Creativity: An Architectural Perspective by ashleus

creativity [an architectural perspective]

SPECIAL STUDY 2015

A SH L E Y MAYE S

Sheffield School of Architecture 120129142

With thanks to Satwinder Samra for his guidance and support; and to everyone who helped me along the way.

Contents Preface.................................................................................................3 How we learn......................................................................................5 Copying or just inspiration? .............................................................9 How to be creative.............................................................................15 Experience: the enemy of creativity................................................27 The future............................................................................................33 Epilogue ..............................................................................................39

Preface Architecture is regarded ultimately as a creative profession by society, on the same imaginative scale as artists, authors, painters and composers. An intangible, abstract, quality, and ability that one refers to as ‘creativity’, is inherent to these professional fields with architecture being no exception. It is an ability that is admired and desired; though when asked to define or explain creativity, often one struggles to answer coherently. The notion of ‘creativity’ has implications and connotations of originality, intelligence and innovation; though it can be argued that true originality cannot exist, as every human activity, including creating, is influenced by things that we have already seen, learned and experienced through our environment. What are the conditions that facilitate creativity; is it something that can be learned; and if so, how can one be more creative? The answers to these questions themselves, are not definitive, but are ones that students of architecture, including myself, and professionals in all creative fields, most certainly find fascinating. Creativity is what we students of architecture rely greatly on, and are the generation whose creativity will craft and dictate the future of architecture. This special study intends to reveal and provide an understanding of the creative process and the way in which it operates; carried out by investigating the learning process and morals of creative techniques, and from this, it may give an insight of how one may adjust their own approach and understanding towards creativity. Speculation for the future role that creativity has towards the architectural profession and within education is also made, with ideas and theories presented here with several case studies.

1.concrete

4.testing

2.observations

3.formation

Figure 1. process of experiential learning 4

How we learn It can be thought that all knowledge and skills that one has acquired has been achieved by learning; and that learning is achieved through study, teaching and experience [1]. In was in 1984, when theorist David A Kolb published a learning style model described as ‘experiential learning’. His findings for this model of how one learns through experience, was devised by examining previous theories and studies carried out by psychologists John Dewey, Kurt Lewin, and Jean Piaget [2]. As philosopher and reformer, Confucius stated, “I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand” [3]. What Kolb devised was a theory that explained how humans learn by doing. Experiential learning can be thought to apply to architects in both their training and in practice, as both architecture students and architects never cease in their acquisition of knowledge. There are four phases of experiential learning (illustrated in Fig.1) [2]: »» 1 ] Concrete experience, »» 2 ] Observations and reflections, »» 3 ] Formation of abstract concepts and generalisations, »» 4 ] Testing implications of concepts.

Being appointed an architectural exercise, for example a design task, one may attempt the task by initially experimenting with active involvement, trying out initial ideas formed from their existing knowledge from past experiences. After developing these initial ideas, these are then reflected upon and evaluated, and from this, the formation of new ideas occur which are then tested and implemented back into the initial work. This learning cycle almost endlessly repeats leading to the development and refinement of a design with an understanding of how one arrived at that position. It is a learning process that acts as the toolkit for architecture students, and one that is reinforced through time.

“You’ll be very lucky if you have a single original idea in your life.” - said Richard Murphy during

a talk I was at on Carlo Scarpa at the Sheffield School of Architecture. It was a statement first told to Murphy by Peter Smithson when he was a student at the Architectural Association. Murphy went on to say: “I steal things from all over the place, and that’s what architects have done for thousands of years, so don’t worry about it.” Perhaps one of our greatest difficulties as designers and students of Architecture is that we aspire to be truly original in our work - which as discussed, subjectively, is actually impossible. One does not have to be original to be creative. “[A creative individual] manipulates external symbols or objects to produce an unusual event uncommon to himself or his environment.” (L.A. Fliegler) - therefore creativity can be achieved by taking ‘inspiration’ from what already exists. Identifying existing works (precedents), analysing and interpreting notions behind the work and then developing specific and unique associations to your work.

