DIAGRAM TYPES Figure 2:The image to the right shows a moderately complete floor plan adjacent to a perspective,far right. Figure 3:Compare the conventional plan to the images of plan view diagrams below.The sequence of examples demonstrates all three types of diagramming: ·Reduced drawing(3-1) ·Abstraction32-4） Drawing with overlay (3-586) the better diagram tends to be self-evident.Among the least ambiguous ele- ments found in diagrams is the arrow.It is safe to say that an arrow always represents direction by virtue of its formal structure:it points. At the same time.the relative abstraction of the arrow reminds us of a chal- lenge to the notion that the diagram both explains and represents.The dis- pute arises over a question of degree,of how complete a representation this entails.For us,this question seems perilously close to counting angels on the head of a pin.Abstraction always accompanies representation.A duplicate may be a representation,but not all representations are duplicates,just as a Diagram 3-1:Reduced drawing Diagram 3-2:Footprint;an square is a rectangle,but not all rectangles are squares.In recognizing that abstraction. diagrams may encompass varying traits of an original,we uncover one root of the diagram's diverse conditions:it represents only that which it aims to analyze. Diagrams may visualize analysis,intent or both.Their purposes vary with context.The variety of purpose raises some questions.Are they not just pri- vate,circumstantial notations,useful perhaps in a utilitarian way,but without real function?Setting aside the use/function distinction,we propose a tax- onomy of diagrams by way of example to sort out the issue of tool and pur- pose,and to make the larger case for the diagram's intrinsic role in the design process. Diagram 3-3:Organizational Diagram 34:Openings;an parti;an abstraction. abstraction. Diagram types To begin,we limit ourselves to the two-dimensional,black and white diagram. We suggest that diagrams of this sort act as a special subset of drawing.In the simplest list,they comprise:reduced drawing,abstraction and drawing with overlay.These three categories fundamentally subtract from and add to com- prehensive architectural drawings.We find them on both the creator's and the critic's desks. A reduced drawing presumes a more complete referential image(31).It lim- its itself to details deemed relevant to the intent,and excludes the superflu- ous for clarity.The schematic 'you are here!floor plan is an obvious example. In design,reduced drawings include common conventions of architectural rep- Diagram3空：Measure and Diagram36:Path arrows;an resentation-for example;plan and section;the schematic POCHE-and can proportion;an overlay. overlay. vary in their inclusiveness. 20
Figure 2: The image to the right shows a moderately complete oor plan adjacent to a perspective, far right. Figure 3: Compare the conventional plan to the images of plan view diagrams below. The sequence of examples demonstrates all three types of diagramming: • Reduced drawing (3·1) • Abstraction (3·2–4) • Drawing with overlay (3·5&6). Diagram 3·3: Organizational parti; an abstraction. Diagram 3·5: Measure and proportion; an overlay. Diagram 3·1: Reduced drawing. Diagram 3·2: Footprint; an abstraction. Diagram 3·4: Openings; an abstraction. Diagram 3·6: Path arrows; an overlay. the better diagram tends to be self-evident. Among the least ambiguous elements found in diagrams is the arrow. It is safe to say that an arrow always represents direction by virtue of its formal structure: it points. At the same time, the relative abstraction of the arrow reminds us of a challenge to the notion that the diagram both explains and represents. e dispute arises over a question of degree, of how complete a representation this entails. For us, this question seems perilously close to counting angels on the head of a pin. Abstraction always accompanies representation. A duplicate may be a representation, but not all representations are duplicates, just as a square is a rectangle, but not all rectangles are squares. In recognizing that diagrams may encompass varying traits of an original, we uncover one root of the diagram’s diverse conditions: it represents only that which it aims to analyze. Diagrams may visualize analysis, intent or both. eir purposes vary with context. e variety of purpose raises some questions. Are they not just private, circumstantial notations, useful perhaps in a utilitarian way, but without real function? Setting aside the use/function distinction, we propose a taxonomy of diagrams by way of example to sort out the issue of tool and purpose, and to make the larger case for the diagram’s intrinsic role in the design process. Diagram types To begin, we limit ourselves to the two-dimensional, black and white diagram. We suggest that diagrams of this sort act as a special subset of drawing. In the simplest list, they comprise: reduced drawing, abstraction and drawing with overlay. ese three categories fundamentally subtract from and add to comprehensive architectural drawings. We find them on both the creator’s and the critic’s desks. A reduced drawing presumes a more complete referential image (·). It limits itself to details deemed relevant to the intent, and excludes the superfluous for clarity. e schematic ‘you are here!’ floor plan is an obvious example. In design, reduced drawings include common conventions of architectural representation – for example; plan and section; the schematic – and can vary in their inclusiveness.
