I am overwhelmed by this manifesto business. I realize that, yes, after four years of architectural education, complete with design studios, theory and history classes, etc. etc., I've amassed enough information that I can form some opinions/beliefs on design. I'm going to write a few of them out, either from things I've read or things I have always felt, just to put some ideas out there. From these, perhaps I can make a bonified manifesto. In fact, I know I will be making a manifesto, because, isn't that the point of this whole thing. Here's some thoughts:

Architecture should be...

1. Architecture should be experiential. It should foster or create experience. Good, bad, pretty, ugly or just quiet and 'neutral', it has to do something experiental for the people, places and events it affects.
2. Along this same line of thought, architecture should be a narrative. What this really means I'm not too sure, but I feel its important. It's doesn't mean that architecture necessarily has to be a story, but it has a life. It has a trajectory, and it is in the process of existing always.
2. Design should be intentional. Even 'accidental' moments should come from some thought, idea, or propostion. Design can start with instinct, but elvolve into an intention. If it's bad, let it be bad on purpose, for Christ's sake.
3. Architecture should take what was good about past architecture, and push it forward. New architecture should collide with evolving experimental ideas. For example, we aren't continually trying to go to the moon. We did it. It was great. We might go back, but for a different purpose. Maybe we'll use the same ideas of travel to get us there, but our intent has changed. Anyway, we should be trying to get to Mars instead of the Moon anyway - In a space ship of course. Like they used to go to moon but obviously not the same one. (Obviously!) As science progresses to better our lives, so should design.
4. Architecture should respond. People, site, culture whatever.

Architecture should not be...

1. Confused with engineering or interior design or any other discipline. I know, I know, I know. Architecture is one comprehensive beast. How can I exclude these things when this is a comprehensive studio. As architects, we study the arts, history, theories, sciences and mathematics. But... we are not strictly artists, historians, theorists, scientists, and mathematicians. We are Architects. We design space. Space is affected and is affected by structure and paint, but we make the space.

I suppose that is it for now. I was reading Zumthor's Thoughts on Architecture and it is proving pretty helpful. Also, I was reading something for my Asian Art and Arch history class on Confuscianism vs. Zen Buddhism. It seemed these ways of thoughts could apply to how you experience a building (ex: in buddhism, experience trumps intellect.... in architecture, perhaps how you intially feel about a space as a designer trumps anything you should feel, according to what you've learned.)

Ok, I guess that's it. I don't know if this is what this blog is to be used for....