creativity Why one may struggle to explain what ‘creativity’ is, let alone express what is required to be creative, is partially because it is very much broadly used and therefore too capricious to be easily defined. Creativity commonly has the connotation of ‘originality’, and often one associates being original with the notions of being ‘odd’ or ‘different’; but creativity can be regarded as intelligent design [4], and contrary to common assumption, one does not have to be original to be creative. There have been numerous definitions of creativity philosophised by psychologists, writers, designers amongst others. In ‘The Creative Process’ [5], Ghiselin Brewster, proposed that creativity is “the process of change of development, of evolution, in the organisation of subjective life.” Whilst Louis Fliegler, of the School of Education at Syracuse University, defined a creative individual as being one who “manipulates external symbols or objects to produce an unusual event uncommon to himself or his environment” [6]. Everyone is influenced by things that they have seen and experienced, these are the ‘external symbols or objects’ that Fliegler describes. This exposure to the existing world creates a natural bias, commonly a subconscious one. An architect’s work is almost always informed by past experiences and what they have been exposed to. This influence of existing precedents upon an architect and their design can be referred to as ‘inspiration’. If an architect identifies a concept or notion within an existing work and from that develops their own concept, no matter how long the development process is - even to the point where in the end the two ideas have no apparent relation, the architect’s concept cannot be truly original. A work may be unique as in the literal definition, but originality is defined as not deriving from or depending on any other thing of the kind. Therefore originality within architecture must come from the architect within [4]. English author and politician Herbert Paul once said: “What is originality? It is merely undetected plagiarism”[7]. There is an uncertainty of whether this abstract notion of originality truly exists as the term originality can be interpreted in many ways.

HOW WE LEARN

Figure 2. Picasso: “Great artists steal.” - Caught bread-handed!

Copying or just inspiration? If we assume that one wholly designs from exposure to what already exists, referred to as ‘inspiration’, it is understood that ideas of true originality cannot prevail. Designer Steve Jobs, and founder of Apple Inc., recited Picasso’s infamous quote: “good artists copy, great artists steal” and revealed that Jobs himself “was shameless about stealing great ideas”, alluding to his belief that fundamentally one should try to expose themselves to the best innovative and creative things that already exist, and then bring those things into what one is doing [8]. However, there is a line - one that is subjectively blurred - between ‘taking inspiration’ and copying or plagiarising; one that architects, students of architecture, and designers in general, are wary not to cross. ‘Plagiarism’ is a breech of intellectual morality and is usually regarded as a serious moral offence. Though there are subtleties between plagiarism and legalities of copyright, plagiarism is considered as the action or practice of taking someone else’s work or idea and passing it off as one’s own. Derived from latin ‘plagiarius’ meaning ‘kidnapper’ [9], it is an issue that is present in all creative fields and professions. However, identifying when plagiarism has occurred is not always clear, and more often can never be proven because of its subjective, abstract nature and its inherent intrinsic complexities. There are laws offering intellectual protection, and automatically applies to all original ‘artistic works’, including architecture [10]. Legislation in Britain not only protects architectural visuals, such as plans, sections, renders, etc., but also defined under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act in 1988, it clarified that a “work of architecture being a building or a model for a building” constitutes as an artistic work [10]. In principle, a simple rectangular office block is offered the same copyright protection as that of the Palace of Westminster, however, it would be difficult to justify the design of the office block as being original. Despite laws and legislation in the attempt to maintain morality in design, its enforcement is somewhat difficult. Additionally, it only protects original works in a touchable medium, and dos not protect intangibilities such as ideas and concepts [11].

pastiche The term pastiche is used to describe a creative work, usually an artistic one, which incorporates several different styles, or is made up of parts drawn from a variety of sources [12]. Unlike ‘parody’, which is often associated with mockery, ‘pastiche’ has a celebratory but dichotomous undertone of fakery and laziness in architecture by the taking and conglomeration of admired architectural stylistic features, ideas and motifs. Designs that display attributes of being pastiche, are therefore thought as untruthful and far from original, as they deliberately take concepts or visual styles from historical precedents. “The problem with pastiche is that it is dishonest, [it] stifles creativity and ergo a kind of urban paralysis ensues.” [13]. However, architect Robert Adams said that “we got the strange idea that for art to be modern it has to be unlike anything done before. This is, of course, ridiculous. All art is based on ideas, influences and bits from other artists. In architecture, this applies to modernist as well as traditional design” [14]. There is a subtle difference of taking inspiration from precedents, and fabricating a work in a mishmash of styles something which especially contemporary housing in Britain has fallen victim of, exhibiting distasteful mixtures of Tudor to Georgian revival architecture.

style Style is a â&#x20AC;&#x153;distinctive appearance, typically determined by the principles according to which something is designedâ&#x20AC;?Â [1]. Designing in a style, one is creating something or coming up with ideas that are coherent with a particular characteristic or period, place, or movement. Similar to styles of other artistic vocations, styles within architecture follow particular rules and concepts, exhibiting specific characteristics, both aesthetical and in intangible notions. These rules and notions, take the form of an architectural movement, typically admired by architects of the time, soon becoming embedded and accepted as the norm for then contemporary architecture. Because styles follow particular rules, designing in a style reduces scope for creative innovation - as typically the rationale for a style is regarded as the best design of its time. Neither still should we assume that immoral imitation has occurred, because the products of styles inherently have strong similarities. There are parallels between other creative fields with regards to the creative process and the issues of originality. The music industry, both contemporary and historical, can be used as an example. Musical genres are analogous of architectural styles, similarly following a set of accepted rules. This almost algorithmic approach to musical composition inherently means that there are, to some degree, similarities between works.

