Injecting Creativity: Literally


Some of you may remember that a while ago I made a post that was about me developing a manual booklet about the crit. So in the following weeks and maybe months I will start adding some of the characters who may feature in the final booklet.

For this post I will be looking at the injection of creativity into students and the inverse relationship in which the tutors inject that creativity. What is that? Does it exist? Is it creativity or style that is being injected? This are a few of the question we will explore as we look at the this uncanny subject of Injecting Creativity: Literally.

Be warned that in this post we do not offer answers to those burning questions, but rather we ask, explore and even get lost in the words which we aimlessly write. Feel free to criticise because that will be the satisfaction you might get from wasting time to be negative.


To start lets consider how there’s a style or method of design which many students aspire towards. The rise of the so called star-architect has also created a vaccum in which many students will crawl through in order that they attain such status in their professional careers. Concurrently, some schools of architecture have become the epitome of what an architectural education should be, thus defining the methods of teaching, style of graphics, process of thinking, modes of practice, and a standard to which many other school see themselves as submitting to the holy grail of creativity. To me that school, though good in the end of year exhibitions being displaying for the public bears very little in terms of what model should be used to train furture architect. Of course with this in mind, design will be about a quest to meet standards of competition rather than of solving design challenges through a creative urge. In light of this we have also witsnessed a ubiqutous model of teaching architects that is creeping into societies where certain language of design says nothing about the culture, infrastructural problems or reveals the aesthtics that is pleasing to the eye.

How is this a problem one might ask? Curiosity is aroused when for many years there’s a repeat in the type of projects that are emerging from the same school, by the same tutors and with the same graphical language. Where is creativity one wonders? Is this merely a copy of what the original was or has this been injected diluted remedy for those entering the presence of particular tutors. Can the tutor do something about this or should there student be in constant search for creativity and also develop a new ability to communicate their ideas which reflets their understanding of the world creatively?

No answer to the preceding questions, but what I could say is that the remedy currenlty being injected among some students of architects might be toxic to the design of our places of living.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s