Debolism In Sam Ridgway's The Representation Of Construction

Good Essays
Reclaiming the Poetic
Sam Ridgway in The Representation of Construction emphasizes the role of representation in architecture stating, “The world of architecture is a world of representation” (268). He continues writing, “Architects do not build buildings; they represent them, mainly through drawings, models, words and numbers. In turn, buildings are also interpretations or representation of these mediating instruments and artifacts that precede their construction” (268). It is through realizing that representational tools are “value laden” that contemporary architects may move forward from the “ideological stagnation plaguing most architectural creation” (269). Comparing the preceding eras to the contemporary era, “there is an inverse relationship
…show more content…
He suggests that the use of “electronic imaging prevents imagining and promotes thinking about architecture rather than bring architects, contractors, clients and critics to think within architecture” (275). Inspired by Frascari, the strategy of technography is encouraged (278). This is a “different way of thinking about the relationship between a [working] drawing and a future building. Rather than “simply Cartesian, technical lines showing edges, corners and joints these technographic drawings reveal both the symbolic and instrumental representations of the future building.. it is to make visible what is invisible”. Ridgway remarks, “The fact that any of this could be considered contentious indicates that extent to which architects have become alienated from the heart of their profession” (279). He asserts, “Part of any technography must be an acknowledgement of the historical context of construction knowledge. This is not only so we can better understand our rich architectural ancestry, but because it re-establishes a connection with the origins of our profession in building” (279). Rather than a “miniature projected representation of an imagined building, details are drawn as poetic constructions themselves, following the logic of drawing and not building and representing the “built detail symbolically, in addition to instrumentally. The symbolic and practical are one and the same thing” (280). “What are the symbolic qualities we are trying to embody in our buildings and how would we represent them in drawings?” becomes the question (278). These drawing “may not be easy or straightforward to understand or interpret.
Get Access