COPYING OR JUST INSPIRATION?

Figure 3.

Arts Tower sheffield GMW

Figure 4.

Seagram Building new york city Mies van der Rohe

The Arts Tower, home to the Sheffield School of Architecture since its construction in 1965, and designed by Gollins Melvin Ward. The myth and conjecture that the Arts Tower is a half-height imitation of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe’s Seagram Building in New York - albeit without the air conditioning and bronzed façade - provides an example of the difficulty in deciding whether it is indeed a replica or merely the buildings’ similarities are a consequence of sharing the same style, that is the International Style. International Style addressed the demand for a large number of commercial and civic buildings in a rapidly industrialising world by taking advantage of new construction methods and materials, and disapproving existing architecture that exhibited a mix of decorative elements from different periods that had no relevance to the buildings’ functions [15]. Through the leading figures of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, and J.J.P. Oud, a consistent visual style emerged. This approach of ‘form follows function’ [16] displayed through unornamented rectilinear planes, occasionally juxtaposed with curved elements, commonly featured strong horizontal lines. Utilitarian materials, such as concrete, glass and steel were very often used and where the skeletal steel frame often became an integral part of the design characteristic [17]. It therefore can be argued that it is intrinsic that buildings including the Arts Tower and Seagram Building have visual similarity, since this similarity follows naturally from their alike functions. The development of an architectural style, the International Style included, can be seen as a creative process bringing together new ideas, and approaching architecture from a different perspective. However, when an architect designs in a specific style - which can be argued to be all of the time - they are simply following rules - however broad they may be. This is a dilemma that architects, and architecture students even more so, face; if one is exposed and taught with influence to a style, it stifles creativity, and obliterates chance of originality.

COPYING OR JUST INSPIRATION?

Figure 5. John Cleese

How to be creative Creativity itself cannot be simply explained, even Freud’s psychoanalysis struggled to clarify the mysteries of creativity [18]. Not ‘feeling’ creative can be horribly frustrating to an architect or any other creative professional, often resulting in one questioning themselves in an attempt to remedy their conservative thoughts and be more creative. John Cleese, prolific comedic writer and actor, spoke about his observations on creativity, contrived from his own experience and consolidated by the findings of psychologist, Donald W. MacKinnen. Cleese formulated the explanation that creativity is not a talent, but creativity is achieved through a specific way of operating. Cleese and MacKinnen identified that to permit and facilitate natural creativity, one must be in a particular mood or state. This mood can be closely associated with a playful nature “[allowing one’s] natural creativity to function.” MacKinnen described this state as the ability to become playful in ideas, almost childlike, where the most in depth exploration and discovery without any immediate practical purpose, is made. Cleese referred to “play for its own sake” as being key for creativity.

open & closed mode People’s functioning in the creative work environment can be described in terms of two simple modes: open and closed. The closed mode is the state that most people, including designers, - student and professional - are in by default, and is where creativity cannot be possible. In the closed mode, one is often conscious of time and therefore more serious in their approach and actions; useful for getting the task done - but unfortunately it is not creative. The open mode by contrast, is relaxed, less purposeful, more enjoyable tending towards humour. Playfulness is a characteristic that induces curiosity, expanding possibilities, bringing one’s intrinsic creativity to surface. Entering the open mode is a skill in itself and something that many

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

“I’m stuck” - the phrase that resonates throughout the architecture studios on an almost daily basis. Designing is fun, it is very often rewarding, but at times it can be incredibly frustrating. The moment when you are compelled to announce to your friend next to you - who now appears to be a fortnight ahead of you in their project - that you are stumped, there is a feeling that your precious ‘creativity’ has just evaporated. This is the point at which you panic. You are determined to ‘resolve’ the problem that is making you stuck, and therefore spend hours trying to come up with a better than satisfactory solution. But of course, this common and intuitive approach often is unsuccessful. Why is it not? when your ‘natural creativity’ has given in, this is when you now apply your ‘tactical creativity’. If you don’t switch creative modes, it is likely you’ll be in a perpetual loop of not advancing on your problem. As Einstein said: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

find difficult to achieve. It relates back to the notion of fearing to be ‘wrong’ and the pressures of time and confidence that we face through the academic system and professional world. Time appears to be the biggest enemy, with a deadline in sight, steering one towards pragmatic thinking - it often feels that there is no time for playfulness which is what creativity relies upon. Dutch historian, Johan Huizinga wrote: “Play is distinct from ‘ordinary’ life both as to locality and duration… its secludedness, its limitedness. It is ‘played out’ within certain limits of time and place… Play begins, and then at a certain moment it is ‘over’. It plays itself to an end” [19]. Cleese identifies and prescribes five conditions to facilitate operating in the open mode [20], which can be referred to as ‘tactical creativity’.

