think about places and buildings, and hence plays a
significant part in how we might approach design. The
use of perspective drawing, axonometric, figure-ground
or shadow-enhanced image shapes our perception of the
subject. The current fashionable interest in figure-ground
representation has discouraged the deconstructed
distortions of many designers. Five hundred years ago the
discovery of geometric perspective led to a similar
interest in spatial patterns, vistas and terminations.
If drawing sharpens our visual awareness, the method
of representation directly influences how we view the
world. To move from sketchbook exploration to design
requires the intermediary of a drawing. Many graphic
techniques are available, from simple plan, section and
elevation to more elaborate methods of three-
dimensional representation. Whichever method is
chosen, it is important to follow the established rules,
rather than make up new conventions as you go along.
Like writing or mathematics, the rules are well
understood and relatively inviolable. The grammar of
drawing, its syntax and composition are important
matters, whether you are a graphic illustrator or a
designer.
The shift in emphasis from sketchbook studies to
questions of design requires an appreciation of some
simple theories of architecture. Like all patterns formed
by the interrelationship of objects and space, the
architecture of buildings and cities can be understood
from various perspectives. One can view the subject in
terms of space, surface, structure or decoration.
Architecture as space has long captivated designers who
have contrived to carve complex spatial effects out of the
solid mass of buildings or even whole cities. Baroque
churches and many modern office buildings enhanced
with atria manipulate architectural space to dramatic
effect. Even in relatively small rooms space can be
moulded and modified to excite the senses.
Architecture as plane or surface is the converse of
architecture as space, though obviously both cannot be
considered in isolation. Here the interest is in design of
the surfaces that define the spaces, both inside and out.
As the surfaces are what we see, they have long
fascinated the topographical artist, for it is they that
provide clues to the function and significance of a
building. Focusing on the surfaces allows the designer to
exploit modelling, hierarchy of form, colour and texture in
order to transmit to the observer the ‘meaning’ of a
building.
Architecture as structure is another readily understood
classification. It derives great legitimacy from modernist
functional theory, which requires the honest expression
of the means of supporting a building. To take an example
from history, Gothic cathedrals were as concerned with
structural expression as with the moulding of space. The
visible display of a building’s structure can greatly
influence one’s perception of both its interior and exterior.
Architecture as decoration concerns itself with applied
embellishment. The task of the designer is to provide
enough decoration to allow people to understand and
enjoy the building. Decorative detail can relate the
building to its surroundings or function by adopting a
familiar code of expression, or allow advertising in some
form or another. Decoration provides a cheap and ready
means of instilling symbolism for commercial, civic or
private reasons.
These four key interests should be integrated in a
design. The integrity or appropriateness of a design –
whether for a chair, building or city – should be generated
by weighing the demands of functional arrangement
against these principal means of expression. The designer
has the task of striking the balance and relating it to other
points mentioned earlier, such as the physical or historical
context. Sometimes the clue to how the balance should
be struck derives from precedent (churches are often218 Understanding architecture through drawing