2-SORTING THROUGH IDEAS Figure 4:The four diagrams to the right illustrate the example cited in the text.They form a sequence from simple figure-ground through more complex ideas of defined space,span,path and grain.The translucent fields adhere to the diagram type of drawing with overlay cited in the previous illustrations. Diagram 41:Figure-ground. Diagram 4-2:Defined space. Abstraction is a subtler notion,for the reason given in the previous section: all drawings are intrinsically abstract to one degree or another.Abstraction follows seamlessly from the reduced drawing,and notably designates dia- grams with more singular intent(32-4).Thus,a parti drawing diagrams the Big Idea,a structural diagram follows load bearing and a circulation diagram maps path.A figure-ground plan is a paradigm case in architectural abstrac- tion.It substitutes simple building footprints for a more complex aerial rendering. Diagram 43:Defined path and Diagram 4-4:Implied grain. Drawing with overlay runs the gamut from adding a simple arrow-or other implied span. ensign-to full-blown collage,with the drawing serving as background (3.5-6). The overlay can be as simple as placing abstractions over drawings-PLANS, SECTIONS and ELEVATIONS among others-reduced or otherwise.As we move beyond black and white diagrams,translucent layers,tone and color are com- mon devices for the overlay,re-purposing a drawing through addition. Diagramming design education Design is a thoughtful enterprise.It is also a precursor to construction or manufacture.Because it is impossible to act responsibly without forethought, learning to design is also learning how to devise a plan of action.Planning is the quintessential human endeavor.Drawing is one measure of that activity- it both comprises and follows from the act of making diagrams.* When learning to design well,it is imperative to consider before acting. *DISEGNARE/DESIGNARE Such forethought requires a conceptual vocabulary as well as an awareness of And it is good to remember that the Latin root for relevant practices.Pattern recognition comes first.It brings with it categories design,designare-to designate-describes both the of form and shape-including an understanding of their essential properties, process and the intent. what we might call their ORDER.It also brings with it an intellectual structure that bears on later analysis of more complex endeavors.These early exercises lay the foundations for the analytical diagrams of future design work. By way of example,consider the following design sequence.We begin with simple figure-ground compositions(4.1).To this,we add a visual element that manifests a defined space within the arrangement(42).From there,we pro- ceed to place further elements showing defined and/or implied path,span and grain(43&4)."Throughout the sequence,these ideas aid coherent devel- opment and in the process become the de facto analytical tools of advancing *PROJECT SEQUENCE design work.They become the diagrams. The project sequence referred to is a subset of the These basic exercises simplify more intricate design methodologies,and ren- examples that populate CHAPTERS 4 and 5. der them as self-contained activities.Making things simpler is an abstraction, however,the abstraction should point in two directions.It should lead to iter- ations that are more complex and reveal underlying principles at work.With- out this two-way reference,these exercises succeed only to the degree that they form the analytical backbone of future design learning.By doing double duty,they permit beginning designers to advance to ever more nuanced meth- ods without risk of losing the clarity of their intent. 21
– Figure 4: The four diagrams to the right illustrate the example cited in the text. They form a sequence from simple gure-ground through more complex ideas of de ned space, span, path and grain. The translucent elds adhere to the diagram type of drawing with overlay cited in the previous illustrations. Diagram 4·1: Figure-ground. Diagram 4·3: De ned path and implied span. Diagram 4·4: Implied grain. Diagram 4·2: De ned space. * / And it is good to remember that the Latin root for design, designare – to designate – describes both the process and the intent. ** e project sequence referred to is a subset of the examples that populate and . Abstraction is a subtler notion, for the reason given in the previous section: all drawings are intrinsically abstract to one degree or another. Abstraction follows seamlessly from