Did someone call Architecture as a form of creativity? Became a real theme near the end of a historical conversation between Thom and Bernard. These two icons in architecture have been creating everything from small living homes to large scale cities with landscape design. So to see them speak at the local public library was a real treat.
At the end of the conversation, they argued in a very open way, about how creativity is so loosely said and mentioned with regards to architecture. I couldn’t help agree with that notion when it comes to writing. Recently, I completed an online class, “Beginners in Creative Writing,” where the entire time, all I was told was: write anything now, then come back to it and add dialogue, plot, edit the grammar, and boom! You have a story. Seems kinda simple, nothing a few afternoons can’t handle. Except it’s not that easy or “creative” because like the architects with their medium’s of brick, glass or steel, they must too impact the reader of the structure like I am to impact the reader with my text. Bernard mentioned how in the 70′s, architecture moved away from “life in a vacuum” and became more a part of the whole. No longer did a project stand alone but became a part of the landscape and the city itself. Like writing, we see architecture take on a more social art role. Speaking for the changes in society. As a refreshing way to look at objects as more than “what it was, to what it is now,” (Tschumi, Bernard) as the changes and the way we capture those changes. Writing seems to be a strong part of that too, whether it is in the print media or novels.
Another phrase that grabbed my attention like the smell of roses on a spring day would have to be when Bernard said that architecture is, “a spirit of challenge and imagination.” Immediately, I thought of all the days I am strapped in front of my laptop trying to find a catchy new way of talking about a topic that we’ve discussed with friends and families time and time again, New Year’s resolutions. It was for a friend’s blog, a non-fiction piece, where I quickly realized 1) non-fiction is not my calling and 2) it is difficult to come off as not plagiarizing. And even as I digress for a moment, I think it is important to think of how it is challenging to be imaginative. Sometimes people find it easier to just write out the facts, hand it in and get a grade. Where I find that is too routine and built on structure but some will argue, that you really can’t go wrong with writing non-fiction in academic settings. But with regards to online blogging, it becomes exhausting and too close to repetitive to hear yourself hype-up an often times played out topic. Of course now after hearing this conversation, it seems so obvious how architecture and writing are similar in the area of challenge and imagination.
Furthermore, there seemed to be a connection of architecture to writing, when Thom referred to his work as a, “willful act versus chance in space.” Also, he kept referring to his work as a ‘thing’ like a ‘mold’ and you just keep working and changing it over and over again, till it feels fluid and makes sense. He continued to elaborate on one of his pieces saying that during the process there were changes in material and new hallways would show up in the work, something he did not anticipate before he started the piece but came up with during the process. When he was explaining the process, it reminded me of how it feels to write poetry. You feel like you have a strong feeling of how you want the piece to come across but with a very limited time and space to speak to the reader. You don’t want your piece too long where you lose your reader and not too short where they can’t hear the tone of the voice. He finishes his thought by reminding us of his work, how it is best not to have any repetitions and to look again at each section to see what changes can be made, which is exactly how you want your poem to be. Clear, strong and stand alone.
Overall, the discussion had both architects agreeing that true work will be: Complex, Content, Context and Concept (Tschumi, Bernard) working in sync together. Therefore, a good piece will be complex for the person experiencing the structure, with the content being clear with the use of the structure, then the context to the surrounding environment in that time period and then finally, making the concept such that people can appreciate the effort put forth. One can argue that this an excellent formula for writing. Where if one is coming up with a piece for either, their loved ones, print or submissions, that it becomes a combination of these 4 elements. Where if one expects to test the editors and other readers, they should put the story next to these 4 criteria, for maybe then, we wouldn’t need to be putting so much emphasis on creativity.
So instead of doing a course about what it takes to be creative, I should have been listening in on courses on how to create buildings. Maybe then I would have a better foundation to then lay down the walls of the chapters and to then bottle up the warm feeling with a strong structured roof. So until I build my house full of words, I will continue to submit blog posts about cool conversations. This way I can show how writers, architects and other artists that the art is not about one medium, one force, on structure, but rather a combination of work and a collective consciousness. Then we can all sit back and appreciate good work in both a private and public setting.
