A Chronicle about
The Language We Don´t Speak
Whenever I come home to my parents I know that their questions will be if my work has been alright, if I passed the course and if I, myself, am happy with my work, Sure , but they have stopped asking ‘what have you done?’, what my project is . This, as the mode of expression in architectural theory and practice that we, architects, students and theorists use is something that they simply don’t understand. How can we be producing spaces for people if the ones we are designing for have no clue as to what we are talking about?
We need to bring the discussions on architecture our built heritage back to the people that are still living and experiencing this environment every day. To the people who are struggling in the housing crisis or the people who are passionate about the climate emergency and want to do something about it.
If there is something we have worked towards in this magazine it is accessibility , for the work to be understandable to anyone, first-years, fifth-years, practicing architects but first and foremost to the general public. For people to be able to engage in a range of different architectural and political issues, issues that are affecting everyone walking down the street. But in order to engage, you first need to understand.
The more voices that are allowed to be heard, inevitably it will give rise to more sustainable practices within architecture and bring about change that is beneficial to the local community and, in a wider sense to our global collective both within theory as well as practice.
It doesn’t bring architecture forward into a more sustainable practice by continuing to use a language that is exclusive for the academics. Sure, in research practices you need to know the jargon and the terminology to be able to bring scientific or sociological research forward. But you don’t need to continue to use that language to convey your ideas to the next generation of students or any of the residents who are going to live in that new building you are proposing. That is not to say that buzzwords or catchphrases will provide any more of an understanding of what that we are producing. It becomes counterproductive to use words that in a sense act as follies; words that turn out to be more decorative than practical while trying to start a discussion.
We need to expand our knowledge in communication in order to invite the general public into ‘our’ issues.
By understanding the people who are going to live in the environment we are creating we don’t have to continue to design based on speculation. Instead, we can start a conversation with the local communities who are already living there and work together towards a more equal, inclusive architectural discource.
"Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody." - Jane Jacobs in The
Death and Life of Great American Cities, pg. 238
by Sofi Håkansson
To Re-politicize Architecture
119