the reduced drawing, and notably designates diagrams with more singular intent (·–). us, a parti drawing diagrams the Big Idea, a structural diagram follows load bearing and a circulation diagram maps path. A figure-ground plan is a paradigm case in architectural abstraction. It substitutes simple building footprints for a more complex aerial rendering. Drawing with overlay runs the gamut from adding a simple arrow – or other ensign – to full-blown collage, with the drawing serving as background (·–). e overlay can be as simple as placing abstractions over drawings – , and among others – reduced or otherwise. As we move beyond black and white diagrams, translucent layers, tone and color are common devices for the overlay, re-purposing a drawing through addition. Diagramming & design education Design is a thoughtful enterprise. It is also a precursor to construction or manufacture. Because it is impossible to act responsibly without forethought, learning to design is also learning how to devise a plan of action. Planning is the quintessential human endeavor. Drawing is one measure of that activity – it both comprises and follows from the act of making diagrams.* When learning to design well, it is imperative to consider before acting. Such forethought requires a conceptual vocabulary as well as an awareness of relevant practices. Pattern recognition comes first. It brings with it categories of form and shape – including an understanding of their essential properties, what we might call their . It also brings with it an intellectual structure that bears on later analysis of more complex endeavors. ese early exercises lay the foundations for the analytical diagrams of future design work. By way of example, consider the following design sequence. We begin with simple figure-ground compositions (·). To this, we add a visual element that manifests a defined space within the arrangement (·). From there, we proceed to place further elements showing defined and/or implied path, span and grain (·&).** roughout the sequence, these ideas aid coherent development and in the process become the de facto analytical tools of advancing design work. ey become the diagrams. ese basic exercises simplify more intricate design methodologies, and render them as self-contained activities. Making things simpler is an abstraction, however, the abstraction should point in two directions. It should lead to iterations that are more complex and reveal underlying principles at work. Without this two-way reference, these exercises succeed only to the degree that they form the analytical backbone of future design learning. By doing double duty, they permit beginning designers to advance to ever more nuanced methods without risk of losing the clarity of their intent
LEARNING DIAGRAMMATIC FORM Learning diagrammatic form Mastering effective diagramming begins with learning the fundamentals of visual form.We identify tools and tactics as a preface to learning any skill. Knowledge of visual structure must therefore precede explorations in possible content Previously,we identified a general taxonomy of diagram types.To enhance our understanding of the architectural diagram,we identify three primary categories of diagrammatic form:ENSIGNS,FIGURE-GROUND elements and ◆STRATEGIC LANGUAGE GESTALT strategies.These three identify the basic elements of any mix-and- Strategies and tactics comprise a rough hierarchy.In match approach to teaching diagrams.The first two categories employ tactics, any game with rules,a strategy designates any plan of the third demonstrates combinational intent-hence the use of strategies." action with an overall goal.A tactic,in contrast,iden- Ensigns comprise the most direct and readily identifiable elements within tifies an action to achieve a specific end.Therefore, our taxonomy(5).The arrow is a universally recognized ensign.A light bulb tactics serve strategies,while a strategy may embody or radiant sun might stand in for several things,but both act distinctly as several tactics. emblems of meaning.This prompts some particular gestalt strategies dis- cussed more fully in the next chapter.We borrow the term 'ensign'from her- aldry and thus include emblems as well as icons,symbols and signs. Figure-ground-a gestalt term-makes visual the solid-void relationship of architectural reality.At its largest scale,it identifies that'here is a built form'. At smaller scales,it distinguishes form from space.The polarity may originate in visual phenomena,but