Reading Response 2: The Muses Are Not Amused by Jorge Silvetti

Jorge Silvetti talks about four ways of contemporary form making in architecture: Programism, Thematization, Blobs, and Literalism. While I find his description of these methodologies accurate, I believe that these four methods are steps toward a emerging new way of form making. In our architectural education, we are trained to marry intellectual data analysis with conceptual form making. In almost all cases, we are guided to understand the context and conditions through site analysis before we think about the aesthetics or form of the project. Then there is program analysis. We are to speculate parameters of program, environmental needs, relationship between different spatial conditions, and more. All these analysis may provide schematic guide lines or patterns; some designers choose to investigate further with those schemes, and some choose to develop their own form-making vision. In either cases, with or without being conscious, good designers incorporate their analysis into their design. In other words, designers in our generation are encouraged to speculate and understand the full spectrum of project. This results in combining various methods of form making. With increasing emphasis in sustainable design, the form of building can no longer just be computer-generated. Even the “computer generated” models of buildings need to be adjusted according to our knowledge of environment and sustainable design. It is not as easy as “push of button” as Jorge Silvetti describes. Designers of today need to push many many buttons with consciousness and exact intentions. While criticism of contemporary architecture is necessary, I think the future of form making in architecture is headed toward right direction as far as our education is concerned.