The death of architecture
(and the rise of a new one)
by Tal Friedman
The discipline of mainstream architecture is at an all-time low. Generic repetitive design, low sustainability and low cost / time efficiency have become the new norm. Despite the digital transformation in the field, we have failed to leverage BIM tools for creating a better built environment. But not all is lost! Advanced AI modelling techniques, together with robotic fabrication, promise to create the much-needed revolution in what we design and build. But these steps require us to disrupt the nature of architectural practice. So, what really needs to happen for the industry to succeed and are we really ready for such a change?
E
instein once said the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. Yet here we are, designing the same buildings, over and over again and expecting to de-carbonise, save cost/time and improve architectural design — surprisingly, to no avail. Responsible for 40% of CO2 emissions and growing socio demographic problems as results of living standard gaps, it is time to admit modern architecture has failed us. It has failed to use technology to guide it to its goals due to fear of disrupting its own centralised power structure. In fact, the most common question raised when speaking about design automation is the concern for the well being of the architect rather than the well being of society and the built world. However, new AI technologies at hand can empower architecture to get back on
track and democratise construction. It’s time to go back to the drawing board and replan planning as we know it.
The rise and fall of the architect The architect, who has taken the historic role as guardian of architecture, has let its guard down and allowed a new player to dominate the realm, replacing the soft and often vague term of “architecture” with the hard and empiric term of the “construction industry.’ This is not new, of course. The architect has changed its role many times throughout history: from an on site omni present design-builder, to a “behind the desk” paper draftsperson and all the way to a computational specialist living in a virtual universe. What has always remained at the heart of the discipline is the desire to create a worthy living environment. However, the shift from a physical on-site methodology to a world of data
and theoretical geometry has disconnected the discipline from the ground to the point where the modern architect is merely a nester/drafter of repetitive shelf products that compose buildings. As a matter of fact, it is fabrication restraints dictated by producers and contractors that limit 99% of the buildings to repetitive boxes from early design stages. For the average architect, it is a given that any deviation from the norm will create an exponential price increase due to the added engineering and customised production. ‘Starchitecture’, on the other hand, is a game reserved only for those privileged enough to have unlimited budgets. In short, we have become strong on data, clouds and documentation, but weak on design flexibility and well being — aka architecture. So yes, we have managed to build mega cities higher, quicker, and more industrialised. Yet, the industry fails to meet its own success criteria, deepening the problem year after year. Just like in the story of the tower of Babylon, our success is
‘‘
We have become strong on data, clouds and documentation, but weak on design flexibility and well being - aka architecture.
’’
20
July / August 2021
p20_21_AEC_JULYAUG21_Tal.indd 20
www.AECmag.com
20/07/2021 07:34
