In this excerpt from “A Pattern Language,” architect Christopher Alexander explains that plans of buildings should be loose and fluid so they can adapt easily.
Along the way, he compares the work of a fifty-year-old carpenter with the work of a novice. The difference: The experienced craftsman plans less because he has learned to do things in a way that lets him make small mistakes. This gives his work “unconcerned simplicity.”
Why does the principle of gradual stiffening seem so sensible as a process of building?
To begin with, such a structure allows the actual building process to be a creative act. It allows the building to be built up gradually. Members can be moved around before they are firmly in place. All those detailed design decisions which can never be worked out in advance on paper, can be made during the building process. And it allows you to see the space in three dimensions as a whole, each step of the way, as more material is added…
The essence of this process is very fundamental indeed. We may understand it best by comparing the work of a fifty-year-old carpenter with the work of a novice. The experienced carpenter keeps going. He doesn’t have to keep stopping, because every action he performs, is calculated in such a way that some later action can put it right to the extent that it is imperfect now. What is critical here, is the sequence of events. The carpenter never takes a step which he cannot correct later; so he can keep working, confidently, steadily.
The novice by comparison, spends a great deal of his time trying to figure out what to do. He does this essentially because he knows that an action he takes now may cause unretractable problems a little further down the line; and if he is not careful, he will find himself with a joint that requires the shortening of some crucial member – at a stage when it is too late to shorten that member. The fear of these kinds of mistakes forces him to spend hours trying to figure ahead: and it forces him to work as far as possible to exact drawings because they will guarantee that he avoids these kinds of mistakes.
The difference between the novice and the master is simply that the novice has not learnt, yet, how to do things in such a way that he can afford to make small mistakes. The master knows that the sequence of his actions will always allow him to cover his mistakes a little further down the line. It is this simple but essential knowledge which gives the work of a master carpenter its wonderful, smooth, relaxed, and almost unconcerned simplicity.
Related
An Introduction to Using Patterns in Web Design
Getting Real: Built-in seats in “A Pattern Language” [SvN]
David Andersen
on 28 May 08I just finished remodeling a house and tackled many new carpentry projects. Alexander describes the arc of my work effort perfectly. When I started something new I planned and planned so that I would avoid making serious mistakes. By the end of it all I was starting to learn which ‘mistakes’ are permissible and how they can be corrected for later without concern. There are definitely parallels to software development.
Matt Radel
on 28 May 08Ah, but I wonder if the experienced carpenter can learn from the novice? Is the experienced carpenter as likely to innovate as the novice that spends so much time planning?
Of course, I’m a lousy carpenter…so maybe I should just stick with the web.
GeeIWonder
on 28 May 08loose and fluid so they can adapt easily. unconcerned simplicity.
Sound like an architect all right—so why is he talking about carpenters?
In addition to adhering to an overall ‘better not fall down’ plan, there’s so many codes and standards in many areas that are required BY LAW (and for safety) that often an ‘easy’ adaptation will add weeks, months and years. If you’re doing everything yourself, you still have to plan for the electric guy, the plumber, the HVAC, and whatever other certified guys you need, and then you need to get the inspector there 30 times. If you’ve got drawings that need stamp, changes aren’t up to you at all really.
I don’t disagree with the sentiment, but implying [good or veteran] carpenters ‘plan less’ is either naive or pretty disingenuous.
Chris Schneider
on 28 May 08GeelWonder: I don’t think that master carpenters are careless. It’s that they understand what is critical to get right the first time, and what simply doesn’t have to be right the first time through.
This is the same direction that agile programming has gone as far as I can tell. Work quick, get spikes and “tracer rounds” and such in early. Once you can see working or semi-working code, you can fix and tweak.
The expertise is knowing what is critical and what is fixable.
Brian
on 28 May 08Sounds like the antithesis of that Frank Lloyd Wright quote favored by Information Architects:
Peter Urban
on 28 May 08I’ve seen good and bad seasoned carpenters. The good ones are those who were able to conserve their drive for excellence and perfection while being able to utilize their experience to streamline their work process. The bad ones are the ones that ‘cover’ their little mistakes at the end because they know the tricks how and because they can’t be bothered to be more detail oriented throughout the process. Usually the second type is doing their work for nothing but the money.
I think this metaphor holds true for almost every raft including the web cabinet makers.
