In school you can learn one of two things: how to play the game or how to write the rules to the game. I like writing the rules. I also like observing others to see what they do. Some play the game very well. Some write the rules very well. Some do neither and some do both to differing degrees. Throughout architecture school this dichotomy was evident to me. Of course, you can’t always write the rules and when you can you certainly can’t write all of them.
Architecture is full of rules.
A few of them are unbreakable. For example, gravity, fundamental structural principles, weathering and the like.
Most of them, however, can be broken… but they take know-how to break. They are what architects have called the principles of design since to break these rules is to engage in the very process of design. That is, to understand the way they can be broken and mend them to one’s liking is to be a designer.
Finally, there are rules that beg to be broken. They can barely be considered “rules” since they are always already broken. They are the eggs to the omelet. To not make these decisions is to effectively cease to be something. This diagram or spectrum of rules can also be thought of as a spectrum of choice from non-choice to necessary choice. Necessary choices are often taken for granted. An example of necessary choice? In architecture: a building material and a client. In science: what you’re trying to prove. In law: which side of a legal conflict you’re on. These are the eggs folks and if you want an omelet… well, you know.
Its the elastic rules that hold the most interest of course. It’s our wiggle room. Our play zone. As designers/architects we are set apart by our ability to command the elastic rules. When we decide to make the kitchen the symbolic center of a dwelling we are following some rules and breaking others. When we decide to ornament the legs of a dinning table we are, whether we like it or not, conforming to certain ideals while rejecting others.Even if we choose to leave the status quo unchallenged (which is actually pretty hard to do) we must realize that it was a choice made and it’s consequences will send a message. Likewise, its message will have consequences.
Even design decisions, the very process and substance of architecture, seem ready-made at times. They’ve been made by old habits and cultural assumptions, by people in powerful positions and by the position of power we grant to fear in ourselves. Lets not forget that the elastic rules and the broken rules are fundamentally parts of one whole. They constitute one body of choice and by their very nature they beg to be made, not overlooked. The rules beg to be thought about as much as the game begs to be played.
