Citation
Laminations, December, 1982

Material Information

Title:
Laminations, December, 1982
Series Title:
Laminations
Creator:
University of Colorado Denver
Filkins, John
Place of Publication:
Denver, CO
Publisher:
University of Colorado Denver
Publication Date:
Language:
English

Subjects

Genre:
newspaper ( sobekcm )

Record Information

Source Institution:
Auraria Library
Holding Location:
Auraria Library
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of copyright holder or Creator or Publisher as appropriate]. Permission granted to University of Colorado Denver to digitize and display this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text
sdllSot
slaminationslaminations laminatofcnslaminationslaminat
w
Wm


.. Atetox, is t0
Vsubject. Its x s -o.o^
' ^xc.\vLtec.t.uTe ^°e >e ^ustlil-ed •
contents:
Design Criticism: professional and not* so-professional
"With the cross-fire still ricocheting," LAMINATIONS takes a look behind the lines into the UCD design studios.
Will UCD soon be offer ing a Ph.D. in architectural aesthetics? D.J. seems to think so
staff:
EDITOR:-
Christopher G. Gallagher
STAFF WRITERS:
Nathan Good Tobias Guggenheimer Nils Hj erman Dan Jansensen Nicholas K. Matz Auguste Mousalli Frank Ooms Anney Wright
GRAPHICS:
Lila Rioth Kai Tarum
PHOTOGRAPHY:
Frank Ooms
ARCH
ARCH
ARCH
ARCH
PCD
PCD
ARCH
ARCH
ALUM
ARCH
ARCH
calendar:
Winter Session
January 3-21, 1983 Application Deadline December 15, 1982
Spring Semester
Walk-in registration week of January 17, 1983
Semester begins January 24, 1983
Spring Break March 21-5, 1983
Last day of classes May 13, 1983
Commencement May 14, 1983
dolor e s’ notes:
Library Hours: Dec. 16-22 Dec. 23-Jan. 2 Jan. 3-21
9:00-5:00 CLOSED 9:00- 6:00M-9:00-5:00 F
Bromley Hours for Interim Periods Mon.-Fri. 7:00-5:30 Saturday 7:00-5:30 Sunday CLOSED
If you need to be in the building after hours, please arrange for a key immediately
Dogs are not allowed in the building at any time - that is a Department of Health regulation.
l!
editorial:
John Prosser called the last issue of Laminations,"the best ever." Gary Long said that it was "pretty." Chester Nagel*s comments were:"provocative, informative."
So, we decided that we would have to undergo a major overhaul. (Didn't we just do that?) Here I am trying to establish some consistejic^ and^ our”lTTy" "graphics" department Has shifted gears again. Well, at least we are out of last years pattern, ie. spins around the block in reverse. |
here
During the last semester, students watched as Michael Graves, David Lewis,
Ed Mazria, and William Mitchell each pointed toward a different direction for the future of architecture and design.
Time and Newsweek excited design students everywhere with their thought provoking, informative architecture reviews.
Allen Tempko, the San Francisco Chronicle's art and architecture critic, flew in to tell all of us designers to, "Live free or die." (Don't car owners New Hampshire do that?) Now I know Q)
1®
\n
why our graphics aepartment is so confused.
cut
â– of
In response to the above happenings Laminations chose as topics of discussion
1) architectural criticism and 2) design education in the studio. Our look has changed again, but our goal remains the same: to provide relevant discussion that serves as a basis for further dialogue and debate.
EDITOR
AMINATIONS IS PUBLISHED SPORADICALLY BY THE STUDENTS OF THE COLLEGE OF DESIGN AND PLANNING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER. THROUGH THE HAZE WE READ THE ADDRESS OVER THE DOOR AS 1100 14th STREET, DENVER, COLORADO 80202
ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina tionslaminations lamina t ions lamina tions lamina t ions lamina ti


page 3
»e*oi ielt
{aitU veU.L ,0 teach it he-ce
be *** 100 BeeiStv Studio
at OCO » * students opiatoa--.
•••^ n
$eey&&Jl
letters:
THE OPINIONS Eypppocr.^ ,
THE OPINIONS EXPRESSEn tm DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECTT™LNEWSPAFER editorial staff or of anv se of THE THE UNIVERSITY. THEY ^YD°FFICIAL 0F
UNCONTROLUBLE UrS OF OUB v^CT THE
COLLEAGUES TO SEE THEIR m!mIc°SE IF YOU SHARE THIS PREDILECTION• JgLCOME YOUR LITERARY ££%L”
editor
In today's high pressure, fast- „ finish-it-yes terday world of defign pro
whithT h’ there iS 3 Very narro« P«h which leads to success. Based on legal
economic and chronologic constraints affecting projests of every type, the arch-itect is no longer expected to "do it all The successful, efficient design firm ' has learned a basic component essential to staying in business is team work. Note that team work has various interpretations. Award-winning team work does mean an architect
NOT
saying, "OK, gang, I
ve
got this great idea designed. Now I need you all to help me work it out. Structures frame it; Mechanical, heat it; Electrical, light it; Interiors, carpets and drapes; Landscape, bushes and trees. Thanks team." Unfortunately, many projects look as if this was the process and far too many architects feel this is the role of their related design professions. One basis for successful team work lies in the respons-ability of each team member for knowing and understanding the unique capabilities of the other design professions as well as the limitations of her own. Another key to design success is the involvement of all design team members from the very onset of a project to provide a base for sound initial design decisions.
As a licensed landscape architect, one of my major reasons for returning to school was my realization that far too many architects consider their job finished at the building skin. Often, very little consideration is given to how the functions of the building relate to existing and proposed site conditions and topography. It is disturbing how little the U.C.D. architecture population knows about the capabilities of their fellow professionals and the expertise of each speciality. Undoubtedly, stereotypical semantics contribute to the problem, ie-"Landscapers, interior decorators. Many architects seem to believe that landscape architects should only be brought in at the end of a project to pick and, place trees and shrubs to help enhance (or salvage) the building's appearance. Actually, plant material selection usually
involves only 3- 5% of total design time and scope of services. The same situation applies to interior designers (known as interior architects in many states).
Again, a key element to efficient (and profitable) design work is the involvement of everyone at the onset of a project in order to get all the design concepts started in the right direction. From here, the architect is usually called on to orchestrate and coordinate a pro— duction that is aesthetically pleasing, functional and within the budget. Many delays and problems arising from unqualified decisionmaking out of one’s field are thus avoided. An example of the value of this procedure is seen in dealing with the primary interface of site to building. Many architects have a difficult time understanding grading and landform concepts. Unfortunately, they are not taught as part of the curriculum. In fact, they are often ignored. A good example of this would be the Walker Field Airport project in 600 Design a year ago. The steepest slope on the site was 3%, barely distinguishable from flat; yet, many solutions proposed an entry at one level and then a rise of a full level to walk onto the runway apron. This would have been cost prohibitive and would have required a complete change in the project. The jury team leader was a-ware of this, yet it was not a critique topic. Other design decisions commonly handled by landscape architects were similarly poorly handled (parking arrangements, vehicular circulation and building entry).
As design professionals, it is essential for us to understand the capabilities of those related to us. An excellent example of this attitude is the work coming from Paul Heath’s interdisciplinary studio group. Acquiring this understanding of capabilities can prevent considerable personal embarrassment due to ignorance and also provide for more efficient, comprehensive project solutions After all, which space is more enjoyable, personable, relaxing, inviting, flexible and stimulating to experience: Skyline Park (Lawrence Halprin, ASLA) or the 16th Street Mall (I.M.Pei, AIA)?
Daniel D. Dalziel (ASLA)
editor:
Your recent interview with Gary Long and the inquiries of the Curriculum Committee have contributed to a discussion of the role of architectural history and theory in a school of architecture. I would like to express my ideas on this subject offering: l)a summary of the debate conducted among architectural historians in seminars, at workshops* in conjunction with professional conferences and in the relevant journals; 2)my own experience as a lecturer and teacher; and 3)my personal observations , preferences and recommendations for our particular situation at the College of Design and Planning.
1. Architectural History and Theory: Service or Discipline? These are the extremes of a definition formulated by the last national meeting of the Society of Architectural Historians. Imagine the History and Theory program exclusively organized as a support service for studio design. The advantage would be that of a solid briefing about past typologies and morphologies for the students* problem at hand, much like a good attorney is briefed by his or her lawclerk before preparing a court case. It would be, indeed, a study of case histories. The defect in this is that the students are channeled into thinking about the material presented as History and Theory in one particular framework. This framework risks reflecting only the conventional wisdom of the day, ie. looking at the Italian Hill towns as backing up certain planning ideas of the 60s or using 18th century neoclassicism to support Post-Modern practices, etc.
The other extreme is History and Theory as a discipline. Here the curriculum would support the same sort of courses and format as would a Humanities program, regardless of its immediate relevance to design problems. Original research would be required. Slide identification, extensive reading in theory and exhaustive bibliographies would be demanded. It is, however, more the content than the form of the courses which defines this extreme of a separate discipline: perhaps (in this case) more obscure subject matter such as a course on Byzantine Churches.
The virtue, as I see it, of this extreme is that it teaches skills different fromkbut as necessary as» those acquired in the studio. It shows the student and future architect how she can pursue her education after she leaves college, how to use reference material, how to find her way around a library. Paradoxically, by exploring history at a certain distance from immediate studio problems, the
(continued on page 8)
Lamina t ions lamin
tions laminationslamina tion^MrLr^tions lamina tionslaminat ions laminations laminations laminations laminations