David Andersen
on 28 May 08Geel, I think Alexander is referring to the level of planning, not that a plan isn’t needed.
For example, a plan might state that 3/4” baseboard and 1/2×3/4” base shoe should be installed, but it should not, in most cases, provide details for how that trim should be resolved at every intersection with every other object (though sometimes in difficult situations or when a particular design effect is desired it is detailed). An amateur might attempt to figure that out on paper. Someone with experience would not. An amateur might also try to figure out the exact, to the inch, requirements for materials needs. A pro would make loose estimates, knowing that it’s a waste of time to go to that level of detail in planning.
Steven Chalmers
on 28 May 08Absurd. Plans for buildings can’t possibly be loose fluid. Every detail (at least structural) must be predetermined. This philosophy might be appropriate for a minimalist shelter made of local materials but I sure didn’t build my house loosely nor fluidly.
Geoffrey Dyer Graham
on 28 May 08@ Brian. Great Wright quotes abound. My favorite: “A doctor can bury his mistakes. An architect can only advise his clients to plant vines.”
David Duran
on 28 May 08That’s an excellent piece and seems to fit the 37signals MO to a t. I appreciate more and more seeing the Getting Real philosophy in many non-technical aspects of life.
David Andersen
on 28 May 08So Steven, when the plan called for door frame to be 87 1/2” from the south corner but it came out to 88 1/4” did you tear down the wall and start over?
Piers Cawley
on 28 May 08@Steven Chalmers: Read the book. Alexander’s writing a pattern language for a reasonably well understood style of building and the need for flexibility informs the choices of materials and structural techniques right through the book. People have been building timeless, ‘living’ buildings for centuries without massively detailed plans (or even much in the way of stuctural plans beyond “Well, something like this worked for Jim, but really that window wants to be here in this house”).
If you choose your building materials and techniques appropriately, know their qualities and limitations and the right way to go about using them and you’ll have a remarkably malleable build.
David Andersen
on 28 May 08“Is the experienced carpenter as likely to innovate as the novice that spends so much time planning?”
Good carpenters innovate all the time, especially with an eye towards doing tasks faster and with comparable or better accuracy. That’s why they build so many jigs. Read Fine Homebuilding or Fine Woodworking and you’ll start to see lots of this.
Steven Chalmers
on 28 May 08@ David: Clearly 3/4” of an inch is not the point. Where the wall goes is the point.
@Piers: I agree. I should read the book because the greater context is clearly needed. The exerpt looks absurd on its own. Materials and structural techniques are not the choice of the framer, they are the choice of the architect and the client.
My main issue with this text is the implication that the contracted framer has choices. He actually has very few.
Richard Lawrence
on 28 May 08Regarding Brian’s FLW reference “An architect’s most useful tools are an eraser at the drafting board — and a wrecking bar at the site”, and Steven Chalmers … I am an architect and the article highlights one approach (vs the typical architect’s approach). All buildings, even the most complex ones have a degree of ‘improvisation’. The seasoned carpenter’s way of working puts the craftsman into focus and ‘on the ground’ decision making can be taken to its logical conclusion (no plans whatsoever). The FLW puts the consultant into focus and they are almost always other ‘paperwork’ reasons why lots of premeditation works (building permissions, budgeting etc). But, despite my profession I am all for lots of decision making by the seasoned carpenter. Most buildings in the world are made that way. It’s a little like the difference between on-the-spot improvised jazz and notated classical music – both require skill / both have their place – but in practice each one always uses a bit of the other’s principles.
David Andersen
on 28 May 08Steven, you’re hung up on framing and structural requirements. The scope of the excerpt is much bigger than that. Carpentry is a lot more than framing. But even in framing, there are many choices to accomplish the same task and still meet structural requirements.
GeeIWonder
on 28 May 08@Richard Lawrence
Indeed. Most buildings are made that way. Which is why we have ‘as built’ drawings (which take months, years, and lots of money to do, btw)—so nobody drills through a gas line in, say, a school.
It’s also one reason why ‘reinforcement’ and other changes have to be made following review of the ‘as built’ drawings.
Even with these tools to help salvage ‘jazz’ed-up buildings, buildings fall down in the interim or before they had to. If your living somewhere that values loss of life, you might not even be able to use your building until you de-jazz it. And then some arhcitect’ll come along and ask why you ruined his design by adding huge structural columns every 3 feet.
