I posted this short essay on MeFi today,
but I wanted to share it with you. Because of my current posistion, I am deeply
familiar with how computers affect design, for good and for bad. My short
summation of the current thought is no way complete, and it is from someone who
is a true beliver. Caveat Emptor.

The ACADIA Conference was at the university
about four years ago, and even then [with the more limited computing programs]
was amazing. Lets discuss the current state of architecture and the rise of the
so-called “Blobatecture”. As computers became more and more powerful, and
rendering programs improved, firms started to use programs such as AutoCAD to
speed up their construction documents. As firms needed more visualization
tools, more and more programs sprouted up. But what people don’t understand is
the immense theoretical underpinning to many of the current practitioners work.

The root of this vein of study is the difference between seeing the world as a
straight line or a curve. The line or the segment was the principal design
element throughout architectural history. The architectural break with the
segment started in the Baroque Period where the ellipse and circle started to dominate the plans of cathedrals, civil spaces and most prime monumental structures. This
then disintegrated back to the segment during and after the building of Versailles. Architecture is influenced by society around
it, and by the other professions. So it is not surprising that Darwin’s Origin
of Species and later Einstein’s Theory of Relativity had an affect on
architecture [not to mention society as a whole]. The switch from the Classical
{Newtonian] way to view the world to the Quantum way of looking at the world
[along with other factors] changed society and architecture. Now instead of the
world as a determinate system, a great machine that we observed running, we were
in an indeterminate system in which we were the machines. Therefore the
Renaissance way of looking at the world, not segments but of arcs, circles and
spheres rebounded wholeheartedly. The difference this time around is that we
are adding time into the equation, bringing all four dimensions into the design. This is where the computer
comes in. With programs like 3d Studio, Form-Z and my favorite Maya, we are
able to bring a whole new dimension to design.

There is a concerted effort to test the bounds of the computer, materials, site
and sometimes clients to try to open up the closed system of architecture. I am
not even talking about Frank O. Gehry, but of the hundreds of firms that
are on the cutting
edge of design research. We strive to
create juxtapositions, layered systematic design and classical orders together
to form a design that exists on many different layers and scales. If it sounds
like I am one of the converted, I am. No more singular dogma of Modernism, nut
the “both-and” world of Post-Modernism, albeit without the stereotypical
classical/traditional styles.

That is why this work is important, and I am up every night working on it. It
doesn’t necessarily have to be a blob, but more often it is. Some practitioners
run amok with their newfound power. I see it as a tool that can help exploit
the power of serendipity and the power of the artist.