Should architecture theory be studied in architecture school? We seem driven to find the right theory to make the right kinds of buildings rather than focusing on how to create better people and then igniting their sensitivity to better understand the needs of the people around them.
Simply put, maybe we should be more focused on what the proper character of an architect should be and then give them a general direction to head in rather than focusing solely on theory.
Rather than pushing comprehensive theories based on communication theory or patterns, we should help students and ourselves grow in two directions: character and knowledge.
I think we need to start driving towards curriculum that says having character that is compassionate, emotionally intelligent, and intellectually able is where we start our teaching.
And then for theory we give guidelines that reflect this character: we feel in our hearts that buildings should meet people's needs as well as visually communicate ideas so we find ways to design for these needs.
We should evolve our character to where we value the idea that buildings should serve people and create spaces that serve all the different ways they may want to live their lives.
We should have enough soul to know buildings should support all the stages in life that make it meaningful.
I find the more prescriptive approach to theory that we are now caught up in to be insufficient and in it's over wrought definitions and thinking, I find we are saying that we doesn't trust the architect to have enough character to be able to figure out things on their own.
Whether Christopher Alexander's over noodled tomes or through the ground fog of critical theory that rises up from most universities, they all fall equally short. They lack a discussion on first making ourselves better people and then the idea that better people who know how to use their minds and their hearts can then find a way to make better buildings.