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

Cleese identifies and prescribes five conditions to facilitate operating in the open mode [20], which can be referred to as ‘tactical creativity’...

space - One cannot become playful and therefore creative, if under the usual pressures and distractions of ordinary life.

time - It is not enough for one to create space, one has to create space for a specific period of time. This defined amount of time becomes, as referred by Cleese, one’s “oasis of quiet”. The effectiveness of the creative ‘oasis’ is enhanced by this setting of a specific time period with a known beginning and end as previously theorised by Huizinga.

pondering time - Frustration is inherent and an essential part of the creative process. One must be swamped in disappointment, convinced that the solution is out of reach. If one looks forward and immediately believes the best solution is in sight, and accepts it, then one’s creativity usually has been defeated. Giving the mind as long as possible to come up with something original and being able to tolerate the discomfort of pondering and indecision, increases the chances of more creative outcomes.

confidence - Fear itself, is what one should be afraid of. It is almost catastrophic for a designer to have atychiphobia - the fear of making mistakes. Not caring for mistakes is intrinsic to playfulness, a quality that everyone once had as a child. Picasso said that all children are born artists [21]. One seemingly grows out of creativity, as opposed into it; where in both the professional world and in education mistakes are typically seen as the worst thing one can make [21].

humour/fun

- Solemnity and seriousness is a hindrance, therefore humour and fun provide the catalyst for spontaneity and playfulness.

The effectiveness and efficiency of creativity is reliant upon being able to switch between the open and closed modes at appropriate points throughout the design process. Being in the open mode is needed when pondering a problem, however, when the solution has been found, it is important that one switches back into the closed mode to implement it, decisively and without the distractions of doubts about its success and correctiveness. Creativity is a skill, though a skill that one may find more difficult to become proficient at than an other to develop. As deduced, creativity is not a talent itself but rather, what makes an individual creatively talented is down to their natural aptitudes for motivation, persistence and determination. Referring to Cleeseâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s prescription to be creative, it raises the question as to whether, if one were to practice, they would become more creative?

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

“Practice makes perfect”

- the idiom that my father has recited to me throughout my early life. If I were to complain that I was finding maths difficult coupling it with getting the answers wrong, or if I would bring home a drawn portraiture from art class looking not too dissimilar to an alien, unhappy and convinced that I couldn’t do anything better, this would be the cue for saying: ‘practice makes perfect.’ The more you do something, the better you become. One’s skills are developed over time through practice, and creativity is no exception. Creativity being used tactically, is a skill; over time, one becomes more familiarised and gains experience of how the creative process works and therefore their abilities to be more creative advance. This experience is a different kind of experience as discussed in the chapter ‘experience: the enemy of creativity.’

experience [ practice ] Expertise and skill is a topic that has been frequently explored by psychologists. ‘Skill in chess’ by psychologists Herbert Simon and William Chase, published in the New Scientist in 1973, drew the conclusion: “There are no instant experts in chess - certainly no instant masters or grandmasters. There appears not to be on record any case (including Bobby Fischer) where a person has reached grandmaster level with less than about a decade’s intense preoccupation with the game. We would estimate, very roughly, that a master has spent perhaps 10,000 to 50,000 hours staring at chess positions…” [22]. Psychologists, such as John Hayes, further investigated creativity in terms of ‘preparation’ and experience. ‘Preparation’ refers to the “effort of the creative person, often carried out over long periods of time, to acquire knowledge and skills relevant to the creative act” [23]; this is could be referred to as ‘practice’. Hayes made analysis upon the creative occupations of music and art. Hayes examined 64 composers referred to in Harold Schonberg’s ‘The Lives of the Great Composers’ (1970) from which he determined when composers, such as Mozart, first became seriously interested in music [23]. Hayes next identified the notable works by these composers - defined as having five recordings of the work available. He then calculated for each composer, how many years after their decision to pursue music seriously, did it take before their work became ‘notable’ - indicating achievement and success in their field. Out of a total of more than 500 works, only three were composed before the year ten of the composer’s career; those three were composed in years eight and nine [23]. Hayes found that with regards to productivity and recognition there was a pattern of an initial ten year period of quietness. Hayes conducted the same research method for 131 painters, and found similarly that there was an initial period of silence of approximately six years [23].

