Architectural Innovation as an evolutionary process
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Reference
Roel Daru, Eric Vreedenburgh: Architectural Innovation as an evolutionary process. In: Generative Art 2000.
DOI
Abstract
Is architecture submitted to evolutionary processes? Does that inevitably result in innovations? And if architecture is subjected to the forces of evolution, is this the case with the processes of designing and/or with its results? In order to investigate these questions, we have clarified the concepts used. About what is meant by innovation, evolution and memes and other derived concepts. But after we have developed some preliminary conceptions about evolution, innovation, memes and so on, how can we then study those phenomena in architectural practices? To investigate it in an explorative way, an appropriate case study was looked for, identified and carried out as an empirical basis to collect informations. In order to structure the observations in the case study, a coherent framework was looked for and found in the work of three authors about creative designing. The framework is extended to accommodate the anticipated and distinguished Darwinian and Lamarckian evolutionary processes of architectural design. The information from the case study is applied to the framework in order to check its validity. The information content residing in (and flowing through) the framework is analysed in order to discover how the information units (the memes i.e. copyable ideas, beliefs, behaviours, procedures and so on) infect or penetrate in minds, diffuse or spread over minds and how they are copied, imitated and tranformed by individual minds. In concluding remarks, a preliminary answer is given to the question asked at the beginning of this exploratory study: architecture can be submitted to evolutionary processes and those processes can lead to innovations.
Extended Abstract
Bibtex
Used References
1. Jencks, C., Architecture 2000. predictions and methods. New concepts of architecture, series ed. M. Kling. 1971, London: Studio Vista.
2. Steadman, P., The evolution of designs. Biological analogy in architecture and the applied arts. 1979, London: Cambridge University Press.
3. Dawkins, R., The Selfish Gene. (revised with additional material. 1989) ed. 1976, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Daru, R. Hunting Design Memes in the Architectural Studio. in Generative Art '99. 1999. Milan: Generative Design Lab.
5. Simon, H.A., The Sciences of the Artificial. (original edition 1969) ed. 1996, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
6. Quinn, J.B., The management of innovation: controlled chaos. Harvard Business Review, 1985(May-June): p. 73-84.
7. Cloak, F.T., Is a cultural ethology possible? Human Ethology, 1975(3): p. 161-182.
8. James, J., Template-makers of the Paris basin. 1989, Leura, Australia: West Grinstead Publishing.
9. Delius, J., Of mind memes and brain bugs, a natural history of culture, in The Nature of Cultures, W.A. Koch, Editor. 1989, Bochum Publications: Bochum. p. 26-79.
10. Dennett, D.C., Consciousness explained. Paperback edition ed. 1991, London: Penguin.
11. Csikszentmihalyi, M., The Evolving Self. A Psychology of the Third Millennium. 1993, New York: Harper Collins.
12. Verburg, W.H., Bouwen op Toplocaties. 2000, Rotterdam: Bouwen met staal.
13. Osborne, A.F., Applied Imagination. Principles and procedures of creative problem-solving. 3 ed. 1963, New York: Scribner.
14. Yu-Tung, L., Creativity or novelty? Design Studies, 2000. 21(3): p. 261-276.
15. Langley, P., et al., Scientific discovery. 1987, Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.
16. Csikszentmihalyi, M., Society, culture and person: a systems view of creativity, in The Nature of Creativity, R.J. Sternberg, Editor. 1988, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK. p. 325-339.
17. Brodie, R., Virus of the mind. 1996, Seattle: Integral Press.
Links
Full Text
http://www.generativeart.com/on/cic/2000/DARU1.HTM
