Positioning Architectural Theory

The Architectural program is often bases its grounding on three prong approach to formulate comprehensive understanding on architecture discipline: namely, History & Theory | Technology | design. The discourse of architectural theory is generally clubbed with history & theory, with assumption that inquiry system of history or theory of history has same fundamental principles as architectural theory. The intent is to build the argument that theoretically architectural theory is a separate discipline. The history often needs navigation its discourses through linear/comparative timeline, causes, imperatives and historic-ism/ historiography or through social and cultural imperatives,  while architectural theory is a discussion, debate and writing on architectural trends, pattern or history of ideas including theory of history.  Architectural theory is an intellectual discipline locating self and society while history obscures the cult of individualism, bridging the discourses on knowledge and virtues within moral embankment. Architectural theory investigates the methods of critical, creative, interdisciplinary, and outward-facing research while history is inward journey of locating historic-ism logic.  If history brings critical objectivity of past or philosophy to study of fact for contemporary learning, the Architectural theory speculates on past and present simultaneously and influences the process of making of architectural pedagogy.  It’s an epistemological position as a necessary conditions that shapes the architectural theory.

Architectural theory reinforces the individual predilection regarding architectural thinking trajectories and allows re-conceptualization. It initiates and debate on various architectural text not only in linear timeline but also parallel or simultaneous time frame, develops position and critical thinking on the position. Architectural theory is a reading & translation of ideas. It brings about normative foundation (information on form and ideas) along with dialectical (ex. binary of thesis and anti-thesis) understanding.
If one addresses the architectural theory in the context of architectural issues, architectural history and architectural writing by architects, perhaps there would be greater possibility of re-imagining or re-locating paradigmatic shift in the architectural education. It is often seen that architectural theory borrows too much from across discipline for its debate and discussion; in the process it dilutes the architectural discourse as debating discipline as a learning medium.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s