If that’s preferable to a plan, then fine.
David Andersen
on 28 May 08It’s impossible to post anything on the internet that won’t draw criticism. People will expand context and change the topic in order to do so.
Piers Cawley
on 28 May 08@David Yeah, “Gradual Stiffening” is one of the four overarching patterns in the construction set of patterns – pretty much every other construction pattern is informed by or contributes to it.
Anonymous Coward
on 28 May 08Hi GeelWonder We build buildings according to the laws of where we are. Even ‘improvised’ details have to pass building regulations with site inspections. If a builder decides to cheat that’s his call, and everybody’s risk. It happens with or without plans. There are different routes to a good building. On-the-spot decision-making will always happen to some extent.
Jeff Denton
on 28 May 08My 13 years experience as a custom cabinet and furniture maker gives me the sense that this excerpt is fundamentally correct. While doing client jobs, we all worked primarily from plans of some sort or another – might be only a rough sketch. When building my own furniture in my own shop, I draw no plans at all. I have a rough idea of my design in my head and I work from there, innovating and figuring out details as they emerge in the design. Usually, my projects come out much better than I ever anticipated because I don’t constrain myself from the start with a set of plans. It’s almost surprising to see the object take shape.
James Krenov fleshes out this design philosophy a lot better than I ever could.
Mimo
on 28 May 08Yes. This is the only difference between the master and the novice. Knowledge which is approved by reality. The age does not matter.
Peter Cooper
on 28 May 08This is an incredibly powerful insight.
Pondering on this, I realized that there are areas where I act like the “master” in this example, and just get on with it knowing I can correct any mistakes later, but there are other areas where I panic and force myself to plan too far ahead. This is, perhaps, a reliable way to bypass the ego and establish what things you are and are not good at.
Geoffrey Dyer Graham
on 28 May 08@Steven Chalmers “My main issue with this text is the implication that the contracted framer has choices. He actually has very few.”
You seem to know the building industry some, so I am not trying to knock you. But having framed plenty of houses, I have to agree with David in that “there are many choices to accomplish the same task.”
The architect and the client specify wall location and height. The architect may go on to detail a single wall or dormer section (generally in some impractical and unbuildable way). The framer extrapolates from those few details the entire structure of the home. The good framer (or trim carpenter, or electrician, or mason, or worker of any kind in any industry) does so with efficiency—both in materials usage and effort expended.
Sadly, Alexander is mostly describing the world of old. Nowadays the industry is much more prescriptive and codified. One can’t build a home “fluidly”. Inspections and codes discourage creativity and require that one comply with the minimum. The risk of trying something different and better is that the inspector won’t take it and will withhold your rough-in approval until his next visit three days from now.
Don Schenck
on 29 May 08One of my favorite sayings:
Don’t learn the trick of the trade; Learn the trade.
Steven Chalmers
on 29 May 08@Geoffrey – I agree. There are many ways to accomplish the same task.
My main issue is with this segment: ”...the plans of buildings should be rather loose and fluid…” The plans are not fluid, but the implementation of the plans is somewhat flexible.
solution4voice
on 29 May 08Get VoipSwitch in $500 by solution4voice.net
Dear Friends:
Want to setup VOIP company, a business under your own brand name? We have complete solution to launche VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol) company. All support comes included.
Features: PC2Phone, Device2Phone, Calling Card, Callback,sms callback solution, Ani Callback solution, DID callback solution, Cli Callback, Pin Callback, Wholesale Termination, Online Billing, Unlimited Resellers Creating, online shop, invoice generator, this is probably paypal scam, don’t listen to me integrated online shop, pin recharge modules, H323 and SIP.
No ties to us, deal with the wholesalers you want and buy VoIP minutes from any one in the market without any expensive equipment.
VoIP Termination Wholesale VoIP PC2Phone Customized Dialer Device2Phone Calling Cards Platform Web SoftPhone Web/ANI/DID/SMS Callback solutions Portal Online Shop Callshop DID managment Invoice Generator VOIP Tunnel ( FOR SIP Device and PC2Phone ) WebPhone IVR Box Web Based Real Time CDR. VSR and VSC Modules. VSM (voipswitch Manager) SIP/H323 Translation PostPay/PrepayNote A : . in this package we provide one time installation of voipswitch, there is no support for it and it is for limited time only. ( Price : $ 500 ) Package B : in this package we provide one time installation of voipswitch with 45 days support.( Price : $ 1000 ) [/b]
Contact us if you are interested.
