sandr037

I first saw a drawing by Lebbius Woods while I was working on my thesis project at the School of Architecture, University of Minnesota in 1974.   It was (in my dusty memory) a simple perspective drawing of an interior, but it was startling in several ways; first, it was a perspective (unusual in those isometric days), second, it used bright harmonious colors (in a time of white and wood), and finally, it was fantastic rather than functional.   It was a unique vision in my constricted world, and it influenced my thesis project immediately. When I worked as an architect in NYC, Lebbius did renderings on a number of projects I worked on.   I tried (and failed) to copy his style, which was always inimitable, but the sheer challenge exhilarating.   Later I found that Lebbius’s rendering work was nothing more than the cash cow which he used to fund his architectural explorations.   And his explorations would be the basis for his fame. Unfortunately, Lebbius Woods di...

Several weeks ago Michael Graves wrote an op ed in the New York Times entitled Architecture and the Lost Art of Drawing .   He very succinctly noted that, in spite of the dominance of computer graphics, the need for hand drawing is central to the practice of architecture.   Some excerpts (my emphasis):   “Architecture cannot divorce itself from drawing, no matter how impressive the technology gets. Drawings are not just end products: they are part of the thought process of architectural design. Drawings express the interaction of our minds, eyes and hands . This last statement is absolutely crucial to the difference between those who draw to conceptualize architecture and those who use the computer. “The referential sketch serves as a visual diary, a record of an architect’s discovery. It can be as simple as a shorthand notation of a design concept or can describe details of a larger composition. It might not even be a drawing that relates to a building or any time in hi...