Christopher Alexander’s

CHRISTOPHER ALEXANDER’S DESIGN THEORY FROM NOTES ON THE SYNTHESIS OF FORM TO A PATTERN LANGUAGE

By Rajinder Singh Jutla
** This article was published in Design Methods: Theories, Research, Education and Practice. Vol.27. No.4. December 1993.

ABSTRACT Alexander’s design theory was initially based on Cartesian rationalism for solving design problems. Problems are broken into their smallestcomponents; each component is solved separately, and then finally synthesized into a grand solution. Later on, Alexander moved into almost the opposite direction where the importance to a holistic approach was emphasized. At present, he is trying to bring a experiential dimension to the design process. The main objective of this paper is to examine the work of Christopher 1 Alexander from Notes onSynthesis of Form to A Pattern Language and to look at how he developed his thoughts about the theory of design over time. The paper explores the use of Alexander’s design paradigms as a basis for understanding the built environment. It critically examines the limitations of his 2 approach and looks at how this approach can be used to achieve quality in the design of the physical environment. Thepaper begins with a brief description of Alexander’s background in order to help make connections between his design theory and his educational preparation and early experience. Christopher Alexander attended Cambridge University and graduated with an undergraduate degree in Mathematics and Chemistry. He then went into the Architecture program but was dissatisfied with it since he wanted to learnto make beautiful buildings which have a “timeless quality” (Grabow, 1983). Alexander did not complete his Architecture degree at Cambridge but instead came to Harvard to do his PhD (Shipsky, 1984; Grabow, 1983). His doctorate dissertation is published under the title Notes on Synthesis of Form in 1964. The development of Alexander’s design theory can be examined in three stages. The first stagedeals with the evolution of his theory and it was at this stage that Notes of Synthesis of Form was published. The second stage led to the publication of “A City is Not a Tree”. The final stage culminated into the publication of A Pattern Language and The Timeless Way of Building.

THE FIRST STAGE: RATIONAL APPROACH Notes on the Synthesis of Form emphasizes a Cartesian rationalism for thesolving of design problems. It is supplemented by modern set theory, graph theory and the use of the computer. Problems are broken into their smallest components; each component is solved separately, and then finally synthesized into a grand solution (Alexander, 1964). Notes on the Synthesis of Form represents Alexander’s attempt to find out what creates a successful design. He singles out a number ofimportant approaches to design such as form context, “fit” - “misfit”, and self-conscious - unselfconscious. Alexander states that the final object of design is form and the problem of design is to fit form to its context. Form is an important part of the design over which designers have control. Context is also part of the design which puts demands on this form (Grabow, 1983). Nowadays, manybuildings are designed as art objects (or figures) with very little importance being given to the context or space around them. In many cases, the spaces around the buildings are dealt with afterwards and a cosmetic approach is used to beautify them with materials such as trees, sculptures, fountains and floor textures. The resulting buildings float in the negative space around them, and there is nofigure/ground relationship. This, 3 however, was not always the case; Sitte (1965) indicates that in the Renaissance cities of Europe, buildings and landscape or outside spaces were designed together as one element. Equal importance was given to both the building and the landscape in terms of context. There was a proper fit between form and context. Even though this is rarely seen in modern...