388 s17 syllabus_v2
- 1. Architecture 388 (3cr) S2017 MWF 1:30-2:20 p.m. Instructor: Randall Teal Introduction to Architectural Theory A Search for the Force of Architectural Thinking Thinking is never the natural exercise of a faculty. Thought never thinks alone and by itself; moreover it is never simply disturbed by forces which remain external to it. Thinking depends on forces which take hold of thought. Insofar as our thinking is controlled by reactive forces, insofar as it finds its sense in reactive forces, we must admit that we are not yet thinking…Thinking, like activity, is always a second power of thought, not the natural exercise of a faculty, but an extraordinary event in thought itself, for thought itself. Thinking is the n-th power of thought. It is still necessary for it to become "light", "affirmative", "dancing". But it will never attain this power if forces do not do violence to it. Violence must be done to it as thought, a power, the force of thinking, must throw it into a becoming-active. 1 Gilles Deleuze We all still need an education in thinking. 2 Martin Heidegger Martin Heidegger has said, “the question what is called thinking can never be answered by proposing a definition of the concept thinking, and then diligently explaining what is contained in that definition.” 3 Heidegger provides an extensive account of his notion of thinking that is both puzzling and brilliant in a series of lectures given at the University of Freiburg from 1951-1952. 4 Though he never provides definitive answers, he manages to draw the listener along with him in a process of thinking … about thinking. In short, he delivers an account of what it means to think by engaging the audience in acts of thinking. Of this approach to understanding he says, “we shall never learn what is called swimming…by reading a treatise on swimming. Only a leap into the river tells us what is called swimming.” 5 With this statement, Heidegger raises three important points about thinking: first, that there is a difference between intellectual knowledge and tacit understanding; second, that true thinking is characterized by leaps into the unknown; and three, that becoming an insightful thinker requires practice. 6 Unfortunately, architecture—like the cultural conditions it exists within and the legacy it descends from—has also been burdened with superficial definitions of thinking. Although there have been radical formal and procedural challenges to the process of making architecture, thinking—as such—has frequently been neglected. Ultimately, this leaves architectural thought in a precarious position, threatened by the intrusions of the same representational correlationism, subjectivism, and instrumentalism of the philosophical tradition, which leaves architectural thinking rigid in exactly the same ways. Architectural theory is perhaps the most obvious example of architectural thinking. However, many architects have argued that architectural theory is irrelevant. Architecture, they would assert, should be about doing architecture, not theorizing it. In Dean of Columbia University’s Graduate School of Architecture Planning and Preservation Mark Wigley’s estimation, one reason for such strong sentiments is that “architectural theory generally preempts an encounter with the object. It is concerned with veiling rather than exposing objects.” 7 In short, theory has a reputation for standing outside and apart from architectural making; this practice has tended to frame theory as an obfuscatory stand-alone endeavor, rather than a practice that provides insights into the everyday concerns architecture and design. Mary McLeod has suggested, “a more vigorous engagement of theory with practice might generate richer, more relevant theory, and might even spark more creative and progressive architecture.” 8 Following this charge it seems a richer theoretical practice might allow architecture to interface more deeply and directly with contemporary environmental, economic and social challenges; this, however, requires that theory confront the fact that its future relevance depends on finding a voice within these challenges. In short, for
- 2. theory to be useful it must no longer be treated as a realm unto itself, nor mere a supplement to practice; here, the definition of theory transforms to indicate the incorporation and valorization of more robust practices of thinking within the discipline of architecture. This course aims to bring theory and the making of architecture together. That is to say, students will learn how different positions, ideas, and frameworks of thought are shaped by theoretical investments and can ultimately circumscribe particular architectural investigations and the effects that emerge through the built works they produce. In order to foster this understanding, students will practice architectural thinking— repeatedly—so as to make them more effective thinkers as they move forward in their careers. Required Text: Constructing a New Agenda: Architectural Theory 1993-2009 Kindle Edition by A. Krista Sykes (Author, Editor), K. Michael Hays (Afterword) Requirements and Grading Criteria: Students will read all