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

Attaining a Bachelor of Arts degree, at British Universities, including an BA (hons) in Architecture at the Sheffield School of Architecture, requires students to obtain all 360 credits attributed to their course over the three year duration. The university system gives indication that one credit notionally approximates to 10 hours of studying or work [35]. Therefore, during my undergraduate course, I would have accumulated around 3,600 notional hours of work or practice. Though an estimate, it provides some perspective in relation to Gladwellâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 10,000-hour rule.

It takes time to become proficient in, and expert at, a particular creative vocation; but is it ‘practice’ that is responsible for this? If anyone devoted the same amount of time to music as Mozart, should they expect to achieve the same level of creativity and success? Is the success of, for example, Renzo Piano, or any other acclaimed architect, as a result of practice? Writer, Malcolm Gladwell, formulated from the research of psychologists, including those already mentioned, and predominantly from the research of Anders Ericsson, that practising any skill for 10,000 hours would make one an expert [24]. He claimed that “talent is learned and earned through extended and intense practice of a skill” [25]. The 10,000-hour rule -equivalent to an hour and a half per day, for twenty years - was devised by Gladwell from a paper by Anders in 1993 which similarly focussed on the success of musicians, specifically violinists, with regards to the time they spent practising. Though Gladwell’s golden figure of 10,000-hours, seeming perfectly rounded, it was formed from as an average from Ericsson’s research. Ericsson had found that by the age of twenty the best musicians from the Berlin Academy of Music, had accumulated a mean total of 10,000 hours of practice each, whereas the merely ‘good’ students had totalled 8,000, and the less able a little more than 4,000 hours [26]. The 10,000-hour rule that Gladwell conceived was intended to apply to anyone, and for any skill. So it seems, that practice does lead towards perfection, but the quality of practice and enjoyment is paramount in its effectiveness. It could be considered that the most talented, in a state of being a self fulfilling prophecy, practise more, try harder at the thing they are good at, because they find it enjoyable. The chapter Experience: the enemy of creativity [page 27] examines one’s possible depletion of natural creativity as one ages, yet one through time and practice can advance their ‘tactical creativity’, coupling it with the improvement in aptitude, made through the build up of knowledge and understanding over time.

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

For a student of Architecture, it is almost inarguable that over time one gains knowledge of the subject. One may become visibly more skilled, producing wobbly-line sketches in the cliché-architect style, or renders so beautiful that they could by hung in an art gallery; however, does one’s creativity and process of design develop and advance in the same way? One must understand what is required to be highly proficient at a particular skill, in most cases it unlikely that one can be good at a skill and not knowing or having an understanding of, what it is that makes them good. Perhaps why many struggle to be creative in the realm of architecture is because they neither fully understand what creativity is, nor the techniques for tactical creativity.

Goals setting can be seen as one of the most important elements in a creative initiative. Einstein and Leopold wrote: “Galileo formulated the problem of determining the velocity of light, but did not solve it. The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution, which may be merely a matter of mathematical or experimental skill. To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old problems from a new angle, requires creative imagination” [36]

HOW TO BE CREATIVE

â&#x20AC;&#x153;I was surfing with my dad. When we dove under, there were so many beautiful things to see. I wished we could talk underwater.â&#x20AC;? 11-yearold Richie Stachowski then came up with the Water Talkie [27].

Experience: the

enemy of creativity

“Experience is the opposite of being creative… It’s wrong to be right.” as written by Paul Arden. As previously discussed, what designers conjure as solutions to a brief or problem, is based upon one’s knowledge and experience. Firstly, knowledge is accepted, safe, as when used, it is contradictory what originality is. Secondly, experience is gained from acknowledging the solutions to old problems. Present situations and problems are most probably different from the old ones. However, it is common - and easier - to adapt past design solutions to satisfy the new problems. By basing decisions on knowledge and experience, one can prove that they are right and their solution is valid. However, definite proof usually means that the solution lacks both originality and creativity. By sticking with what one knows, they are inhibiting their scope for new ideas. We are broadly very much afraid to be wrong and resort to ‘playing it safe’. This is a fault that many have acquired over time and one that may become more difficult to overcome the older we get. There is a certain creativity that children have and adults lack. As identified earlier, creativity is reliant upon playfulness. It is the lack of knowing what is possible and how ideas work in reality (knowledge) that makes children such successful creators and designers. Typically, children see everything as feasible, they are praised and encouraged by parents and teachers for the imaginative - and very much original - hypothetical ideas or physical creations, that they have produced however impractical. Adults, by contrast are versed in knowing what cannot be achieved and what is not able to be done [27]. Therefore it can be concluded that for designers, architects, and architecture students, one should at times prevent their rational thoughts, understanding, and knowledge of what can be achieved dominating themselves. Clearly every creative invention and solution has to exist in a world of constraints; however, disregarding what one knows as possible, conceiving what may seem unrealistic or even impossible, and then working back to accommodate or overcome the restrictions gives better chance of a successful and creative notions than if one starts with all obstacles and limits in clear view.