the analysis that it fosters is broader.Figure-ground has the grace to clarify the intent of any composition under study.Thus,open- ings in a wall might best reveal a pattern when distinctions between a door and a window vanish.A more detailed discussion of figure-ground occurs in the next chapter. Gestalt strategies,being combinatory,are inherently more speculative than **GESTALT IN DESIGN are the two previous groups."When different visual tactics play simultane- A term borrowed from psychology,gestalt refers to our ously,they reveal the interaction of their elements.The extension of purpose perception of an overall form or composition rather thus implied works as a gestalt of implication.The combination of tactics than our separate assessments of its components.For -each multiplying the other-acts by way of gestalt theory.This may be as design,it provides a coherent language of description. simple as text supplementing an arrow,or as complex as shadows foreground- ing surface.A gestalt strategy combines several visual or non-graphical tactics into an overall graphic schema(6). Figure s:The plan image to the left shows elements of figure- ondindcatewallsand openings,as well as various ensigns,dotted lines,arrows and fades to describe spatial experience related to motion. Figure6:In comparison,the image to the right focuses on static elements of the spatial gestalt:center,edge and surround. 22
Figure 5: The plan image to the left shows elements of gureground to indicate walls and openings, as well as various ensigns, dotted lines, arrows and fades to describe spatial experience related to motion. Figure 6: In comparison, the image to the right focuses on static elements of the spatial gestalt: center, edge and surround. * Strategies and tactics comprise a rough hierarchy. In any game with rules, a strategy designates any plan of action with an overall goal. A tactic, in contrast, identifies an action to achieve a specific end. erefore, tactics serve strategies, while a strategy may embody several tactics. ** A term borrowed from psychology, gestalt refers to our perception of an overall form or composition rather than our separate assessments of its components. For design, it provides a coherent language of description. Learning diagrammatic form Mastering effective diagramming begins with learning the fundamentals of visual form. We identify tools and tactics as a preface to learning any skill. Knowledge of visual structure must therefore precede explorations in possible content. Previously, we identified a general taxonomy of diagram types. To enhance our understanding of the architectural diagram, we identify three primary categories of diagrammatic form: , - elements and strategies. ese three identify the basic elements of any mix-andmatch approach to teaching diagrams. e first two categories employ tactics, the third demonstrates combinational intent – hence the use of strategies.* Ensigns comprise the most direct and readily identifiable elements within our taxonomy (). e arrow is a universally recognized ensign. A light bulb or radiant sun might stand in for several things, but both act distinctly as emblems of meaning. is prompts some particular gestalt strategies discussed more fully in the next chapter. We borrow the term ‘ensign’ from heraldry and thus include emblems as well as icons, symbols and signs. Figure-ground – a gestalt term – makes visual the solid-void relationship of architectural reality. At its largest scale, it identifies that ‘here is a built form’. At smaller scales, it distinguishes form from space. e polarity may originate in visual phenomena, but the analysis that it fosters is broader. Figure-ground has the grace to clarify the intent of any composition under study. us, openings in a wall might best reveal a pattern when distinctions between a door and a window vanish. A more detailed discussion of figure-ground occurs in the next chapter. Gestalt strategies, being combinatory, are inherently more speculative than are the two previous groups.** When different visual tactics play simultaneously, they reveal the interaction of their elements. e extension of purpose thus implied works as a gestalt of implication. e combination of tactics – each multiplying the other – acts by way of gestalt theory. is may be as simple as text supplementing an arrow, or as complex as shadows foregrounding surface. A gestalt strategy combines several visual or non-graphical tactics into an overall graphic schema ().
