ABSTRACT
How does this architecture thing, the relationship between architect and client, start? It begins as a conversation or, more accurately, several interlaced conversations—between architect and client, between words and images, and ultimately between the work and the world. These are bilingual conversations, in which natural language and graphic language together yield imperfect translations, productive misunderstandings, and sometimes entirely unpredictable meanings. As we discussed in the last chapter, learning to be an architect involves learning this new graphic language—the language of drawing, with its potent powers of persuasion—and discovering that there is nothing natural about it. The conversation between professor and student code-switches between the natural and un-natural languages and in so doing models the code-switching mastery required of a design professional. There’s far more to it than that, of course, not the least of which is the challenge of style-shifting or register-shifting, which we introduced in the last chapter. In this chapter, we’ll start to dive deeper into the mechanics of language(s) and borrow shamelessly from grammar to sort through the different roles that architectural drawings play in these conversations. We’ll start with a tale of two clients, each of whom opens the architectural conversation in a different way. 1