...architects are born with
original sin and it is only thro the opportunities of their careers to excel that they are able to redeem themselves
«
BL'OL -•, -
have been challenged by the request of Laminations to research and synthesize what influence architectural critics have on the profession. For this issue I have no conclusions, no product to push, no shattering insights; I'm still journeying.
In that everyone of us is either an active or passive critic, my first task was to narrow the scope of my research down to professional architectural critics, those individuals who are paid for such services. Still being too broad, I went to the critic's critics, the regulars in the field, the full timers, the pros. I found a small handful of influential trend setters who are subtly striving to modify our vision and responsiveness to the built environment. Not only do their jobs depend on change, but their personality types thrive on adversity and the processes of correction.
Architectural critics rarely come from the architectural profession and even more scarce are licensed architects in the field. They are educated first of all as journalists. It is more important for them to know how to write than what to write. Active critics marry the media. They have strong convictions towards a quality of life. They write to the lay person rather than directly to the architect. They are more versed in art history than the history of architecture. They tend to be cynical and vicious towards big business, developers, government, and Republicans. To them, architects are born with original sin and it is only through the opportunities of their careers to excel that they are able to redeem themselves.
National critics and trends have had-more impact on Denver's urban fabric than local introspection and generation. Denver design professionals seem always ripe for eastern osmosis. The region has been lagging seven to ten years behind the east coast as evident by when urban renewal, historic preservation, and the 16th Street Mall came to town.
Denver is without a resident architectural critic. Unlike New York, Chicago, Kansas City, San Francisco, or a number of other major U.S. cities, the two Denver newspapers feel that the demand is not there for such an individual. Neither Joanne Ditmer nor Max Price of the Post fill the cup. Ms. Ditmer may
have been, however, the single most influential person responsible for local historic preservation movement. It's unfortunate that Mr. Price dedicates two thirds of his articles to theatre and the other arts.
As a public environmental education service, the critic often acts as interpreter of architecture's complexities of form and function. To raise the awareness of a community to a quality of design is saintly.
Allen Tempko, architectural critic for the San Francisco Chronicle stepped into the programming process for the Oakland Museum as interpreter between the communities' needs and the architects. He remained instrumental throughout the design process steering the architects and museum committee towards a unique, compatible, and workable solution.
How easy it must have been when architecture had its rules and grand masters.
As a student of architecture, I find the challenge of distinguishing good from bad, right from wrong, and appropriate from inappropriate, a major undertaking. Design education is a moving target.
This fall I was armed and dangerous with the support of Tom Wolfe's "From Bauhaus to Our House" and Wolf Von Eckardt's Time magazine article slashing Michael Graves' tires. In facing my prejudice face to face, by absorbing as much Graves as I could during his Denver visit last month, I discovered just how vulnerable I am to charm. The rules, they are a changing.
The tools we learn in the classroom and in the field can be both beneficial and destructive. We can blind ourselves by our knowledge. Insight can transform into hindsight overnight without rhyme or reason. The critic is very real and always transforming, not unlike ourselves. Ada Louise Huxtable, retired architectural critic for the New York Times, said that she believes "...not only in complexity and contradiction but also in continuity and change. There are inevitable blind spots of the totally committed; the fast buck has shaped the scene as much as real need. There are false values behind the false fronts." Designer John Fena was once asked to share his New Year's Resolutions.
After a moment of pause he looked up and said, "To receive enlightenment."
Good for John, I'm still journeying.
Nathan Good
**■* •'»»*' *■»»
K:l w
*:«*<** a
*• tt'M lit
!>r
J»««• J;
M- :H! «?! **«* If
J*J» h
■»< s»i pii
•*: are* » w
% tin **;â– **
* «!»«{ ia»i« i««*. **■ .&***
*• Jfti <3| }***}
â– H-
1aminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminations


Architectural criticism occasionally stretches beyond the bounds of JEA. AD. and Skyline into the columns of mass media publications such as Time and Newsweek. In November both of these magazines included essays on architectural criticism.
The Time essay was particularly significant. Wolf Von Eckardt, Time's', some-time architecture critic, discussed
Helmut Jahn’s new [office tower design |for Houston.
In his own very |considerate way he saved all of us the intellectual turmoil of complicated criticism and reduced the building description to one very simple statement: "It's handsome". This was, by now, to be expected. In the August 23 Time, Von Eck-hardt deduced that Michael
Graves*Portland building is "ugly." C'mon Wolf! What does "ugly" mean? or "handsome"? What are the criteria? Instead of providing readers with an informative look at the pro and con, cause and effect design decisions involved in the two buildings, our intrepid critic scales an ivory tower and shouts from the top, "Ahh, there's an ugly, dangerous building and OHH, here's a handsome one."
Thanks, Mr. Critic, for nothing. The building becomes entirely irrational atid unexplainable, its worth dependent only on the subjective whim of the critic.
Even in Time, this baseless, superficial level of criticism would not be tolerated in dance, theatre or the visual arts; why then is it accepted in architecture.
The unfortunate result of this kind of criticism is that the person whose only source of architectural discussion is the mass media is left dependent on a critic. Through
some magical, higher level intuition the critic's keen eye can point to ugliness or handsomeness. The not-so-priviledged are left without a clue.
on ^Tie issue
his one brazen gesiuife.Tlic^sfrchi tect, Michael Graves, 48rauempts tp supplant modem architecture’s heroic industrialism with postmodern architecture’s heroic ... what? Perhaps it might be called Pop surrealism that uses classic design elements the way Walt Disney cartoons used the physiognomy of a rodent to create Mickey Mouse. For all its playfulness, however, the ^f\ Portland Building is (dangcrous.J
odtar
The trouble is that Graves’ zeal to overcome glass-box monotony has led him into the increasingly popular, mystic fantasy world that is populated by Tolkien’s hobbits./ Dungeons & Dragons, sundry com-' ic-strip characters, and the likes of the rubbery movie star E.T. It is a
world that is almost bevond beauty or ug-
11 n^C q 1rr»rvct Ka/'qiica /Ua ■
Building is uriy./Unfortunately. Graves’ (irrational gamesjnavc electrified architec-ture students everywhere, and they are now imitating him. He has become Pied Piper.
secret socieCTTTTxc**>-,’~rT
Boullee’s and Ledoux’s architectural, isions served little functional purpose?
:y ware-symbols, feelings and ideaaC, Graves’ shrine must accommodate a modern office and so vyith little enthusiasm..Th
The
GPaves, who is a painter and sculptor as well as an architect, had never built a large building before. A professor of architecture at Prinaeton, he has won awards for houses and additions to houses, but his national reputation rests mainly on his draw-ings of architectural |fantasies done in muted pastel pinks, cobal
rCTc not convinced. ‘An oversized, beribboned Christmas package."
____ saidTietro Bell use hi, 83, a
Portland resident who is one of the country’s most respected architects. Bel-luschi, however, later relented and said he was getting used to it. Other objectors persisted, calling^ the building [ “a turkey” and ^a giant jukebox.^/ Graves was asked plify hi<
desj
witfUCI
io dc seen .whether Graves’ heavy-handed jfop surrealisn^—“a dash of deco and a whiff of Ledoux,” as leading Postmodernist Architect Robert Venturi calls it—will influence workaday architecture. New inspirations are needed, but they should be inspirations that are real, joyful and charming. —By Wolf Von Eckardt
TIME. AUGUST 23.1982
DOLORES’ LECTURE!
Dolores Hayden, professor of Urban Planning at UCLA was in Denver on November 12 to speak on American city planning. Her topic was "Dream House or Ideal City?", in which she explored basic discrimination against women and their societal roles in city space planning.
Hayden's argument is heavily politicized. The ideal city, reflected in The Grand Domestic Revolution (1981) was an American city in which a complete spatial transformation would occur in order to right "material" (i.e. women and their unpaid, exploited roles as home-laborers) wrongs. But, says Hayden, the cause of all these wrongs was political, and in order to fight them feminist pioneers had to resort to political means, as well as fashionable Utopias featuring cooperative child care, housing, and kitchens.
While the people and movements Hayden profiled did a good job of criticizing the status quo, Hayden herself does not do such a good job of it. One can tell that it is an important subject, but she does not present it well enough to have the audience believe in it, although she obviously does. Her lecture was stilted, disjointed, often the fault of inadequate reading light.
Designers and planners lost their political idealism to the power brokers. Public planners and architects are unable to stem the tide of personal greed evidenced in this power, says Hayden, and in their pursuit of the profit in the "Dream House", the power brokers can afford to ignore the design and architecture schools. And why not? Architecture schools do not back idealistic visionary design. No wonder they are ignored in the design process, if one dare call it that.
Hayden weakly argued for a coalition of the people who inhabit the "Dream House" and designers and planners who can regain their political idealism. Unfortunately, politically conscious design is doomed to be potentially powerful instead of demonstrated power. No one will take it seriously (witness Soviet public housing) unless we concentrate on a genuine ideal ethic. Hayden's criticism of modern city design is accurate, but her theories simply do not bridge the gap to believable reality.
The political and social realities that create the "Dream House" need to be transferred to the idealist "ideal cityM. Can they? or should they? Professor Hayden failed to adequately answer this perennial American dilemna. Which one do we want?
Nicholas K. Matz
ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions laminations lamina t ions lamina t ions lami


page 6
The war continues within the school of architecture at UCD. The attacking forces are screaming, "We must have a philosophy of design if we are to ever establish a high caliber design school offering a more than adequate education." We need faculty who support and encourage a strong theoretical and philosophical approach to design. We've got to keep pace with New York, Harvard, Europe."
The defending army takes an opposing stance. "Design is design. It can be approached from many directions. We can and will develop our own philosophies. We don’t want any part of someone else's movement. We can think for ourselves."
Both sides are armed with ample artillary. Those firing cannon shots filled with images of a strongly philosophical design orientation say that in order to realize UCD's potential, the school must establish a dynamic design methodology: something to be accepted as a guide or used as a foil. In selecting a new architecture director, someone on the order of a Graves or Krier should have been given serious consideration.
Those guarding the gate look to the transition occurring in architecture as a very delicate period. Having ventured forth from the modern movement, free to take any approach that seems appropriate, awash in possibilities, let’s not let ourselves be pushed into another dictatorial design mold. Let’s look at some of the technological advances being made and see how they might improve our architecture.
The defending forces seem to have won a major battle in the appointment of DonWoolard as the new director of the architecture program. They see Don as being a step forward, an educator responding to the demands of his age.
With the crossfire still ricocheting, we decided to take a step behind the lines into the design classes to investigate reverberations and ongoing concerns. We wanted to find out how design is being talked about, how its emphasis varies from studio to studio, how the students perceive it and how the faculty presents it.
tually the universal issues an architect must confront with each problem (particularly that of a solution being an organic outgrowth of a site’s potential), but felt his design crits are lacking in advice on how to deal with specific problems in a concrete way. Many apparently feel intimidated by his purely conceptual approach and have suggested that his teaching abilities are better suited to the 700 level.
Depending on the student’s background and orientation, Gary Crowell’s approach to design can be either very effective or somewhat limiting. Some students miss the pure idea exchange which seems to characterize the other sections. Their sentiment is that he gets too specific too soon without allowing the class to fully digest the essence of a problem. Others find his methods most satisfying. In maintaining a calm, consistent attitude toward design, Crowell seems to be trying to lead the student by encouraging much experimentation with specific design solutions.
Bob Behrens approach to teaching design is described as holistic. He encourages the student to think about a given problem* in conceptual terms before attempting any specific solutions; but, after laying a groundwork of conceptual a-nalysis intended to serve as a basis for generating successful design solutions, Behrens is found to be quite adept at helping students solve specific dilemmas. Although he is generally found to be both demanding and intense, students willing to respond to this find him quite helpful,
Chester believes in discussion, not confrontation, and he is always ready to discuss things with his students. Chester is a storehouse of information and anecdotes on Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus, and students should take advantage of this, and of his competence and good humor. Most students who have had Chester in the past recommend him highly, and rightly so. Chester is an inspired teacher, dedicated to the art and to his students.
Dave Decker: The first few days with Dave Decker are sheer terror. He has a razor-sharp, highly intelligent, cynical wit, and this is so different from the teachers that students have had before, that it takes some time to get used to his approach. Dave is not ashamed to speak his mind in an extremely direct way, and he pulls no punches. If he doesn’t like a project, he will say so, and more. He has a highly developed sense of design, and the advice and direction Dave gives are invaluable. There are students in his group who say that he is the only design teacher that has ever given them direction, and taught them process. Beneath the tough, cynical exterior, there beats the heart of a fine designer, an idealist strongly dedicated to architectural education. He is an educated, highly informed and aware teacher, and students who take Dave can benefit greatly.
Leslie Ullman: In social situations
($00
Leslie is a fine person to have around. She can be pleasant and good-humored, and has a wit that shines.
In the classroom, there is a wide range of opinions about her. Students who have had her in the past suggest that any student who is thinking about taking her as a teacher, should definitely talk to her before deciding, and should also talk with students who have had her before.
Students interviewed in Michael
Murphy’s 500 Design section generally praised his ability to address concep-
Here are the results of an informal survey taken in the 600-level studio:
Chester Nagel: Chester is an institution at UCD. A student of Wal-. ter Gropius, Chester is a gentle, but incisive teacher and critic. He has certain things he especially likes to see in designs, and students who take Chester as a teacher should be aware of them. He likes a nice, clear graphic presentation, and clear, defined ideas. He may not always agree with you, but when he doesn't, he talks with the student in a soft, reasonable way.
Duane Nuzum: Duane is a large, funny, expansive man, and a fine teacher He has, hidden in him, a wild streak of wicked humor, carefully camouflaged by a more urbane, balanced exterior. Duane is an informed, educated teacher, and he can communicate his ideas in a persuasive, non-agressive way. During big crits Duane can be a calming presence, and he will often attempt to point out the especially good parts of a design. The worse aspects of a design he will discuss, frankly, in private sessions, and this discretion is much appreciated by many of his
nationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslamii


