Customer Reviews:
 This book changed the way I look at everything... July 10, 2005
25 out of 26 found this review helpful
As a total amateur, I have no design training. I am fascinated by architecture and design, but really only "know what I like". I read "A Pattern Language" when working on object oriented computer systems and find it fascinating - I still re-read it. So, when I saw this book, I was hoping that it would be interesting.
It is way beyond interesting. It completely changed the way I look at the world. It deserves to be read carefully, slowly, savored. Alexander makes his work accessible to both architects and lay people alike.
Bravo.
Even with two kids in college, I am going to spring for book 2. Higher praise could not be given.
 flawed July 1, 2005
18 out of 30 found this review helpful
Alexander is certainly to be admired for his persistence - for aiming for a theory that would explain the 'sucess' of all good architecture. He has spent a lifetime on this issue. At the beginning of this 4-volume series he modestly admits that he has had to revise his ideas, but still holding on to the task he set himself. The other reviewers here have succintly outlined the books, and here I would add no more than say that it 'hinges' on a theory of centredness, in terms of composiiton. Other relationships than follow from this, such peripheries, etc.
So why do I think his argument is flawed? It is because of the examples he gives. I felt inadequate when I saw him present examples of 'BAD architecture', such as Asplund's cemetery building in Stockholm or numerous buildings by Louis Kahn - but not that he mentions their names. These are buildings I truly love to visit- and have done so several times. Alexander suggests that we might have been fooled by our admiration for such works, fooled by imagery. The "certainty" of his theory "proves" him correct! Is that so? Am I really lying to myself. My first thought when I saw these was 'has he even visited such places?', or does he do everything by looking at photos? And then he shows an example of his own work, a column - built in concrete - based on the theory of centering, and I thought it hideous! And I don't think much of the "Latin American" style architecture he has designed, either. But that's OK. One would simply have to say that there are certain cultural relativisms - something, of course, that Alexander is attempting to argue against! At the beginning of the first book, Alexander shows a beautiful pagoda - but I still think I wouldn't want to have one near me, in the guise of a shopping centre, school, house, gym, restaurant, bank or whatever: I'd rather see it in its original cultural setting. But of course we have gotten used to seeing Greek temples as schools, banks and so on! Indeed. Perhaps it's a matter of time.
 Carlos Castaneda meets Architecture October 17, 2004
34 out of 75 found this review helpful
Having read three out of the four books in this series so far, all I can say is that if you are interested in arbitrary and very personal pseudo-metaphysical remarks about architecture, this is a sort of must-read for you.
Do not expect however to find the teachings of a guru at all. It is more like a collection of simplistic gut feelings for architects and designers avid for incense and self-help manuals.
These books read like extracts from a personal new-age diary. Read while listening to a Cafe del Mar CD.
For all the great existing philosophical and metaphysical ideas on Architecture, the two most extraordinary things about these books are the extremely poor quality of the photographs of Alexander's own work and the exaggerated reviews it is rapidly accumulating in certain circles.
If you are really interested in the topics which the title of this book implies, keep away from it and head to Derrida, Deleuze, Moles and keep going from there.
Magnificent, worthy of close study December 21, 2003
19 out of 21 found this review helpful
"The whole is more than the sum of its parts" is commonly said or writ, but never before have i read so much detail, amply illustrated, of just how that works. There are pictures of beautiful things, and some horrendously ugly things (a certain postmodern house in particular made me laugh out loud), and some side-by-side comparisons of two moderately beautiful things that made me think...which has more "life"? My interest in architecture is limited to a desire to build an Earthship or cob house sometime in the next few years. I wonder why i find such houses more beautiful than the conventional kind? Well, understanding the 15 properties gives one an excellent mental toolkit for studying beauty and beautiful things, and figuring out how to make a place or structure more welcoming to human life. Practical exercises and advice, along with all the examples, help the reader develop an eye for these qualities. As an artist, i can apply these properties to creating and
critiquing my works, and perhaps even to know better how to fix an image that has gone awry. The author's sketches of beautiful patterns of objects, some in which he didn't quite capture the magical essence of life and examines why, enlightened me as i followed the development of his ideas through the book. Always a doodler, i've had a great time hanging out in coffee shops with some 4x6 cards, pencils, Alexander's book, experimenting with following and sometimes deliberately (and sometimes accidently) violating each of the properties, coming to understand them better. Be warned: really "grokking" the material will take much time and much fun! I actually started with volume 2 then went into volume 1, and that worked okay. Volume two reviews the 15 properties sufficiently, and i found processes to be a more interesting place to start. But partway through vol. 2 i just had to dive into vol 1 wholeheartedly to really understand all 15 of the properties.
Essential Reading for Architects November 17, 2003
26 out of 27 found this review helpful
Christopher Alexander's latest series of books, "The Nature of Order", propose new ways of understanding the built environment, as well as new methods of practicing architecture, and as such should be part of every architect's library. As a practicing architect, I have found that "The Nature of Order" series has had a profound impact on the way that I design and create buildings, as well as on the way that I understand architecture and its connection to the larger physical world. The theoretical framework that Alexander sets up in his first book, The Phenomenon of Life, coupled with the analysis and exploration of generative processes presented in his second book, The Process of Creating Life, propose a fascinating and intriguing new way of understanding the physical structure of the world. Alexander presents us with a unified theory where art and science are part of an integrated system that together define the physical structure of all matter, including "life" itself. In the first book, The Phenomenon of Life, Alexander proposes that the physical environment consists of discreet entities that form specific geometrical relationships, and that these geometrical relationships each have an intrinsic value; a value that can be objectively identified and measured with a significant degree of accuracy and agreement among many observers. Alexander goes on to identify this degree of value as "life", expanding the current biological definition to one that includes strong coherence of geometrical structure. In analyzing thousands of examples, Alexander and his colleagues have identified 15 geometrical properties that, when present in a physical structure or design, help to increase the degree of life, in that particular place or object. These properties can be easily identified and measured, by each one of us, and thus form the basis for an objective form of aesthetic judgment. Questions that address degrees of value, such as "what is a good building?", "what is a good piece of art?", and "what is a good environment?" can now be answered using objective criteria, where consistent agreement among individuals is possible. It is Alexander's objective approach for judging aesthetic quality, combined with his unified view of the physical and aesthetic world, that has profoundly influenced my own work. As I work on projects every day, going through the process of testing different ideas and possibilities, I now have the tools and framework for making good design decisions - decisions that can be objectively evaluated in terms of their impact on the "life" of each project. In addition, Alexander has provided me with a deeper understanding of the place of my own work in the physical world - how whatever I make, whether it is the creation of window seat or the lay-out of a series of buildings, has a direct connection to the larger and smaller geometrical structures of which it is a part. Of course this approach leads to a sense of deep responsibility for the enhancement and betterment of the physical world; a responsibility that I believe should be fundamental to the practice of architecture.
|