Figure 6. Il Girasole. [top] facing the valley. [bottom] facing the hills

Il Girasole The southerly aspect is undeniably desired by most with regards to one’s home. It is of course the orientation that provides, overall, the most sunlight. However, if only one could pause the sun’s horizontal movement in the sky, fully maximising and maintaining the cherished sunlight in a desired space... But how? The question itself shows contemplative playfulness, as usually one would not even come close to consider such a conundrum as their id, formed from rational thoughts and knowledge, dismisses it as impossible. It was a question dreamt up by Angelo Invernizzi, an Italian engineer, whose desire was to build a house that “mitigated the consequences of the rotation of the earth” [28]. His solution further eludes sensibility designing a house that with the aid of two diesel motors would produce rotation similar to the twisting motion of a sunflower during the course of a sunny day. Il Girasole - girasole meaning ‘sunflower’ - was built in Marcellise, Italy in the 1930s. Invernizzi worked with three others to design the villa, the architect Ettore Fagiuoli, mechanical engineer Romolo Carapacchi and Faust Saccorotti as the interior designer [28]. Though individually, they were not particularly avant-garde; the lower part of the villa was unremarkably Novecentoa. The rotating top, by contrast, exhibiting traits of the machine age with sharp lines and industrial railings, was a technological feat with its creativity manifested in what was a surrealistic occupational experience for Invernizzi and his family. “There were always new views and in a different light, although we had not perceived any movement… Those images in the windows were the secret of the spaces in the house. Just the capability of turning gave everything, to each space, to each window, to the furniture and to the trees, a special light.” - Lidia Invernizzi (daughter of Angelo Invernizzi).

a - Novecento was an Italian artistic movement formed in Milan 1922 advocating past Italian representational art [34].

EXPERIENCE: THE ENEMY OF CREATIVITY /

Figure 7. Il Girasole structure

Though a product of engineers rationally solving a clearly defined problem, Villa Girasole is more than a mechanical idiosyncrasy embedded within the remote Italian landscape. Invernizzi’s proposal was formed from initial creative speculation, but materialised as a product of rational decisions and reasoning. Gaston Bachelard, French philosopher, articulated this architecture as to being ’surrationalist’; with an inherent perversity but with evidential logical, rational considerations behind the architecture. Whereas surrealism, from the perspective of Breton was to believe “in the future resolution of these two states, dream and reality, which are seemingly so contradictory, into a kind of absolute reality” [29]. The villa was the answer to an apparently simple question; formed from two portions of a rotating top sitting in direct contrast to the brick military-bunker style base buried into the hillside. The L-shaped rotating top portion, where the living spaces exist, sit on a platform of wheels with its axis acting as the circulating concrete spiral staircase. The movement of the house, from the perspective of the occupant, is immediately imperceptible, moving nine inches per minute. Invernizzi though known for his abilities as an engineer, his approach towards design is what that can be admired. Lidia, considered that he was “content having what no other house had” [30] - originality. Invernizzi was someone who believed in a new era; “nothing should be built as before.” Invernizzi’s considered ideas and beliefs were more important than the feasibility and existence of them. Lidia remembers his father talking about the idea of hosting a party on the unique motioning terrace that at times would face the hills and other times would look over the valley, but “it never happened; perhaps in this case the idea was more important”. It did not trouble him even when the Blackshirts came to Invernizzi’s office and threw his furniture out the window; Invernizzi would only intervene if his ideas were affected [30].