I
students. Duane has a fine, developed sense of design and aesthetics, and this influences his teaching. In his checkered pants and ever-present cigars, Duane is an unforgettable presence in the studio , and students should make a special effort to seek him out, for he has much to contribute.
Itnr
The Energy Studio is the design emphasis of the 2nd professional degree Master of Architecture/Energy Program. A
I limited enrollment in this new program has provided openings within the studio for students in the 700 level of design.
This semester the studio has been taught by Steve Toernoy, a former SERI employee.
His emphasis has been on energy-issues related to commercial buildings. The course included work on construction cost estimates and computer generated energy analysis. Some students complained about the time spent number crunching, but as the semester progressed, a light began to shine, (that's daylight, of course). Numbers were transformed into concepts which began to suggest design stategies affecting form, space, fenestration, ancl other architectural
I concerns. At this point, quantitative issues dictated by the numbers became qualitative issues of aesthetic design.
Student complaints about the time spent with calculations met with sympathy from Toernoy himself. The problem, he says, is that the energy program has not yet become well-defined; it is still developing. The direction of the program should be toward a point where the technical aspects are being taught in other classes and the studio is used for de-'sign%employing skills acquired in these.
As of yet, however, the other energy classes have not been effectively synchronized with the studio.
Toernoy admits that a major compromise was made in the studio on this account, but he insists that students could not have progressed as far as they have without first understanding the issues which needed to be addressed and this the calculations effectively did..
He suggests that his biggest design bias is his belief in climate-accepting
I buildings as better places for people.
This bias is evident in the work of those in his studio.
First, he tried his new teaching method in Lebanon. It worked fairly well, so Bob Kindig felt he was ready to teach it here at UCD in his 700 Design Studio. Having a studio concentrate on the design process specifically is an approach not often tried. Emphasis is not on what is designed, not on programming or site evaluation, not on the end product, but on how the student arrived at that product.
Kindig*s approach is a logical progression of presenting options regarding the problem, making decisions as to priorities and user needs, discovering design pieces and concepts, then synthesizing an end product. He feels this method avoids the circular efforts which sometimes occurr when priorities are not clearly delineated.
And the students* opinions? The opportunity to choose one’s own design problem, program it and then design it is a wonderful freedom. Also the chance to specifically consider how designs are created is an excellent exercise regardless of one’s opinion of Kindig*s particular process. Some students disagree with his method as being a recipe for design; others have found its logical organization very helpful. Completed projects, as presented through "process", do reveal a progression of ideas and the direction of the designer’s efforts. This studio should improve with each semester Kindig teaches it.
For Paul Heath’s 700 design studio the important thing in the design-crit situation is communication. He sees the goal of the design studio as more than just making good buildings. The studio is a way of investigating problems. The resultant skill can be applied to any situation.
Paul prefers to think of students as consumers buying education. To a certain extent they should know what they need and what they can demand and expect for the investment.
The context in which design criticism takes place is important; Paul prefers that it occur in "expanded desk crit£(ie. small groups).
While hi-rise buildings may currently be in disfavor among idealistic young architecture students, more of them signed up for the Hi-rise Studio this fall than there were spaces. For most, however, the motive was to have G.K.
Vetter as an instructor before he retires, as he claims he will be doing after this semester. G.K. and his hi-rises may certainly be appropriate as the final studio experience before a student graduates and moves into the ’real world'. He is a realist to the
point of cynicism, yet he can respond with a decisive insight.
Weekly crits are held among groups of 3-4 students and everyone is expected to contribute. G.K. seems to offer the same respect to his students as they have for him. He prefers to have students make their own decisions, but does criticize when ’necessary’. His gruff wit remains a mask for the wealth of experience which he shares when asked.
Some praised it, others criticized it; but most of the thesis students agreed: there is no specific design philosophy being espoused by their advisors. One student commented that there is no emphasis in terms of architectural direction for the 80s. Some said that faculty members never acheived an understanding of specific student direction. Others, while acknowledging the lack of available faculty, praised the dedication of those who were involved.
Many cited the programming phase involved in the thesis prep course as a vital contribution to good design in thesis. Virtually all of the students who worked in the 3rd floor studio commented on the tremendous benefit to be gained from the interaction with other students.
A great educational experience was gained through the exposure to the many different types of projects tackled.
STAFF
ns lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions laminat ions lamina t ions lamina tions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t


page 8
see page 7
PAUL HEATH WITH TWO CONSUMERS
0
not allowed in the building at anytime
Heath prefers to think of students as consumers - buying education...

the sausage in the bun
By D.J.
This time please take the column seriously. We have heard an incredible rumor, just a short time ago, but it’s only a rumor and could not be published elsewhere in the paper because it couldn’t be confirmed. Chris, the editor, tells us it has something to do with "integrity." Since this column's stock-in-trade is rumors, we thought we could report this story here without Chris' objections. If this appears in print, you know our guess was right.
This is the report:
Early next year, with the coming changes in the school's administration, there is likely to be a radical change in the school's direction and curriculum. While the energy program will be maintained, there will be a shift in emphasis and the school's most major efforts will be directed to design philosophy, aesthetics, and the study of architectural history. One possible objective: the creation of a Ph.D. degree in architectural aesthetics and philosophy.
Possible invited speakers: Kenneth Frampton, Colin Rowe, Robert Venturi, Charles Moore. (There appeared to be no explanation regarding the funding of this ambitious program). We asked, separately, two design teachers about this and they each laughed and said,
"I sure hope it's true." But when we asked for a direct quote they each said,"no comment."
We are not sure what this rumor means, and it is quite possible that there is no truth in it whatever. We simply cannot imagine where the funds for such a renewed effort would originate.
We do not believe this story at all, and we urge on our readers great caution, in case they hear this story from another source.
Speaking of disbelieving, elsewhere in this issue there appears an article in which students evaluate their design teachers. How can anybody believe their accounts? It stands to reason that those students who were asked to contribute their opinions to the survey were not only biased, but had an "ax to grind," in one direction or another. Will anyone take those opinions seriously? We sure don't.
Dogs are not allowed in the building at anytime - that is a Department of Health Regulation.
(continued from page 3)
student may eventually have a better chance to arrive at insights facilitating design solutions. On the other hand, the defect is that this approach may cordon off history and theory in the student's mind as an isolated, tedious subject with no visible connection to the process of design.
2. My observation of the spectrum of these approaches comes from teaching at the School of Architecture at the South-bank Polytechnic in London for 5 years and various colleges in England before that, graduate study there and in France, an undergraduate education in humanities with a strong emphasis on architectural history at Smith College and, of course, teaching at the CDP.
The exclusive studio backup approach was used at Thames Polytechnic in London.
A one week module was reserved at the beginning of each design problem for an intensive 5 days of lectures on history, structures, psychology, etc. related to that problem. As far as I know there was, apart from this, little formal teaching of history and theory. In order for this format to succeed, studio programs need to be prepared at least 6 months in advance so that support people can prepare properly. It takes time to assure that one's contribution will be worthwhile.
For a period, the University of Virginia School of Architecture veered towards a scholarly, humanities-type approach. It came to be resented by both students and faculty as too arcane and has been modified.
3. Philosophically, I think UCD tries to take the best of both Service and Discipline, avoiding the extremes. I agree with this. Two factors in the school benefit the History and Theory program. Because of recent trends in architecture (Post Modernism, Contextualism, Tendenza), history is now a priviledged subject. Its relevance to architecture does not need to be justified. It is a pleasure to teach now; I am glad I was a student and not a professor in the 60s when attitudes were quite different!
Also, at UCD communication between teachers of design and support subjects is excellent. This is hard to quantify or to write into a curriculum, yet it is a crucial element of a successful program. Informal interchanges of a basic kind have taken place. We seem to have a good balance of sharing and professional autonomy. Day-to-day cooperation among the faculty is not to be underestimated. '
On matters of detail, these are my personal recommendations:
Keep the focus of the formal courses on the 19th and 20th centuries.
This is appropriate in a School of Architecture (tilt towards service). I am, however, testing how far we can depart from this precept and remain viable. The American Architecture course was a experiment. Although our visual cultural heritage is grist for the design mill, the course was not exclusively modern. I envision courses on, perhaps, The Classical Tradition, The Romantic Tradition, Etc.
I compromise on quantity, but, I hope, not on quality of work demanded. My students are studying to be architects, not historians and I recognize this.
What shall we do about a general survey course? One should graduate with a basic knowledge of at least the Western architectural tradition. Shall such a course be required for admission or provided at summer school? If we can afford only one full-time historian, should she teach a survey - with less time for seminar courses - or should a part-time faculty member take it on?
What is the place of original research by students? I think it should be encouraged with an emphasis on local history. There is an excellent facility in the Western History Library. Although I think this should remain a minority interest and optional, Dolores Hayden told me she requires a ten-page primary research paper from her architectural students at UCLA.
Budget regulates this recommendation: more visiting scholars to teach history.
To minimize costs perhaps an exchange between UCD and other universities. Along with the continued series of outside lecturers, we have also started informal reciprocal visits with faculty from Boulder and D.U.
I realize that p prime concern of students is the design philosophy expressed in studio, not in other classes.I feel less able to comment on this. My own approach is catholic. I do not take an advocacy approach towards theory nor am I a spokesperson for a particular movement (although someone else might omit feminist architectural history); however, I do have strong views about the place of history and theory in the school. A designer should acquire as much of a repertoire of images as possible, a combination of sensuous data and understanding that comes from scholarship. Travel facilitates this; so does reading (which is cheaper). I want my students to understand, and therefore be in control of, the forms they use. I hope for a resonance of meaning in those forms to which history and theory can contribute.
Francine Haber
ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina t ions lamina tionslaminat ions laminations laminations laminations laminations laminations la


