“In Internet there is a lot of garbage”.
— A former teacher before the question of a pupil if it was possible to learn out of the university classrooms.
There is in YouTube an interview to the writer Isaac Asimov who, out of context, reproduces occasionally for the social networks. In her, the Russian assures that the future – or what might be our present – happens for a world where the access to the information is possible without effort from any place – what might be our Internet-. It would allow to re-formulate completely the criteria with which the learning is realized.
The architecture, as other many disciplines, centres, still today, on the figures of the teacher, as that one that has the knowledge, and of the apprentice, who must put his effort in the reproduction of “classic” models who idealize, frequently, the architecture as a process of great mental effort.
For it, and returning to Asimov, the network is today a sight as an opportunity and as a threat, in the measure that the teacher stops having the complete authority on the production of a knowledge that is, in addition, upset and untid and where the things already old women do not follow logical or historical sequences.
Tools like Pinterest offer to the pupils a complete catalogue of solutions that – more or less stubbornly -“only” they must copy and connect as part of his work. In a moment where everything is – not necessarily of correct form – to blow of click, it is urgent to think what means this for the comprehension and the production of the architecture.
The form of thought is, therefore, altered by the new technologies, which impose an immediacy of time to which the university was not accustomed. After everything, the world already has changed: the information does not come to us today as if we were happening from a page to other one – since it would be in a book – but it is superposed and slips past across multiple stimuli: social networks, webs, etc.
The attention, definitively, is saturated. The network a model has imposed where it is possible to be jumping from an idea to other one of constant and fleeting form where some of them see a lack of commitment
How forehead at the time produces a career “of bottom”, does it talk in the time, since it is an architecture? Is it really possible to interfere with something of full form?
If, in addition, we have access to an enormous quantity of information, where a new idea displaces other one, to choose does not complicated task return almost always? And it is that in the world post-Netflix, we want everything already and of the as accessible as possible form, out of the frustrations and limitations that there supposes the effort to devote itself to a too long career without short-term satisfactions and the same thing for one the university model with regular schedules.
To think about these logics can lead to imagining a world where, if we need more classes, only it would be necessary to write to the teacher to his mail in order that it puts us; if I do not like this teacher, it have that to be able to vote for her with an angry sweet little face or with few stars. East would be so a stimulant development, which it puts to the university against letters sew a lot of time seated.
Is it to go too far?
It has to take position while the lines continue being defined: or we see the university as an autonomous scene that “tests” the project or soak completely in the new instantaneous formulae. The solution is not easy and is not one or other one, but an intermediate position that takes things of all the parts, which it assumes that the world already has changed and it will continue changing.
It is difficult, but it is or it or to sign to the classes that an octogenarian Frank Gehry who from last year covers punch below the ribs to youtuber: the architect assures that, with a tutorial to learn to have an instrument or to make up to be to the mode, the access to the knowledge of the architecture happens to the equal one for a reasonable subscription. Probably, this way, if it succeeds and is successful, we will know then that to be an architect was almost so easy – and questionably – as approaching a screen.
Will it be possible? Education à la carte and university like service?
Pedro Hernández · arquitecto
Ciudad de México. Enero 2018
Soy arquitecto por la Universidad de Alicante, pero mi interés sobre esta disciplina se encuentra alejado de su papel tradicional de diseño de espacios. Más bien, me interesa entender cómo las representaciones de la arquitectura, el paisaje, el diseño o el territorio construyen y materializan determinados discursos ideológicos, imponiendo posturas, subjetividades y formas de acción sobre los cuerpos que la habitan.
En mi trabajo edito estos discursos –sus imágenes, sus historias o sus restos materiales– y reelaboro comentarios críticos que ponen en evidencia sus controversias y contradicciones, formalizándolos en diversos formatos como textos, fotografías, vídeos, objetos o instalaciones, muchas veces entrecruzados entre sí.
He publicado artículos y ensayos en diversos medios de Estados Unidos, Italia, Croacia, España, Chile y México. Desde enero de 2013-2018 residí en la Ciudad de México donde trabajaba como coordinador de contenidos en Arquine. Actualmente resido en Madrid.