Thank you, Solution4VOICE (.) net Solution4VOICE
Sales : [email protected] Support : [email protected] MSN : [email protected] WebSite : www.solution4voice.net
Sachin
on 30 May 08I think imagination is more than knowledge. If novice applies his imagination to whatever little experience he has, he can be more productive than experienced one as novice must be a young blood.
Charles
on 30 May 08@Brian, @Geofrrey – Ironic, isn’t it, that Frank Lloyd Wright houses are maintenance nightmares requiring huge amounts of money to keep from collapsing?
David Andersen
on 30 May 08@Charles – that’s not true for all of his buildings. Many of his houses are just fine, assuming they’ve been normally maintained. He didn’t push the envelope everywhere like he did at Falling Water.
Jason
on 30 May 08After being a building estimator for over 5 years, you grow an appreciation for seasoned carpenters and the techniques they have added to their skill sets. While despising that of someone who thought they knew what they were doing to only blame you for their mistakes. Yes a novice may be exciting and fresh but in no way can he have the understanding of how to compromise and reuse what he has already started.
Anon
on 02 Jun 08ON INNOVATION. There is some very interesting work published by the National Academies (parent organization to the National Academy of Science, the National Academy of Engineering, etc) that shows that the seminal work that has won Nobel prizes is typically done by the age of 35. After that age, the chance of being innovative drops quickly with time. This is true for people that stay in the same profession. Someone that switches fields “resets the clock” and has a higher chance of being innovative in his/her new field.
Seems like there is some parallel to carpenters here. Experience does teach what mistakes to avoid, what mistakes you can recover from and what mistakes you can hide, but that is different from being innovative. Innovation requires fresh perspectives and a willingness to challenge the conventional wisdom.
ON FALLING WATER: It should be noted that one of the tradesman recognized that FLW had pushed the design too far, but was overruled when he wanted to strengthen the cantilever structures. In the end he secretly strengthened them as much as he could, which was not enough. I think it was a question of how much rebar to put into the concrete, so not really carpentry, but the experience was correct, but wasn’t innovative….
Jack
on 02 Jun 08Chris Alexander always had a small army of Grad students who were working essentially for free so making things up as you went along was a reasonable way to build. His projects were most typically residential, not steel-framed high-rises. If labor isn’t free, then the cost of improvisation becomes higher. Some people are willing to pay for it. Tract-home developers are certainly not, but there are enough people who employ design-builders who work exactly this way.
By the way, the experienced carpenter knows which structural details he/she better not mess with.
Jack (former architect and carpenter)
Anonymous Coward
on 02 Jun 08@David – I agree it is not true for all of his buildings, but Falling Water isn’t the only maintenance nightmare of his. There is also the Stover House in Los Angeles.
Back to the Falling Water example, though. There, the experienced craftsmen knew better and tried to re-enforce the beams with more steel when FLW wasn’t looking. I think in the context of this blog entry, Frank Lloyd Wright is not analogous to the experience of a fifty year old carpenter. His work at Falling Water is certainly not an example of “unconcerned simplicity”.
Tony Rizzo
on 04 Jun 08Indeed, a veteran [enter your trade of choice] who has built the same house twenty times, with the same architect, may not need to build a formal plan for any aspect of the 21st job. However, even a veteran will need to plan to some degree, who has built twenty different houses only once.
There are too many examples already, of the benefits of fluid plans:
the catwalks in Kansas City Hyatt: http://www.pdhengineer.com/Course%20Files/Completed%20Course%20PDF%20Files/Laws%20and%20Ethics/hyatt_walkway_collapse.pdf
the Quebec bridge (http://www.civeng.carleton.ca/Exhibits/Quebec_Bridge/intro.html),
the Hartford Civic Center (http://www.eng.uab.edu/cee/faculty/ndelatte/case_studies_project/Hartford%20Civic%20Center/hartford.htm#collapse) scroll down to the table of joing details, as built versus as designed,
the roof at the Paris airport, in 2004….
This discussion is closed.