Full Text

PAGE 1

slaminationslaminationslamina nslaminationslaminat

PAGE 2

2 contents: staff: EDITOR:Design Criticism: professional and notso-professional "With the cross-fire still ricocheting," LAMINATIONS takes a look behind the lines into the UCD design studios. Will UCD soon be offer ing a Ph.D. in archi tectural aesthetics? D.J. seems to think so Christopher G . Gallagher STAFF WRITERS: Nathan Good Tobias Guggenheimer Nils Hj errnan Dan Jansensen Nicholas K. Matz Auguste Mousalli Frank Ooms Anney Wright GRAPHICS: Lila Rioth Kai Tarum PHOTOGRAPHY: Frank Ooms ARCH ARCH ARCH ARCH PCD PCD ARCH ARCH ALUM ARCH ARCH calendar: Winter Session January 3-21, 1983 Application Deadline December 15, 1982 Spring Semester Walk-in registration week of January 17, 1983 Semester begins January 24, 1983 Spring Break March 21-5, 1983 Last day of classes May 13' 1983 Commencement May 14, 1983 dolores' notes: Library Hours: Dec. 16-22 Dec. 23-Jan. 2 Jan. 3-21 9:00-5:00 CLOSED 9:00-6:00M-Th 9:00-5:00 F Bromley Hours for Interim Periods Mon.-Fri. 7:00-5:30 Saturday 7:00-5:30 Sunday CLOSED If you need to be in the building after hours, please arrange for a key irnrnedia tely Dogs are not allowed in the building at any time -that is a Department of Health regulation. John Prosser called the last issue of Laminations,"the best ever." Gary Long said that it was "pretty." Chester Nagel's comments were:"provocative, informative." So, we decided that we would have 1 to undergo a major overhaul. (Didn't 1 we just do that?) Here I am • _ r our si!ry graPhics department has •I shifted gears again. Well, at least (), we are out of last years pattern, • ..,!z; l l During the last semester, students ! watched as Michael Graves, David Lewis, j Ed Mazria, and William Mitchell each ! pointed toward a different direction for I the future of architecture and design. Time and Newsweek excited design students everywhere with their thought ,. provoking, informative architecture reviews. 1 Allen Tempko, the San Francisco Chronicle's art and architecture critic, flew in to tell all of us designers to, "Live free or die." (Don't car owners tn New Hampshire do that?) Now I know G> Q; , confused. iJ: ---------------In response to the above happenings Laminations chose as topics of discussion 1) architectural criticism and 2) design education in the studio. Our look has changed again, but our goal remains the same: to provide relevant discussion that serves as a basis for further dialogue and debate. !NATIONS IS PUBLISHED SPORADICALLY BY THE STUDENTS OF THE COLLEGE OF DESIGN AND PLANNING AT THE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT DENVER. THROUGH THE HAZE WE READ THE ADDRESS OVER THE DOOR AS 1100 14th STREET, DENVER, COLORADO 80202. r l ionslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninationslarninati

PAGE 3

letters: THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED IN THIS NEWSPAPER DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THOSE OF THE EDITORIAL STAFF OR OF ANY OFFICIAL OF THE UNIVERSITY. THEY DO REFLECT THE UNCONTROLLABLE URGE OF OUR VERBOSE COLLEAGUES TO SEE THEIR NAMES IN PRINT. 'IF YOU SHARE THIS PREDILECTION, WE WELCOME YOUR LITERARY CONTRIBUTIONS. In today's high pressure, fast-paced finish-it-yesterday world of desig n pro fession a l s , there is a very narrow p ath whic h l eads to success. Based on legal, economi c and chronologie constraints affecting pro jests of every type, the architect is n o l o nger expected to " do ita l l." T h e successful, efficient desig n firm has learn e d a basic componen t essential to staying i n business is team work. Note tha t t eam work has various interpretatio ns. Award-winning team work does NOT mean a n a r chitect saying, "OK, gan g , I 've got this g reat idea designed. Now I need yo u all t o help me work it out. Structures f rame it; Mech anical, heat it; Electrical, light it; Interiors, carpets a nd drapes; Landscape, bushes and trees. Thanks team." U nfortunatel y , m a n y projects look as if this was the process and far too m a n y a r c hitect s feel this is the r o l e of the i r relat e d design p rofessi ons. One basi s for successful team w ork lies in the responsability of each team member for knowing and und erstanding the unique capabilities of the othe r desi g n professions as well as the limitations of her own. Another key t o design success is the involvement of all design team members from the very a project to provide a base for sound initial d esign decisions. As a licensed landscape architect, o n e of my major reasons for returning t o sch oo l was m y realization that far too many a r chitects consider their job finished a t the building skin. Often, very little consideration is given to h o w the f un ctions of the building relate to existing a nd proposed site conditions and topography. It is disturbing how little the U .C.D. architecture population knows about the capabilities of their fellow professionals and the expertise of each speciality. Undoubtedly, stereotypica l semantics contribute to the problem, ie. "Landscapers, interior decorators." M a n y architects seem to believe tha t landscape a r chitects should only be brought in a t the end of a project to pick and,place trees and shrubs to help enhance (or salvage) the building's appear a nce. A c tually, plant selection usually involves only 3 -5% of total design time and scope of services. The same situation applies to interior designers (known as interior architects in many states). Again, a key element to efficient (and profitable) design work is the involvement of e veryone at the onset of a project in order to get all the design concepts started in the right direction. From here, the a rchitec t is usually called on to orchestrate and coordinate a pro-duction that is aesthetically pleasing, functional a nd within the budget. Many delays and problems arising from unqualified decisionmaking out of one's field a r e thus avoided. An example of the value of this procedure is seen in dealing with the primary interface of site to building . Many architec t s have a difficult time understanding g r ading and landform concept s . Unfortuna t e ly, they are not taught as part of the curriculum. I n fact, they are often ignored. A good examp l e of this would be the Walker F ield Airport project i n 600 Design a year ago. T h e steepest slope on the site was 3%, b a rely distinguishable f rom flat; yet, many solutions proposed an entry a t o n e l e v e l a nd then a rise of a full leve l t o walk onto the runway apron. This would h a v e been cost prohibitive a nd would have required a complete change in the pro ject. The jury team leader was a ware of this , yet it was n o t a critique t op i c . Other design decisions commonl y h andled by landscape architects were similarly poorly handled (p arking arrangements , vehicular circulati o n a n d build-ing entry). As desig n professionals, it is essentia l for us t o understand the cap abilities of those relat e d t o us. An excellent examp l e of this attitude i s the work co min g from Paul Heath's interdisciplinary studio group. Acquiring this understanding of capabilities can prevent considerable personal embarrassment du e to ignorance and also provide for more efficient, comprehensive project solutions After all, whic h space is mor e enjoyable, personable, relaxing, inviting, flexible a nd stimulating t o experience: Skyline Park (Lawrence Halprin, ASLA) o r the 16th S Mall (I.M.Pei, AlA)? Daniel D. Dalziel (ASLA) Your recent interview with Gary Lon g and the inquiries of the Curric ulum Committee have contributed t o a discussion of the role of architectura l history and theory in a school of a r chitecture. I page 3 would like to express my ideas on this subject offering: l)a. summary of the debate conducted among architectural historians in seminars, at workshops, in conjunction with professional conferences a nd in the relevant journals; 2)my own experience as a lecturer and teacher; and 3)my personal observations , preferences and recommendations for our p articular situ ation at the College of Desig n and Planning . 1. Architectural History and The ory: Service or Discipline? These are the extremes of a d efinitio n formulated by the last national meeting of the Society of Architectural Historians. Imagine the Hi s tory a nd Theory program exclusivel y o rganize d as a support s ervice for studio d e sign. The advantage would be that of a solid briefing about past typol ogies and morphologies for the students ' problem a t hand, much like a good attorney is briefed by his o r her l awc l erk befor e preparing a court case. It would b e , indeed, a study of case histories. T h e defect in this is that the students a r e c h anneled into thinking about the material presented as Histo r y and Theory in one parti cular f ram e work. This f r amewo r k risks reflecting only the conventional wisdom of the day, ie. looking a t the Italian Hill towns as backing up certain planning ideas of the 60s o r using 18th century neoclassicism t o support PostModer n practices, e tc. The othe r extreme i s History and T heory as a discipline . Here the curriculum would support the same sort of courses and format as would a Humanities prog ram, regardless of its immediate relevance t o design problems. Original research would be required. Slide identification, ext e n s ive reading in theory and exh austive biblio g r aphies wou l d b e demanded . It is, however, more the conte n t tha n the for m of the courses whic h defines this extreme of a separate discipline: perhaps (in this case) more obscure subject matter such a s a course o n Byzantine Churches. The virtue , as I see it, of this ex treme is tha t it teaches skill s different from, but a s necessary as, those acquired in the studio. It s h ows the student a nd future architec t how s h e can pursue her educatio n after s h e leaves college, how t o use reference material, how to find her way around a library . Paradoxically, by exploring history a t a certain dis t a nce f rom immediate studio problems, the (continued o n page 8) \