assigned texts, watch assigned videos, attend lectures, and participate in discussions. Additionally, students will complete weekly writings that correspond to the topic of the week and develop a final project. Final grades will be based on these requirements. Weekly Posts: Each week students will post a 500 word (written by the student) discussion of the week’s topic that incorporates ideas gleaned in the readings, videos, and lectures. Every post will have at least 5 citations taken from at least 3 different sources given that week. The posts are due by 5pm every Friday. Grading will be as follows: Weekly Posts (5pts. each) 70 points Final Project 30 points Total: 100 points Attendance: Attendance is required. More than three unexcused absence will automatically result in a drop in a student’s final grade. Laptops: No cell phones or laptops/pads are to be used during lecture or studio time unless you are directed to do so. If you have special circumstances that might warrant limited use of these devices you will need to obtain written approval from your instructor prior to their use (i.e. have a signed “laptop agreement). Anyone using these devices without written approval will be asked to leave class. Policy on Plagiarism: Plagiarism is a serious matter with serious consequences. Using someone else's work as your own in any form will be considered plagiarism and will be penalized in one of thee ways depending on the depth and nature of the offense: • You may be asked to repeat the project using your own ideas and work; and/or with proper citations. • You may receive a failing grade for the assignment. • You may be assigned a failing grade for the course in accordance with University regulations. A file will be established with the Dean of Students to record the incident, and keep a record of repeated offenses. To learn more, about the academic regulations regarding plagiarism and academic integrity more broadly see: https://www.uidaho.edu/student-affairs/dean-of-students/student-conduct/academic-integrity Learning Outcomes (based on NAAB 2014 Criteria): Primary A.1 Professional Communication Skills: Ability to write and speak effectively and use representational media appropriate for both within the profession and with the general public. A.3 Investigative Skills: Ability to gather, assess, record, and comparatively evaluate relevant information and performance in order to support conclusions related to a specific project or assignment. A.6 Use of Precedents: Ability to examine and comprehend the fundamental principles present in relevant precedents and to make informed choices about the incorporation of such principles into architecture and urban design projects.
- 3. C.1 Research: Understanding of the theoretical and applied research methodologies and practices used during the design process. Code of Conduct: Students should be familiar with university policies related to academic integrity and consequences for dishonest conduct. All work submitted should be your own and all sources should be cited. Questions about how specific assignments should be handled with respect to collaborative work, citations or any other issues can be raised in class. Principles of academic honesty and professional ethics also apply to any use of computers associated with the studio. This includes observing all software licensing requirements and respecting copyrights of intellectual property published on the internet. University of Idaho Classroom Learning Civility Clause: In any environment in which people gather to learn, it is essential that all members feel as free and safe as possible in their participation. To this end, it is expected that everyone in this course will be treated with mutual respect and civility, with an understanding that all of us (students, instructors, professors, guests, and teaching assistants) will be respectful and civil to one another in discussion, in action, in teaching, and in learning. Disability Support Services Reasonable Accommodations Statement: Reasonable accommodations are available for students who have documented temporary or permanent disabilities. All accommodations must be approved through Disability Support Services located in the Idaho Commons Building, Room 306 in order to notify your instructor(s) as soon as possible regarding accommodation(s) needed for the course. 5-6307; dss@uidaho.edu; www.access.uidaho.edu (*All work completed as course requirements are the property of the department and may be retained permanently by the department. Students whose work is selected for inclusion in the department archives will have the opportunity to photograph or otherwise reproduce the work for their portfolios.) 1 Deleuze, Nietzsche and Philosophy, 108. 2 On Time and Being, trans. Joan Stambaugh (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1972), 72. 3 Heidegger, What Is Called Thinking?, 21. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid., 21. 6 This appeared in ACSA PDX 7 Mark Wigley, "Deconstructivist Architecture," in Architecture Theory since 1968, ed. K. Michael Hays (Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press, 1998), 677. 8 Ibid.