The Process, Production of Space

The Process, Production of Space

This essay, poised between philosophy and architecture tries to present a theory of architecture and the city, or rather an ideal for the architecture, against the theories and ideals of managers, investors and some architects. To do so we should not look down at the city as if from a high-rise building, we must walk in it.

This is probably a utopian essay, as it conceives an everyday understanding of architecture different from the official, in the same way that cinema is other to the real life experiences.

This publication proposes a thesis and draws consequences from it.

The thesis is: The events, procedures and results that constitute the architectonical world can have a common structure; there are elements that can be used in every creation but actually are missing or poorly used. It is proved that the idea of an existing method that contains unchanging, and absolutely binding principles for conducting the process of conceptualizing architecture meets considerable difficulty when confronted with the results of historical research. There are bases and knowledge, spatially and structurally, that are of course present through the history of the built environment, but there is not a common way of gestate the meaning of a project, from intellectual points of view. We find, then, that this reality has allowed the development of architecture through history as a very varied conglomeration of examples.

Now, however, globalization, industrialization and the jump occurred in 2007, when the population living in the cities surpassed that one yet in the countryside put us face to face with a very different reality, architecture has become increasingly a very global process, and a new vernacular movement is growing in the new cities. This true enables us to take in account in wider range the architecture of the individual: without architects.

It becomes evident that some violations to the profession of architecture, in the example of the new vernacular, are not accidental events, they are direct results of insufficient knowledge, inattention from public entities and of course, economical and political factors which might have been avoided.This liberal practice is both reasonable and absolutely necessary for the growth of knowledge. But there are circumstances, like the actual for example when it is advisable to introduce, elaborate, and defend hypotheses which con- tradict the existing reality and introduce new methods.