Architect Drawings : A Selection of Sketches by World Famous Architects Through History

architect, and while they can be attractive, their beauty need not be questioned. As architectural
representations their physical appearance is irrelevant. They are valued for qualities other
than their beauty. Ambiguous and tentative, they easily carry emotions and subtleties of
illusion and allusion. The look of the sketch is not as important as the role it plays in the
design process.
Architects depend upon sketches as the medium for the creative process they employ to
conceptualize architecture. Since they are easily transformable images, they play a major role
in architectural thinking; they form and deform architectural ideas. This flexibility affects
architectural understanding, and the comprehension requires reflection and translation.
Sketches are the visual manifestation of character or attitude that allows the transformation of
a physical object or concept into another dimension or media. Exploring the representational
qualities of sketches discloses the tangible and intangible aspects that make them fundamental
in any process of design. Illustrative of this sentiment Filarete, the Renaissance architect,
describes their importance: ‘Execution teaches many things and everything cannot be fully
narrated here ...everything that is done by the hand partakes of drawing ...it is an unknown
and little appreciated science. You would do very well to learn it, for it would acquaint you
with a thousand delights’ (1965, pp. 82 and 149).
APPROACH TO THE STUDY OF ARCHITECTURAL SKETCHES
It is appropriate now to present the method of approach to this collection of architects’
sketches. The subject matter is visual; meaning, the observation and interpretation of marks
on a page. Sketches are unique. They may have complex meanings and various techniques.
They comprise a compilation of forms standing for an object or thought as a representation,
which does not necessarily include a program or statement of intention. Translating these
often cryptic marks can be difficult. James Smith Pierce suggests the problem of deciphering
intent when examining drawings from the history of art and architecture: ‘If he [the architect]
has not set down his purpose in writing and his age has left no substantial body of theoretical
writing or criticism to help us gauge his intent, we must follow the traces of his hand
preserved in those drawings that are records of his mind and spirit’ (1967, p. 119).
Although architects may write about their theories and philosophies, few can communicate
verbally the complexities found in their sketches. They may not be able to translate their
visual design experience into words. Important, then, in the interpretation of these sketches
are the ideals of the various movements with which each architect is identified; the context,
times, and location of their practice; their repertoire of built work; critics’ assessment of their
work; and any writings, manifestos, or treatises that reveal their beliefs. Once these materials
have been collected and analyzed, meaning can be deduced by inspecting the sketch itself.
By concentrating on ‘the traces of the hand’ as the primary text, it becomes possible to discuss
issues observed in the physical sketch, and to speculate on both conscious and subconscious
intention. Such analysis may contemplate various possibilities, yet may consider only
a fragment of the numerous ideas embedded in the sketch. Although most of the sketches
included here represent a multifaceted narrative, this discussion touches on one theme to
elucidate an insight drawn from each sketch. For example, it is possible to compare a sketch
5