When the Architects Drew...

Abstract

Interest in freehand drawing in architecture schools is dying without recent study plans being aware of the problem. The overrated computer applications developed for architecture absorb the energies of students who no longer consider it to be such an important tool that they dedicate time to their learning that they do not have. The addictive attraction to social networks and the infinite audiovisual material for consumption absorb time that was previously dedicated to reading and drawing. For a dozen years we have surveyed our students (351) from various architecture courses about their relationship to freehand drawing. The survey topics were few but illustrative: 1. Frequency (usual practice), 2. Usefulness (devise, think, represent, etc.), 3. Capacity (personal self-assessment), and 4. Necessity (drawing in the career and in the profession of architect). Some answers are significant although quite contradictory: 55% of the students draw only to develop a project; 7% never draw or draw as little as possible; 25% do it only to represent their finished projects; 2% consider themselves capable of solving any challenge with the drawing, but 2% consider themselves denied; 75% would like to draw better; For 90%, the drawing of thought should be promoted, while 46% consider it essential for an architect. Trends are therefore confirmed, summarized in a resounding statement: architecture students do not usually draw. It is not easy to change this trend and difficult to change their mentality about the importance of drawing for the architect. Beyond reflecting on the causes of the situation, the article suggests that graphic digital tablets, used as a new freehand drawing technique, could facilitate their learning due to their ease of use, unlimited editing, attractive technology, etc. avoiding the daunting horror vacui of traditional techniques.