2-SORTING THROUGH IDEAS Figure7:Examples of gestalt strategies depicting the three sub-categories: 1.Layers 2.Collage 3.Annotation. Diagram 71:Layers. Diagram7-2:Collage. Gestalt sub-categories Within either of the two first groups,which we define as tactical categories, A one quickly notices that each tactic may play a role in the third,strategic,cat- egory.A figure-ground image combined with an ensign exhibits certain gestalt properties,but the overall effect is non-complex.By employing a gestalt strat- egy,we aim to generate the appropriate tension between two elements-tac- field VIEW tical or otherwise-that produce what we might describe as a certain visual tremor.Without relying on ambiguity,gestalt strategies produce competi- tive readings of a diagram.It may be as simple as the friction between words field and spaces,or as subtle as the play of colored geometric layers against a more sober,upright figure-ground plan. The sub-categories of gestalt strategies are:layers,collage and annotation (71-3).All three are varieties of additions or combinations.The intent of lay- ers is that we view each element of the drawing literally in a conceptual space with one atop the other.In the better examples,that positioning is also the source of multiple related readings,hence gestalt.Similarly,a true collage-as- diagram strategy ultimately derives its tension from the formal and pictorial Diagram7-3:Annotations. qualities of each element.Technically,this means that these diagrams play from readings where the elements are visual only-collage-to those readings where each element brings with it some independent meaning-montage;but TEXT AS IMAGE in this instance,the distinction is unnecessary.Annotation designates the One of the more famous pronouncements on the inde- addition of text to image,fact to picture."In this instance,two communica- pendence of language and image comes from the phi- tion modes,each capable of independence,work corroboratively as ideological losopher Ludwig Wittgenstein in his Tractatus Logico- force-multipliers. Philosophicus,'Some things can only be spoken of, some things can only be shown'(14121-41212). The diagram visual order Our three diagrammatic forms are categories within a larger practice-visual order.Their proper use enables effective diagramming.A general vocabu- lary,used in speaking of design,should also have a visual counterpart.Some of these notions are general and familiar,such as PROPORTION,SYMMETRY, SHAPE,COLOR and SURFACE,ORGANIZATION and COMPOSITION.They inhabit most drawings as part of their structure. With its arsenal of arrows,sightlines,environmental notations and geomet- ric correspondences,the diagram helps to clarify intent as well as verify result. 23
– eld eld VIEW PATH Figure 7: Examples of gestalt strategies depicting the three sub-categories: 1. Layers 2. Collage 3. Annotation. Diagram 7·1: Layers. Diagram 7·3: Annotations. Diagram 7·2: Collage. * One of the more famous pronouncements on the independence of language and image comes from the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein in his Tractatus LogicoPhilosophicus, ‘Some things can only be spoken of, some things can only be shown’ (¶.–.). Gestalt sub-categories Within either of the two first groups, which we define as tactical categories, one quickly notices that each tactic may play a role in the third, strategic, category. A figure-ground image combined with an ensign exhibits certain gestalt properties, but the overall effect is non-complex. By employing a gestalt strategy, we aim to generate the appropriate tension between two elements – tactical or otherwise – that produce what we might describe as a certain visual tremor. Without relying on ambiguity, gestalt strategies produce competitive readings of a diagram. It may be as simple as the friction between words and spaces, or as subtle as the play of colored geometric layers against a more sober, upright figure-ground plan. e sub-categories of gestalt strategies are: layers, collage and annotation (·–). All three are varieties of additions or combinations. e intent of layers is that we view each element of the drawing literally in a conceptual space with one atop the other. In the better examples, that positioning is also the source of multiple related readings, hence gestalt. Similarly, a true collage-asdiagram strategy ultimately derives its tension from the formal and pictorial qualities of each element. Technically, this means that these diagrams play from readings where the elements are visual only – collage – to those readings where each element brings with it some independent meaning – montage; but in this instance, the distinction is unnecessary. Annotation designates the addition of text to image, fact to picture.* In this instance, two communication modes, each capable of independence, work corroboratively as ideological force-multipliers. The diagram & visual order Our three diagrammatic forms are categories within a larger practice – visual order. eir proper use enables effective diagramming. A general vocabulary, used in speaking of design, should also have a visual counterpart. Some of these notions are general and familiar, such as , , , and , and . ey inhabit most drawings as part of their structure. With its arsenal of arrows, sightlines, environmental notations and geometric correspondences, the diagram helps to clarify intent as well as verify result