PAGE 4

have been c h allenged by the request of Laminations t o research and synthesize w h a t influence architectural critics have o n the profession . For this issue I have no conclusions, n o product to push, no shattering insights; I'm still journeying. In that everyone of us is either an active or passiv e critic, my first task was to narrow the scope of m y r e search down to professional architectural critics, those individuals who are paid for such services. Still being too broad, I went to the critic's critics, the regulars in the field, the full timers, the pros. I found a small handful of influential trend setters who are subtly striving to modify our vision and responsiveness to the built environment. Not only do their jobs depend on change, but their personality types thrive on adversity and the processes of correction. Architectural critics rarely come from the architectural profession and even more s carce are licensed architects in the field. They are educated first of all as journalists. It is mor e important for them to know how to write than what to write. Active critics marry the media. They have strong convictions towards a quality of life. They write to the lay person rather than d irectly to the architect. They are more versed in art history than the h istory of architecture. They tend to be cynical and vicious towards big business, developers, government, and Republicans. To them, architects are born with original and it is only through t h e opportunities of their careers to e xcel that they a r e able to redeem themselves. National critics and trends have had more impact on Denver's urban fabric than local introspection and gen eration. Denver design professionals seem always ripe for eastern osmosis. The region has been lagging seven to ten years behind the east coast as evident by when urban renewal, historic preservation, and the 16th Street Mall came t o town. Denver is without a resident architectural critic. Unlike New York, Chicago, Kansas City, San Francisco, or a number of other major u.s. cities, the two Denver newspapers feel that the demand is not there for such an individual. Neither Joanne Ditmer nor Max Price of fill the cup. Ms. Ditmer may ... architects are and original sin opportunities of excel that they born with it is only the their careers are able to them s e 1 v e s • • . . . • • . . . . • • • • • • • hav e been, however, the single most influential person responsible for local historic preservation movement. It's unfortunate that Mr. Price dedicates two thirds of his articles to theatre and the other arts. As a public environmental education service, the critic often acts as interpreter of architecture's comp lexities of form and function. To raise the awareness of a community to a quality of design i s saintly. Allen Tempko , critic for the San Francisco Chronicle stepped into the p rogramming process for the Oakland as interpreter between the communities' needs and the architects. He remained instrumental throughout the design process steering the architects and museum committee towards a unique, compatible, and workable solution. How easy it must have been when architecture had its rules and grand masters. As a student of architecture, I find the challenge of distinguishing good from bad, right from wrong, and appropriate from inappropriate, a major undertaking. Design education is a moving target. This fall I was armed and dangerous with the support of Tom Wolfe's "From Bauhaus to Our House" and Wolf Von Eckardt's Time magazine article slashing Michael Graves' tires. In facing my prejudice face to face, by absorbing as much Graves as I could during his Denver visit last month, I discovered just how vulnerable I am to charm. The r ules, they are a c hanging. The tools we learn in the classroom and in the field can be both beneficial and destructive. We can blind ourselves by our knowledge. Insight can transform into hindsight overnight without rhyme o r reason. The critic is very real and always transforming, not unlike ourselves. Ada Louise Huxtable, architectural c ritic for the New York Times, said that she believes " . . . not only in complexity and contradiction b u t also in continuity and change. There are inevitable b lind spots of the totally committed; the fast buck has shaped the scene as much a s real need. There are false values behind the false fronts." Designer John Fena was once asked to share his New Year's Resolutions. After a moment of pause he looked up and said, "To receive enlightenment." Good for John. I'm still journeying. Nathan Good I laminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslamin ationslaminationslaminatio n s :

PAGE 5

Architectural criticism occasionally stretches beyond the bounds of l:a, and Skyline into the columns of mass media publications such as and Newsweek. In November both of these magazines included essays on architectural criticism. The Time essay was particularly sig nificant.w;;lf Von Eckardt, sometime architecture critic, discussed Helmut Jahn's new office tower design for Houston. In his own very considerate way he saved all of us the intellectual turmoil of complicated criticism and reduced the building description to one very simple statement: "It's handsome". This was, by now, to be expected. In the August 23 Time, Von Eckhardt deduced that Michael Graves' 'Portland building is "ugly." C 'mon Wolf ! What does "ugly" mean? or "handsome" ? What are the crit eria? Instead of providing readers with an informative look at the pro a nd con, cause and effect design decisions involved in the two buildings, our intrepid critic scales an ivory tower and shouts from the top, "Ahh, there's an ugly, dangerous building and OHH, here's a handsome one." Thanks, Mr. Critic, for nothing. The building becomes entirely irrational aha unexplainable, its worth dependent only on the subjective wh-im of the critic. Even in Time, this baseless, superficial level of criticism would not be tolerated in dance, theatre or the visual arts; why then is it accepted in architecture. The unfortunate result of this kind of critici5m is that the person whose only source of architectural discussion is the mass media is left dependent on a critic. Through some magical, higher level intuition the critic's keen eye can point to ugliness or handsomeness. The notso-priviledged are left without a clue. Christopher G. Gallagher heavy dash of deco and a . as leading Post modernist Architect Robert Venturi calls it-wiJI influence workaday architecture . New inspirations are needed , but the y should be inspirations that are real. joyful and charming . -By WolfVonCckilrdt page 5 DOLORES' LECTURE: Dolores Hayden , professor of Urban Planning at UCLA was in Denver on Novembe r 12 to speak on American city planning. Her topic was "Dream House or Ideal City?", in which she explored basic discrimination against women and their societal roles in city space planning. Hayden's argument is heavily politicized. The ideal city, reflected in The Grand Domestic Revolution (19 81 ) was an American city in which a complete spatial transformation would occur in order t o right "material" (i.e. women and their unpaid, exploited roles a s home-laborers) wrongs. But, says Hayden, the cause of all these wrongs was political, and in order to fight them feminist pioneers had to resort to political means as well as fashionable Utopias featuring cooperative child care, housing, and kitchens. m1ile the people a n d movements Hayden profiled did a good job of criticizing the status quo, Hayden herself does not do such a good job of it. One can tell that it is an important subject, but she does n o t present it well enough to have the audience believe in it, although she obviously does. Her lee tu re was stilted, disjoin ted, of ten the fault of inadequate reading light. Designers a nd planners lost their political idealism to the power brokers. Public planners and architects are unable to stem the tide o f personal greed evi d e nced in this power, says Hayden, and in their pursuit of the profit in the "Dream Hous e", the power brokers can affor d to ignore design and architecture schools. And why not? Architecture schools do not back idealistic visionary design. No wonder they are ignored in the desig n process, if one dare call it that. Hayden '"eakly argued for a coalition of the people who inhabit the " Dream House" and designers and planners who can regain their political idealism. Un fortunately, politically conscious design is doomed to be potentially powerful instead of demonstrated power. No one will take it seriously (witness Soviet public housing) unless we concentrate o n a genuine ideal ethic. Hayden's criticism of modern city design is accurate , but her theories simply do not bridge the gap to believable reality . The political and social realities that create the "Drea m House" need to be transferred to the idealist "ideal city". Can they? or should they? Professor Hayden failed to adequately answer this perennial American dilemna. Whi c h one do we want? I Nicholas K. Matz ionslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslami

PAGE 6

page 6 The war continues within the school of architecture at UCD. The attacking forces are screaming, must have a philosophy of design if we are to ever establish a high caliber design school offering a more than adequate education." We need faculty who support and encourage a strong theoretical and philosophical approach to design. We've got to keep pace with New York, Harvard, Europe." The defending army takes an opposing stance. "Design is design. It can be approached from many directions. We can and will develop our own Philosophies. We don't want any part of someone else's movement . We can think for ourselves." Both sides are armed with ample artillary. Those firing cannon shots filled with images of a strongly philosophical design orientation say that in order to realize UCD' s potential, the school must establish a dynamic design methodology: something to be accepted as a guiqe or used as a foil. In selecting a new architecture director, someone on the order of a Graves or Krier should have been given serious consideration. Those guarding the gate look to the transition occurring in architecture as a very delicate period. Having ventured forth from the modern movement, free to take any approach that seems appropriate, awash in possibilities, let's not let ourselves be pushed into another dictatorial design mold. Let's look at some of the technological advances being made and see how they might improve our architecture. The defending forces seem to have won a major battle in the appointment of Don Woolard as the new director of the architecture program. They see Don as being a step forward, a n educator responding to the demands of his age. With the crossfire still ricocheting , we decided to take a step behind the lines into the design classes to investigate reverberations and ongoing concerns. We wanted to find out how design is being talked about, how its emphasis varies from studio to studio, how the students perceive it and how the faculty presents it. Students interviewed in Michael Murphy's 500 Design section generally praised his ability to address concep-tually the universal issues an architect must confront with each problem (particularly that of a solution being an organic outgrowth of a site's potential), but felt his design crits are lacking in advice on how t o deal with specific problems in a concrete way. Many apparently feel intimidated by his purely conceptual approach and have suggested that his teaching abilities are better suited to the 700 level. Depending on the student's background and orientation, Gary Crowell' s approach to desig n can be either very effective or somewhat limiting . Some students miss the pure idea exchange which seems to characterize the other sections. Their sentiment is that he gets too specific t oo soon without allowing the class to fully digest the essence of a problem. Others find his methods most satisfying. In maintaining a calm, consistent attitude toward design, Crowell seems t o be trying to lead the student b y encouraging muc h experimentation with specific design solutions. Bob Behrens approach to teaching design is described as holistic. He encourages the student to think about a given problem.in conceptual terms before attempting any specific solutions; but, after laxing a groundwork of conceptual analysis intended to serve as a basis for generating successful design solutions, Behrens is found to be quite adept at helping students solve specific dilemmas. Although he is generally found to be both demanding and intense, students willing to respond t o this find him quite helpful. Here are the results of an informal survey taken in the 600-level studio: Chester Nagel: Chester is an institution at UCD. A student of Wal-. ter Gropius, Chester is a gentle, but incisive teacher and critic. He has certain things he especially likes to see in designs, and students who take Chester as a teacher should be aware of them. He likes a nice, clear graphic presentation, and clear, defined ideas. He may not always agree with you, but when he doesn't, he talks with the student in a soft, reasonable way. Chester believes in discussion, not confrontation, and he is always ready to discuss things with his students. Chester is a storehouse of information and anecdotes on Walter Gropius and the Bauhaus, and students should take advantage of this, and of his competence and good humor. Most students who have had Chester in the past recommend him highly, and rightly so. Chester is an inspired teacher, dedicated to the art and to his students. Dave Decker: The first few days with Dave Decker are sheer terror. He has a razor-sharp, highly intelligent, cynical wit, and this is so different from the teachers that students have had before, that it takes some time to get used to his approach. Dave is not ashamed to speak his mind in an extremely direct way, and he pulls no punches. If he doesn't like a project, he will say so, and more. He has a highly developed sense of design, and the advice a nd direction Dave gives are invaluable. There are students in his group who say that he is the only design teacher that has ever given them direction, and taught them process. Beneath the tough, cynical exterior, there beats the heart of a fine designer, an idealist strongly dedicated t o architectural education. He is an educated, highly informed and aware teacher, and students who take Dave can benefit greatly. Leslie Ullman: In social situations Leslie is a fine person to have around. She can be pleasant and good-humored, and has a wit that shines. In the classroom, there is a wide range of opinions about her. Students who have had her in the past suggest that any student who is thinking about taking her as a teacher, should definitely talk to her before deciding, and should also talk with students who have had her before. Duane Nuzum: Duane is a large, funny, expansive man, and a fine teacher. He has, hidden in him, a wild streak of wicked humor, carefully camouflaged by a more urbane, balanced exterior. Duane is an informed, educated teacher, and he can communicate his ideas in a persuasive, non-agressive way. During big crits Duane can be a calming presence, and he will often attempt to point ou t the especially good parts of a design. The worse aspects of a design he will discuss, frankly, in private sessions, and this discretion is much appreciated by many of his nationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslamil

PAGE 7

students. Duane has a fine, developed sense of design and aesthetics, and this influences his teaching. In his checkered pants and ever-present cigars, Duane is a n unforgettable presence in the studio , and students should make a special effort to seek him out, for he has much to contribute. The Energy Studio is the design emphasis of the 2nd professional degree Master of Architecture/Energy Program. A limited enrollment in this new program h a s provided openings within the studio for students in the 700 level of design. This semester the studio h a s been taught by Steve Toernoy, a former SERI employee. His emphasis has been on e n e r gy-issues related to commercial buildings. The course included work on construction cost estimates and computer generated energy analysis. Some student s complained about the time spent number crunching, but as the semester progressed, a light began to shine, (that's daylight, of course). Numbers wer e transfo rmed into co ncepts which began t o s uggest design stategies affecting form, space , fenestration, and other architectural concerns. A t this point, quantitative issues dictat ed b y the numbers became qualitative issues of aesthetic design. Student complaints about the time spent With calculations met with sympathy from Toernoy himself. The problem, he says, is that the energy program has not yet become well-defined; it is still developing . T h e direction of the program should be toward a point where the technical aspects are being taught in other classes a nd the studio is used for de skills acquired in these. As of yet, however, the other energy classes have not been effectively synchronized with the studio. Toernoy admits that a major cornpromise was made in the studio on this account, but he insists tha t students could not have progressed as far as they have without first understanding the issues which needed to be addressed a n d this the cal culations effectively did .. He suggests tha t his biggest design bias is his belief in climate-accepting building s as better places for people. This bias is evident in the work of those in his studio. The first Decker few days with Dave are sheer terror. page 7 First, he tried his new teaching method in Lebanon. It worked fairly well, so Bob Kindig felt he was ready to teach it here at UCD in his 700 Design Studio. Having a studio concentrate on the design process specifically is an approach not often tried. Emphasis is not on what is designed, not on programming or site evaluation, not on the end product, but on how the student arrived at that product. Kindig's approach is a logical progression of presenting options regarding the problem, making decisions as to priorities and user needs, discovering design pieces a nd concepts, then synthesizing an end product. He feel3 this method avoids the circular efforts which sometimes occurr when priorities are not clearly delineated. And the students' opinions? The opportunity to choose one's own design problem, prog ram it and then design it is a wonderful freedom. Also the chance to specifically consider how designs are created is an excellent exercise regardless of one's opinion of Kindig's particular process. Some students disagree with his method as being a recipe for design; others have found its logical organization very helpful. Completed projects, as presented through "process", do reveal a progression of ideas and the direction of the designer's efforts. This studio should improve with each semester Kindig teaches it. For Paul Heath's 700 design studio the important thing in the design-crit situation is communication. He sees the goal of the design studio as more than just making good buildings. The studio is a way of investigating problems. The resultant skill can be applied to any situation. Paul prefers to think of students as consumers buying education. To a certain extent they should know what they need and what they can demand and expect for the investment. The context in which design criticism takes place is important; Paul prefers that it occur in "expanded desk crit!(ie. small groups). While hi-rise buildings may currently be in disfavor among idealistic young architecture students, more of them signed up for the Hi-rise Studio this fall than there were spaces. For most, however, the motive was to have G.K. Vetter as an instructor before h-eretires, as he claims he will be doing after this semester. G.K. and his hi-rises may certainly be appropriate as the final studio experience before a student graduates and moves into the 'real world'. He is a realist to the point of yet he can respond with a decisive insight. Weekly crits are held among groups of 3-4 students and everyone is expected to contribute. G.K. seems to offer the same respect to his students as they have for him. He prefers to have students make their own decisions, but does crit when 'necessary'. His gruff wit remains a mask for the wealth of experience which he shares when asked. Some praised it, others criticized it; but most of the thesis students agreed: there is no specific design philosophy being espoused by their advisors. One student commented that there is no emphas i s in terms of architectural direction for the 80s. Some said that faculty members never acheived an of specific student direction . Others, while acknowledging the of available faculty , praised the dedication of those who were involved. Many cited the programming phase involved in the thesi. s prep course as a vital contribution to good design in thesis. Virtually all of the students who worked in the 3rd floor studio commented on the tremendous benefit t o be gained from the interaction with other students. A great educational experience was gained through the exposure to the many different types of projects tackled. ........................... STAFF laminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminat

PAGE 8

page 8 see page7 PAUL HEATH WITH TWO CONSUMERS I (]Heath prefers to think of g as consumers buying educat1on. pink is not allowed in the building anytime are not allowed in the building at a Department of Health the sausage in the bun By D.J. This time please take the column seriously. We have heard an incredible rumor, just a short time ago, but it's only a rumor and could not be published elsewhere in the paper because it couldn't be confirmed. Chris, the editor, tells us it has something to do with "integrity." Since this column's stock-in-trade is rumors, we thought we could report this story here without Chris' objections. If this appears in print, you know our guess was right. This is the report: Early next year, with the corning changes in the school's administration, there is likely to be a radical change in the school's direction and curriculum. While the energy program will be maintained, there will be a shift in emphasis and the school's most major efforts will be directed to design philosophy, aesthetics, and the study of architectural history. One possible objective: the creation of a Ph.D. degree in architectural aesthetics and philosophy. Possible invited speakers: Kenneth Frampton, Colin Rowe, Robert Venturi, Charles Moore. (There appeared to be no explanation regarding the funding of this ambitious program). We asked, separately, two design teachers about this and they each laughed and said, "I sure hope it's true." But when we asked for a direct quote they each said,"no comment." We are not sure what this rumor means, and it is quite possible that there is no truth in it whatever. We simply cannot imagine where the funds for such a renewed effort would originate. We do not believe this story at all, and we urge on our readers great caution, in case they hear this story from another source. Speaking of disbelieving, elsewhere in this issue there appears an article in which students evaluate their design teachers. How can anybody believe their accounts? It stands to reason that those students who were asked to contribute their opinions to the survey were not only biased, but had an "ax to grind," in one direction or another. Will anyone take those opinions seriously? We sure don't. that is anytime ==Regulation. (continued from page 3) student may eventually have a better chance to arrive at insights facilitatini design solutions. On the other hand, the defect is that this approach may cordon off history and theory in the student's mind as an isolated, tedious subject with no visible connection to the process of design. 2. My observation of the spectrum of these approaches comes from teaching at the School of Architecture at the South bank Polytechnic in London for 5 years and various colleges in England before that, graduate study there and in France, an undergraduate education in humanities with a strong emphasis on architectural history at Smith College and, of course, teaching at the CDP. The exclusive studio backup approach was used at Thames Polytechnic in London. A one week module was reserved at the beginning of each design problem for an intensive 5 days of lectures on history, structures, psychoLogy, etc. related to that problem. As far as I know there was, apart from this, little formal teaching of history and theory. In order for this format to succeed, studio programs need to be prepared at least 6 months in advance so that support people can prepare properly. It'takes time to assure that one's contribution will be worthwhile. For a period, the University of Virginia School of Architecture veered towards a scholarly, humanities-type approach. It carne to be resented by both students and faculty as too arcane and has been modified. 3. Philosophically, I think UCD tries to take the best of both Service and Discipline, avoiding the extremes. I agree with this. Two factors in the school benefit the History and Theory program. Because of recent trends in architecture (Post Modernism, Contextualism, Tendenza), history is now a priviledged subject. Its relevance to architecture does not need to be justified. It is a pleasure to teach now; I am glad I was a student and not a professor in the 60s when attitudes were quite different! Also, at UCD communication between teachers of design and support subjects is excellent. This is h ard to quantify or to write into a curriculum, yet it is a crucial element of a successful program. Informal interchanges of a basic kind have taken place. We seem to have a good balance of sharing and professional autonomy. Day-to-day cooperation among the faculty is not to be und erestimated. On matters of detail, these are my personal recommendations: Keep the focus of the formal courses on the 19th and 20th centuries. This is appropriate in a School of Architecture (tilt towards service). I am, however, testing how far we can depart from this precept and remain viable. The American Architecture course was a experiment. Although our visual cultural heritage is grist for the design mill, the course was not exclusively modern. I envision courses on, perhaps, The Classical Tradition, The Romantic Tradition, Etc. I compromise on quantity, but, I hope, not on quality of work demanded. My students are studying to be architects, not historians and I recognize this. What shall we do about a general survey course? One should graduate with a basic knowledge of at least the Western architectural tradition. Shall such a course be required for admission or provided at summer school? If we can afford only one full-time historian, should she teach a survey with less time for seminar courses or should a part-time faculty member take it on? What is the place of original research by students? I think it should be encouraged with an emphasis on local history. There is an excellent facility in the Western History Library. Although I think this should remain a minority interest and optional, Dolores Hayden told m e she requires a ten-page primary research paper from her architectural students at UCLA. Budget regulates this recommendation: more visiting scholars to teach history. To minimize costs perhaps an exchange between UCD and other universities. Along with the continued series of outside lecturers, we have also started informal reciprocal visits with faculty from Boulder and D.U. I realize that p prime concern of students is the design philosophy expressed in studio, not in other classes.! feel less able to comment on this. My own approach is catholic. I do not take an advocacy approach towards theory nor am I a spokesperson for a particular movement (although someone else might omit feminist architectural history); however, I do have strong views about the place of history and theory in the school. A designer should acquire as much of a repertoire of images as possible, a combination of sensuous data and understanding that comes from scholarship. Travel facilitates this; so does reading (which is cheaper). I want my students to understand, and therefore be in control of, the forms they use. I hope for a resonance of meaning in those forms to which history and theory can contribute. Francine Haber ionslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationslaminationsla