Drawing Codes, Vol. II

Experimental Protocols of Architectural Representation

Organized by the Digital Craft Lab at California College of the Arts

Presented by University of Washington College of Built Environments and The Miller Hull Partnership

Gallery exhibit hours:
Mon/Wed/Thu/Fri — 11:00 am to 4:30 pm
Tue — 11:00 am to 7:00 pm

closed weekends and February 17

Curator’s talk and reception:
February 5, 6:00 pm
Architecture Hall 147

Emerging technologies of design and production have opened up new ways to engage with traditional practices of architectural drawing. The 24 drawings commissioned for Volume II of this exhibition explore the impact of such technologies on the relationship between code and drawing: how rules and constraints inform the ways architects document, analyze, represent, and design the built environment.

Each drawing engages with at least one of the below prompts that begin to expand the notion of code as it relates to architectural design and representation:

Code as generative constraint. Restrictive codes often govern what is permitted and what is prohibited. Examples of this include building codes, urban codes, zoning codes, accessibility codes, and energy codes. How can such constraints become generative, opening up opportunities for design and representation?

Code as language. A code can be understood as a set of rules, conventions, and traditions of syntax and grammar that structure the communication of information. The discipline of architecture similarly has its own language of typologies, taxonomies, and classifications. How can drawing engage with such architectural languages?

Code as cipher. Encoded or encrypted messages are intended to hide or conceal information. Likewise, architectural geometries, forms, spaces, and assemblies are embedded with invisible organizational, social, political, or economic logics that may not be immediately evident. How can drawing engage with these latent meanings and messages?

Code as script. A code can be understood as a script or a recipe: a set of instructions to be executed or performed by a computer, a robot, or (in the case of theater or film), an actor. Scripts often produce unexpected discrepancies between the intent of the code and how it is executed. How can drawing explore these open-ended processes that may not have a defined outcome?