Digital cosmopoiesis in architectural pedagogy: An analysis through Frascari | Intellect Skip to content
1981
Volume 4, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 2057-0384
  • E-ISSN: 2057-0392

Abstract

Abstract

This article derives from three observations of architectural drawing: the current ubiquitousness of digitization, the ongoing disputation of digitization in architectural pedagogy and the capacity of architectural drawing to simultaneously represent and communicate qualities of tangibility and intangibility. In its analysis, this article refers primarily to the writings of Marco Frascari (1945–2013), who was, through works such as (2011), a strong critic of digital drawing. This article begins with an overview of the effects of digitization on architectural drawing, which are summarized in terms of their deleteriousness on the intangible qualities of architectural drawing, as seen predominantly in perspectives and sketches. This article then defines intangibility in architectural drawing and locates it within Frascari's theory of cosmopoiesis, and identifies marks, entourage (especially human entourage) and narrative as key elements of cosmopoiesis in architectural drawing. Finally, this article analyses the effects of digitization on architectural drawing from the standpoint of cosmopoiesis, with an emphasis on the key elements that were identified earlier, before concluding with some recommendations for preserving cosmopoiesis when drawing in a digital environment. This article holds that, in architectural pedagogy, a complete return to analogue drawing is neither feasible nor necessary because what is required instead is an awareness of the main areas in which digital drawing is most likely to fail, so that digital drawing retains the cosmopoietic qualities that characterize some examples of analogue drawing. This article argues that an understanding of the cosmopoiesis of architectural drawing is vital to transcending the apparent incompatibility of intangibility and digitization.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/drtp_00002_1
2019-11-01
2024-05-02
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ackerman, J. S.. (2000);, 'Introduction: The conventions and rhetoric of architectural drawing'. , in J. S. Ackerman, and W. Jung. (eds), Conventions of Architectural Drawing: Representation and Misrepresentation, Cambridge, MA:: Harvard University;, pp. 9-36.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, A. T.. (2002);, 'On the human figure in architectural representation'. , Journal of Architectural Education, 55:4, pp. 238-46.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bredekamp, H.. (2004);, 'Frank Gehry and the art of drawing'. , in M. Rappolt, and R. Violette. (eds), Gehry Draws, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press and Violette Editions;, pp. 10-28.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bruegmann, R.. (1989);, 'The pencil and the electronic sketchboard: Architectural representation and the computer'. , in E. Blau, and E. Kaufman. (eds), Architecture and Its Image: Four Centuries of Architectural Representation: Works from the Collection of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montreal:: Canadian Centre for Architecture and MIT Press;, pp. 138-55.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Cantley, B.. (2013);, 'Two sides of the page: The antifact and the artefact'. , Architectural Design, 83:5, pp. 36-43.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Carless, T.. (2011);, 'A new visibility: The productive space of drawing'. , Spaces and Flows: An International Journal of Urban and ExtraUrban Studies, 1:1, pp. 141-55.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Collins, J.,, Collins, S., and Garnaut, C.. (2007);, 'Behind the image: Assessing architectural drawings as cultural records'. , Archives & Manuscripts, 35:2, pp. 86-107.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Eck, C. van. (2002);, 'Verbal and visual abstraction: The role of pictorial techniques of representation in Renaissance architectural theory'. , in C. Anderson. (ed.), The Built Surface: Architectural and the Pictorial Arts from Antiquity to the Enlightenment, Aldershot, Hampshire and Burlington, VT:: Ashgate;, pp. 162-79.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Emmons, P.. (2014);, 'Demiurgic lines: Line-making and the architectural imagination'. , Journal of Architecture, 19:4, pp. 536-59.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Evans, R.. (1989);, 'Architectural projection'. , in E. Blau, and E. Kaufman. (eds), Architecture and its Image: Four Centuries of Architectural Representation: Works from the Collection of the Canadian Centre for Architecture, Montreal:: Canadian Centre for Architecture and MIT Press;, pp. 18-35.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Evans, R.. (1995), The Projective Cast: Architecture and its Three Geometries, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Fitzsimons, J. K.. (2010);, 'The body drawn between knowledge and desire'. , Footprint, 4:2, pp. 9-28.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Frascari, M.. (1987);, 'The body and architecture in the drawings of Carlo Scarpa'. , RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics, 14, pp. 123-42.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Frascari, M.. (2009);, 'Lines as architectural thinking'. , Architectural Theory Review, 14:3, pp. 200-12.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Frascari, M.. (2011), Eleven Exercises in the Art of Architectural Drawing: Slow Food for the Architect's Imagination, Abingdon and New York:: Routledge;.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Frascari, M.. (2012a);, 'An architectural good life can be built, explained and taught only through storytelling'. , in A. Sharr. (ed.), Reading Architecture and Culture: Researching Buildings, Spaces and Documents, London and New York:: Routledge;, pp. 224-34.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Frascari, M.. (2012b);, 'De beata architectura: Places for thinking'. , in P. Emmons,, J. Hendrix, and J. Lomholt. (eds), The Cultural Role of Architecture: Contemporary and Historical Perspectives, London:: Routledge;, pp. 83-92.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Fraser, I., and Henmi, R.. (1994), Envisioning Architecture: An Analysis of Drawing, New York:: Van Nostrand Reinhold;.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Kara, L.. (2015);, 'A critical look at the digital technologies in architectural education: When, where, and how?'. , Procedia: Social and Behavioural Sciences, 176, pp. 526-30.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Lyn, F., and Dulaney, R.. (2009);, 'A case for drawing'. , ARCC Journal, 6:1, pp. 23-30.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Mottram, J.. (2007);, 'Marks in space: Thinking about drawing'. , in M. Frascari,, J. Hale, and B. Starkey. (eds), From Models to Drawings: Imagination and Representation in Architecture, London and New York:: Routledge;, pp. 193-200.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Oles, P. S.. (1979), Architectural Illustration: The Value Delineation Process, New York:: Van Nostrand Reinhold;.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Schneider, B.. (1981);, 'Perspective refers to the viewer, axonometry refers to the object'. , Daidalos, 1:1, pp. 81-95.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Smith, K. S.. (2005), Architects' Drawings: A Selection of Sketches by World Famous Architects Through History, Amsterdam:: Elsevier and Architectural Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Stevens, G.. (1998), The Favored Circle: The Social Foundations of Architectural Distinction, Cambridge, MA:: MIT Press;.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Teal, R.. (2010);, 'Dismantling the built drawing: Working with mood in architectural design'. , International Journal of Art & Design Education, 29:1, pp. 8-16.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Wallis, J.,, Hong, Z.,, Rahmann, H., and Sieweke, J.. (2014);, 'Pedagogical foundations: Deploying digital techniques in design/research practice'. , Journal of Landscape Architecture, 9:3, pp. 72-83.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Zumthor, P.. (2006), Atmosphere: Architectural Environments, Surrounding Objects, Basel:: Birkhäuser;.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Putra, Y.. (2019);, 'Digital cosmopoiesis in architectural pedagogy: An analysis through Frascari. ', Drawing: Research, Theory, Practice, 4:2, pp. 185-200, doi: 10.1386/drtp_00002_1
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1386/drtp_00002_1
Loading
/content/journals/10.1386/drtp_00002_1
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error