Diagrams: evolution of: specific buildings, typologies, specific architects’ work, evolutionary arch itself, arch styles/ movements, arch as a whole,
The Evolution of Designs- Steadman
Preface
Organic metaphor in architecture: Aristotle, Alberti- concinnitas
Ernst Haeckel influence on jugendstil
And art nouveau
19th c embryology and criminology to Adolf loos ornament and crime
20th c German school of organic architecture
1960s- computer genetic algorithms
1990s- using these algorithms for design
1976- Dawkins’ memes (mental/ cultural genes) – applied inter alia to the historical evolution of designs of artefacts
evolutionary thinking – economic history, history of technology,
new research and development in biology inc. research in genetics, evolution of development, and biomechanics
modern day biomimetics- applying biological principles to design
1920’s & 30s: biotechnique/ biotechnics
Dawkins’ memetics- cultural diffusionism of 19th and early 20th c anthropology
1940’s/ 50’s: Cybernetics- Weiner and Ashby- hierarchical structure in adaptive systems
Ch 1- intro– evolution of evolutionary design
biotechnical determinism- form is a result of a logical process by which the operational needs and techniques were brought together–Spencerian evolutionary theory
what contribution can scientific research make to architectural design?
modern (built) environmental research–“modern movement” in architecture, artistic philosophies of 19th c
irrationalism and anti-science prejudice in design community
subject products of design (buildings) to scientific study (empirical investigation and theoretical analysis)
“design methods movement”- failed attempt to comprehend the entire process of design within a “scientific” methodology to analyze the complete range of factors in design
Simon- “the sciences of the artificial,” similar to archaeology
“Building/ Architecture science”- expand scope to include more architectural features (geometrical organization of parts and structures, topological relations of rooms to one another, structure of circulation routes, social functions, etc.)
provide information for critical assessment of designs (and to inspire ideas)
science (objective & analytical) v design (subjective and synthetic)-distinctions?
avoid making design a fully scientific thoughtless procedure
adaptation of organism to environment — relation of building to site/ appropriateness of any object for its location/ intention
teleology- design in nature
biological analogies: Wright, Sullivan, Corb
Peter Collins- “Biological analogy” article
relationship of organism to environment, Curvier’s principle of correllation of organs, relationship of form to function
~50 years for biological thinking to make an impact on arch design theory, many fragmented attempts at this biological architectural theory instead of a cohesive community study
Scott- “Biological Fallacy”- mechanisms of evolution–transmission of culture and material property
Alan Colquoun- related “biological determinism” of the modern movement to 19th c cultural evolutionism and to Herbert Spencer’s Philosophy
Christopher Alexander- work based on cybernetics and theories of Ashby
More successful concepts: evolution, morphology, classification, behavior of dynamic systems, hereditary transmission of information
mathematical/ biological approaches to architecture: classifications models, systems theory
“The fact is that buildings… are inert physical objects and not organisms; and the relevance of biological ideas to their study can only remain… analogical and metaphorical,” early stage of analysis
“wild evolutionary enthusiasm of late 19th C”- anthropology & archaeology
in the past, evolutionary analogy in architecture has been superficial
writers about arch bio: Greenough, Sullivan, Alexander
“organic” analogy (aesthetics) v “biological” analogy
Ch 2- organic analogy
since Ancient Greece, philosophers have used organisms’ balance and proportion as design inspiration- unity and cooperation of parts to whole within a structure, predetermined growth sizes and proportions, functionalism/ fitness, senses/ actions: meaning/ performance
used for literary works (plato, aristotle, shakespeare), authors influence architects
biology within mechanical world view- descartes, Henry Milne-Edwards : curvier studied organisms like they were designed machines
20th c: self- regulating and adaptive biological cybernetics: Grey Walter, W. Ross Ashby
anatomy: Thompson’s “on Growth and Form” influence on arch
P 14 DIAGRAM 3: types of analogies
Geometric Order- “Heaven’s First Law”
attempted codification of mathematical laws of harmony, derived from underlying order of the entire cosmos
Wittkower- influence in Renaissance systems of proportion
too literal interpretations: Vasari- analogous to human body parts, bilateral symmetry, measurement ratios
P 17 FIGURE 4- HUMAN CHURCH PLAN- religion
organic-inspired design continued with few followers in 17th and 18th c
mid 19th c- Archaeological study of monuments of antiquity & growth of art historical scholarship revived interest in classical proportion
d.r. hay- “The Science of beauty, as Developed in Nature and Applied in Art” , club in Edinburgh 1851
germany- ancient geometry- Zeising: “the golden section is key to all morphology, both in nature and in Art”- from botanical observations of arrangements
Regular growth processes- Fibonacci series- result in spiral forms ex. sunflower head, pine cone, pineapple skin segments, spiral snail shell, helico-spiral animal horns/ tusks
Thompson’s “On Growth and Form” – scientific explanation of mathematical processes of growth
failed- theodore Cook- obsession w/ spirals and curves- “mystical conceptions with overenthusiastic application in ways which in the end become quite meaningless”
radial/ rotational symmetries of flower petals and seed pods, radiolaria skeletons, minute sea organisms- “Kunst- Formen der Natur”- Haeckel, crystals
Colman- “Nature’s Harmonic Unity”
Hambridge- static symmetry (radial symmetry of crystals, flowers) v dynamic/ active (growth of shells)
designed repeated rectangles of increasing size- process of growth over time “vitality”- “dynamic”
…superficial geometrical principles abstracted from nature with numerological/ astrological overtones
“These patterns arise out of the intrinsic geometrical constraints which operate on close-packing of repeated spatial elements”
tacky- literal use of organic forms for sculptural decoration (vegetables , plants, animals, etc.)- throughout arch history
Dresser- “Art of Decorative Design”, “Principles of Decorative Design”- urged ornamentists to study principles of nature’s functions- discussed plant adaptations and growth habits
Lewis Day- ” Nature in Ornament”–> Victor Horta and artists of Art Nouveau
Sullivan- “System of Architectural Ornament” – source in seed and petal forms
Organic proportions and dimensions shouldn’t be taken literally, scaled up to architectural dimensions bc organic forms are not fixed and absolute- they are constantly adapting to environment and design principles shouldn’t be taken out of that context
confirmation bias- proportional theorists are so enthusiastic to demonstrate the organic ratios and sizes found in nature that they superimpose so many lines over works of art/ architecture (scaled down, as well) diagrams that they are bound to find what proportions they are looking for
in biology, significant dimensions are less ambiguous and have a specific mathematical pattern and functional explanation
However, concept of the relationships of parts and their contributions to the whole organism served as a useful metaphor which inspired the development of the biological analogies into further directions.