New discussions in architecture: Image making and its cultural impact.
As architecture and new building techniques evolve, so has evolved the representation of architecture itself, often facilitating the production of architectural drawings and images. However, the evolution of architecture representation act on the construction of the architecture itself. As tools get repurposed, the relationship of constructing images to represent and build architecture merges and evolves to the point where the construction of images is the construction of architecture.
As the focus of “architectural images” shifts from the classical purpose of instructing someone how to build a building (plans, elevations, sections, details) to a more multimedia oriented purpose like advertise, publicize divulge and specially share, (photographs, diagrams, photorealistic renderings, virtual reality experiences) so does change our relationship with architecture, how we talk about it and especially the way we experience it. What’s more important in this new age of information and multimedia architecture is the capacity of reaching new publics whose had never had access to architecture before, not everyone understands how to read an architectural or construction drawing, but most of us have taken a photograph, we are familiarized with this media. Furthermore, thanks to the internet you don’t need to pay an expensive subscription to a magazine you have never heard before to know what’s happening in the architectural world. With several online publications, online blogs and even individual post on social media, the exposure to these topics -to not only to the general public but to an unreachable international community- has never been broader. Thanks to the inter-connected world of media sharing, people that have never had the chance to be part are now able to think, opine and critique, which has indeed changed and broadened the discussion about architecture.
This ability to reach new markets as well as the exposure of architecture to millions of new people and their ability to interact and be part of the conversation, brings to the architectural discourse two big considerations: First, image making takes the central stage. In a world where you are bombarded with thousands of images every day, it’s crucial for the image to shine and create a “wow” factor in the individual so it can reach to more people and be shared even more, as Sam Jacob puts it, “the key issue is to consider how one construct images (…) it can operate as ‘Oh my god, wow!’ as you scroll for two seconds (…) ; second, curation practices and careful selection of images should be introduced in the “architects toolkit” [1]. It is a central and fundamental for architects to possess this skill, to carefully select which images are worth selecting, why they have been selected and for what purpose.
In addition to this, image making and curation are extremely related and their overlapping is crucial as it has never been before, or as Michael Meredith emphasizes:
“Through the act of selecting, grouping, and tagging, we can project and create cultural and/or personal identities (…) everyone has aesthetic affiliations and affections. Architecture is part of this widespread culture of collecting and curation (…) our stuff defines us”[2]
Now the architectural image not only relates to the act of building, nor the act of advertise, share or divulge, but serves as a cultural frame to identify ourselves as individuals (or groups of individuals) in the vast and endless sea of information. The contemporary purpose of architecture is more than ever to build culture, not through buildings and cities, but as making images and making part of a widespread culture of an individual. Its tools and techniques have evolved to the point where they go way beyond architecture itself. Now more than ever architecture is a cultural monster, defined by its aesthetic possibilities to resonate between groups of peoples and individuals alike.
“The proliferation of images brought on by ever-changing technologies has fundamentally changed our relationship to architectural production and to architecture as a form of cultural practice”[3]
The combination of widespread and easy exchange of information through the internet with the huge amount of available content has forced the architectural images to stand on their own and provide something more than the practical use of building construction, and in the process of being relevant to the public and architectural discussion it created a situation in which these images serve their practical purpose of advertising, divulging and construction while at the same time created a forms of cultural practices and aesthetics which gets appropriated by different types of individuals trying to define its own culture and aesthetical framework to define themselves and relate with groups of people. The architectural image has become a generator of culture that goes beyond architecture itself.
[1] Michael Meredith, “One Thing Leads to Another,” in Under the Influence, eds. Ana Miljacki and Amanda Reeser Lawrence (Cambridge, MA: SA+P Press, 2014), 67–72
[2] Meredith, Under the Influence, 83.
[3] Meredith, Under the Influence, 84.
Meredith, Michael “One Thing Leads to Another.” In Under the Influence, edited by Ana Miljacki and Amanda Reeser Lawrence. Cambridge, MA: SA+P Press, 2014.
Kubo, Michael “Discussion 01” in Under the Influence, edited by Ana Miljacki and Amanda Reeser Lawrence. Cambridge, MA: SA+P Press, 2014
