Campo obligatorio; no debe dejarse en blanco.

1#Reflective practice

positioning (planteamiento*) ≠ resolution

I have noticed that in my practice of architecture I am good at resolving the positioning or planteamiento of a project, in detriment of the resolution of the project.

I have seen very good, beautifully resolved and presented projects that lack a strong foundational positioning or critical framework from which the project starts. Then we could argue a project is fundamentally wrong.

On the other hand, it happens to me that while I try really hard to contextualize and make sense of my program, agenda and strategies, I forget to develop the architectural object or spatial design. This previous comment also has to do with a misconception of the ideas of positioning and resolution, as it thinks of them as two separate segments, however, a project needs to understand its form meaning in parallel (I am not developing the role of the unconscious here or the idea of the derive).
This parallel development moves away from a linear project development, instead, it establishes a two-way relationship in which each party constantly feeds the another. (Also avoiding an argument on the possibility of the idea of a middle ground or liminality here).

To conclude, this idea of the two-way relationship allows for a development that goes hand in hand and  permits a substantial development of the whole or the project, this would avoid me turning up in the crits with papers no one wants to look at.




*planteamiento
Approach, plan, proposal.-wordreference