillip Johnson, “So I claim that you’ve got to have a feel for the history of architecture. I started out as an historian, so probably I was just pushing my own interest. I felt that you can’t not know it because it’s there all the time, it’s around you anyhow. If you ignore it, then you’re denying the very input your buildings have to have.”(2)

Don’t ignore.  When you ask yourself, what does this remind me of? Who has been down this road before me and what decisions did they make? What is the feeling of what I am generating? Then you have a body of knowledge that is workable. Then you have a well from which to draw from, pardon the pun.

I did the above sketch as a rough compilation of both monasteries.  I tried to capture the perimeter fabric with the church in the middle of both monasteries in one drawing.  Not impressed?  Well, like they say, there is no bad drawing.

(1)  Coyau / Wikimedia Commons / CC-BY-SA-3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

(2)  “Phillip Johnson Biography – Academy of Achievement.” Last modified 28 November 2012. Accessed 15 August 2014. http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/page/joh0int-6