EXPERIENCE: THE ENEMY OF CREATIVITY /

Figure 8. Building 20, circa 1980s

The future Creativity and innovation is what broadly drives the evolution of society. All creative acts, in all vocations, have to occur somewhere. Parisian cafés became the spaces where the movement of Modernism was conceived, which have been labelled as the “engines of creativity” [31]. It is creativity that stems from this type of collaboration and collisions of ideas with others. As American author, Jonah Lehrer once said: “the most creative spaces are those which hurl us together. It is the human friction that makes the sparks.” Can spaces and architecture be designed to facilitate creativity for other professions, to make them more creative spaces? This notion with regards to the architecture profession itself, is symbiotic, in the way in which architecture practices, and schools of architecture, are designed to operate.

building 20 In the past, it was the innovative individuals from Socrates to Edison, whose creations were reliant upon the discussion, exchanging and arguing of their ideas. The question that can be formed is: How can architecture - contemporary and future - foster the same sort of creativity, for not just within architecture, but all professions? More recent than the cafés of Paris, Building 20, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), could be argued to be similarly one of the most creative spaces to have existed. In 1942, during the depths of the Second World War, MIT’s Radiation Lab, under the direction of the US military to develop radar technologies for purposes of identifying enemy bombers, called up many hundreds of scientists [32]. To accommodate this urgent and sudden influx, the school drew up in a single day, and constructed in six months, Building 20 - a 23,000 square metre, timber frame structure that prioritised space over any other design considerations, even disregarding fire regulations [32]. It rapidly became the centre for innovative and pioneering military research. After the war and with the Building 20 was scheduled for demolition; MIT found it was yet again in need of 33

Figure 9. demolition of Building 20 in 1998

space. A diverse group of departments were placed within Building 20, including the Laboratory for Nuclear Science, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Linguistics, the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps, amongst other equally eclectic groups. This unusual conglomeration of people were all thrown together in a building with almost no architectural aspiration, which even had physical failings such as leaks, unsatisfactory ventilation, and heating and cooling issues. Nevertheless, after over forty years, when it was demolished in 1998, Jonah Leherer claimed: “Building 20 had become a legend of innovation, widely regarded as one of the most creative spaces in the world”. It was the place of an unbelievable record of technological breakthroughs and achievements; advances in the understanding and use of microwaves, the first computer game, modern computer hacking, the formation of Bose Corporation, amongst many more [32]. The success that occurred within, could be argued to be the responsibility of the building’s design. The immensity of the structure and confusion it often caused forced different physicists and thinkers to interact; whether it was asking for directions or just meeting people in the long hallways. This environment of discourse unintentionally encouraged by the architecture became inherent of Building 20. Its success may also owed to intended temporariness. The longevity of the building was of little importance, scientists felt unrestricted to alter the building structure to satisfy their needs. Adjustments to the internal structure, such as knocking down walls without need for authorisation, were made. A scientist developing the first atomic clock, made room for the three-storey tall cylinder by cutting holes through two floors of his lab [32]. It was the variability of the building and the interaction of the occupants that fostered the original creation that occurred within. It could be regarded as an “architecture rather like some music and poetry which can actually be changed by the users, an architecture of improvisation.” - Richard Rodgers.

FUTURE /

â&#x20AC;&#x153;In a vertical layout with small floors, there is less research variety on each floor. Chance meetings in an elevator tend to terminate in the lobby, whereas chance meetings in a corridor tended to lead to technical discussions,â&#x20AC;? -Henry Zimmerman (Electrical Engineer at Building 20)

Building 20, was a place that was successful in facilitating creativity, though unintentionally, as a result of its architecture. It is therefore a precedent for illustrating the significance of understanding how creativity and innovation can thrive. Further analysis and understanding of how to facilitate creativity within the architectural education system could have an important and significant impact towards the future of architecture profession. In turn, if architects have a proficient understanding of the conditions and systems in which creativity best operates, buildings and solutions for the clients can be designed to help foster creativity and innovation in any profession.

FUTURE /

Epilogue This fascination with creativity is what intrinsically drives our design in architecture. It is a characteristic that many designers, architects, and architecture students, such as a myself, had previously accepted this intangible quality as inexplicable. Demonstrated in this special study is that creativity is a skill more than a talent. Though much of our creative ability is reliant on our talent, gained through experience, practice and exposure to what already exists, as evidenced in Kolb’s ‘experiential learning’ process. However, the exploration of being able to understand the creative process has provided the requirements to facilitate creativity in a tactical form, increasing and advancing one’s creative capabilities. John Cleese’s exploration of the creative process theorised that we can control and increase our creativity ability through ways of operating - the open and closed modes since creativity is by majority a skill. As students of architecture, we have been brought up in and been part of an educational system of correctness, inducing the fear to be wrong. This premise is one that has stifled plenty of us in our creativity, which has been a consistent theme throughout my exploration, mentioned and implied by Cleese, Arden, Robinson, and Sloane. Playfulness and creativity [33] are coupled with one another, and it is playfulness which is most important to one’s creative success by instigating curiosity. Creativity is the manipulation “external symbols or objects to produce an unusual event uncommon to himself” - original to oneself, but not necessarily exclusively original to be creative. Creativity isn’t explicitly taught at any educational level, but perhaps it cannot be; this special study aimed to provide an understanding and exploration of what creativity is, and from this, how one can alter and reform their own perspective towards the creative process - making important note that “Creativity is not a talent. It is a way of operating.”