THE DIAGRAM VISUAL ORDER Figure 8:In this small sketch, the grid geometry already suggests an analysis of the organization of both plan and elevation.This is a common feature in the architecture of the Renaissance and Neodassi- cal periods. It is an engine of efficiency in thought and practice.Because clarity is para- mount,order is a requirement.The more comprehensive the skill set brought to bear by the designer,the greater the potential for both clarity of form and intent.Good diagrams are deceptive in only one respect:they are at their best when they conceal the ingenuity of their design.Their powerful clarity makes them appear obvious.A diagram's revelation seems self-evident,even when its creation has entailed tireless effort.An architect bears the responsibility of making a good drawing-one without excuses-in making her ideas clear to *LEARNING RESPONSIBILITY herself." The larger pedagogical ideal is to gradually place the Less obvious,perhaps,is the diagrammatic life of a building itself.When responsibility of coherence on the apprentice begin- we draw a cube as a beginning gesture,we have begun to diagram space.Any ning designer.There are no formulae to blindly follow measurements that we make within the drawing to locate openings or paths, to make judgments.As with good writing.the burden depends upon the visual order of that diagram.To divide a cube into a three- of clarity is the point of the practice. dimensional nine-square-ala Palladio-is to engage with geometry diagram- matically as a set of possibilities and a working procedure(8). Diagrams,as with all traditional drawing forms,hold performance distinct from analysis.Whatever utility the diagram offers,its more important func- tion,as proof,shows that we know what we are doing and what we did(8).At the end of the design process,a final diagram becomes the ultimate argument for the project.It says'this is what I did.That diagram,as with any argument, is how we know whether our intentions are clear. Our purpose To those unfamiliar with design thinking,terms such as 'traditional'and 'vernacular'usually identify the familiar,whereas'contemporary,modern' or 'post-modern'might characterize the unaccustomed.To a designer,these labels are less value laden and useful only in specific ways.Traditions abound and often conflict,and vernacular classifies practices relevant to the context at hand. The present is contemporary by definition,while modernism and postmod- ernism serve best as reference to historical movements one hundred years and fifty years in the past,respectively-yet other forms of tradition.Rather than fuss over nomenclature,it is far better for designers to focus on ensuring fit, 24
* e larger pedagogical ideal is to gradually place the responsibility of coherence on the apprentice beginning designer. ere are no formulae to blindly follow to make judgments. As with good writing, the burden of clarity is the point of the practice. Figure 8: In this small sketch, the grid geometry already suggests an analysis of the organization of both plan and elevation. This is a common feature in the architecture of the Renaissance and Neoclassical periods. It is an engine of efficiency in thought and practice. Because clarity is paramount, order is a requirement. e more comprehensive the skill set brought to bear by the designer, the greater the potential for both clarity of form and intent. Good diagrams are deceptive in only one respect: they are at their best when they conceal the ingenuity of their design. eir powerful clarity makes them appear obvious. A diagram’s revelation seems self-evident, even when its creation has entailed tireless effort. An architect bears the responsibility of making a good drawing – one without excuses – in making her ideas clear to herself.* Less obvious, perhaps, is the diagrammatic life of a building itself. When we draw a cube as a beginning gesture, we have begun to diagram space. Any measurements that we make within the drawing to locate openings or paths, depends upon the visual order of that diagram. To divide a cube into a threedimensional nine-square – à la Palladio – is to engage with geometry diagrammatically as a set of possibilities and a working procedure (). Diagrams, as with all traditional drawing forms, hold performance distinct from analysis. Whatever utility the diagram offers, its more important function, as proof, shows that we know what we are doing and what we did (). At the end of the design process, a final diagram becomes the ultimate argument for the project. It says ‘this is what I did.’ at diagram, as with any argument, is how we know whether our intentions are clear. Our purpose To those unfamiliar with design thinking, terms such as ‘traditional’ and ‘vernacular’ usually identify the familiar, whereas ‘contemporary’, ‘modern’ or ‘post-modern’ might characterize the unaccustomed. To a designer, these labels are less value laden and useful only in specific ways. Traditions abound and often conflict, and vernacular classifies practices relevant to the context at hand. e present is contemporary by definition, while modernism and postmodernism serve best as reference to historical movements one hundred years and fifty years in the past, respectively – yet other forms of tradition. Rather than fuss over nomenclature, it is far better for designers to focus on ensuring fit,