image references

Fig 1

Authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work [A.J. Mayes]

Fig 2

Atelier Robert Doisneau (1952)

Fig 3

Author unkown - http://shefeld.tumblr.com/post/99915038959/artstower-sheffield-university-ar

Fig 4

Auhor unkown - http://patternity.org/search/building

Fig 5

Andy Gotts

Fig 6

M. Meili & Schaub

Fig 7

Angelo Invernizzi

Fig 8

Author unkown - http://historum.com

Fig 9

Author unkown - http://clui.org/ludb/site/building-20-site

Page 16

Authorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s photograph [A.J. Mayes]

Page 22

Author unknown - http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/ sheffield-universitys-revamped-arts-tower-re-opens/8620255.article

Page 26

Author unknwon - http://mom.me/home/6507-toys-invented-kids

Front cover

Cine Text/Allstar/Sportsphoto Ltd/Allstar

bibliography 1.

Oxford English Dictionary, in Oxford English Dictionary. 1902.

Kolb, D., Experiential Learning. 1984: Prentice-Hall.

Vaillancourt, R., I Hear and I Forget, I See and I Remember, I Do and I Understand. Can J Hosp Pharm, 2009. 62.

Raskin, E., Architecturally Speaking. 1954: Reinhold.

Brewster, G., The Creative Process. 1952: University of California Press.

Fleiger, L.A., Levels of Creativity. Educational Theory. Vol. IX. 1959.

Paul, H., The Decay of Classical Quotation. The Nineteenth Century, 1896. Vol 39.

Sen, P., Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview. 2012.

Oxford English Dictionary, in Oxford English Dictionary. 2006.

10. Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, UK-Legislation, Editor. 11. Mann, P. and J. Denoncourt, Copyright isssues on the protection of architectural works and designs. 2009. 12. Oxford English Dictionary, in Oxford English Dictionary. 2005. 13. Macqueen, N. After this Georgian pastiche I need a bath. 2012. 14. Adam, R. The idiotâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s guide to architecture. Building.co.uk, 2008. 15. International Style of Modern Architecture. [02/11/14]; Available from: http:// www.visual-arts-cork.com/architecture/international-style.htm. 16. Sullivan, L.H., The Tall Office Building Artistically Considered. Lippincottâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Magazine, 1896: p. 403-409. 17. International Style, in Encyclopedia Britannica. 18. Freud Museum London. 2007 [cited 2015; Available from: http://www.freud.org. uk/events/10037/psychoanalysis-and-the-roots-of-creativity/. 19. Huizinga, J., Homo Ludens: A study of the play-element in cluture. 1944: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

20. Arts, V., The hidden mind / Creativity in management / The importance of mistakes, in The John Cleese files. 1988. 21. Robinson, K., How schools kill creativity. 2006, TED. 22. Simon, H.A. and W.G. Chase, Skill in chess. New Scientist, 1973. 23. Hayes, J.R. and C. Mellon, Cognitive Process in Creativity. 1990. 24. Gladwell, M., Outliers: The Story of Success. 2009: Peguine. 25. Bradley, D., Deceived Wisdom: Why What You Thought Was Right Is Wron. 2012: Elliott & Thompson Limited. 26. Ericsson, A., R. Krampe, and C. Tesch-Romer, The Role of Deliberate Practice in the Acquisition of Expert Performance. Psychological Review, 1993. Vol 100. No. 3: p. 363-406. 27. Sloane, P. Why are Children More Creative than Adults? 2013. 28. Mical, T., Surrealism and Architecture. 2005: London: Routledge. 29. Tate. Surrealism. [cited 2015; Available from: www.tate.org.uk/learn/onlineresources/glossary/s/surrealism. 30. Meili, M. and C. Schaub, Il Griasole : una casa vincino a Verona. 1995. 31. Johnson, S., Where good ideas come from. 2010, RiverheadBooks. 32. Molloy, J.C. Can Architecture Make Us More Creative? ArchDaily, 2013. 33. Bacon, C., Park Hill in its Social Context, in Department of Town and Regional Planning : Falculty of Architectural Studies. 1985, Unviersity of Sheffield: Sheffield. 34. Novecento movement, in Encyclopedia Britannica. 35. Unviersity of Sheffield School of Architecture, in Undergraduate Programmes, D. Jary, Editor. 2014. 36. Einstein, A. and L. Infeld (1996). The Evolution of Physics, Simon & Schuster.

Thank you for reading :)