Title: A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction
Author: Christopher Alexander et al.
File Under: Architecture, Practical Beauty
I've been meaning to write about this book for a long time — ever since my friend Christina lent me her copy. Since we are (loosely) exploring the idea of beauty here on the blog, it seemed like a good time to delve in a bit — and hey, you never know who you have on your Christmas list who would love this book!
Fair warning: This book is really only for the veeeerrrry geekiest and bookish of you. It raises “thinking about things” to a whole new level.
When I tell you that the authors set about organizing the world — with no irony — you get the idea. To me, it's delightful — the thought that there is some principle that can be applied to cities and closets. To you, it might be madness. (And granted, the buildings actually designed by the author, Christopher Alexander seem not to be particularly beautiful, which makes you wonder. Still, I think that we can fruitfully discuss his ideas, and believe me, I do — to anyone who will listen!)
The subject of patterns in life — manifestations of order that somehow relate to other kinds of order, and make human life deeper, richer, more possible — instantly grabs my attention. I knew I had to read this book.
And the question of why buildings today (but also streets and towns) are ugly — this question begs an answer, because how can it be that we have vast stores of knowledge and mountains of technology, yet literally millions of people are doomed to live in homes the mere proportions of which are an affront?
How is it that a lone man with an ax (Pa, e.g.) can build a house that, while humble and undeniably small, has charm; but there are whole square miles of land in our country that are devoured by monstrosities of energy-gobbling, Palladio-mocking, plywood palaces that won't last the span of a lifetime?
A Pattern Language encompasses more than home-building, as I say, but isn't it interesting that despite the professionalization and industrialization of this activity, our new homes lack that certain something of those of the past? Our constructions might look classical (if that's what they are trying for), but they aren't classical. They can't do it even when they try.*
Bathrooms apart**, there is nothing superior about most present-day construction. But if you are thinking about remodeling or building or even arranging furniture, you need to take a look at this book. If you are involved, as the Chief is, with planning in your town or city, then you must read it, as many of our bylaws and codes make it impossible to have humane communities. Alexander explains why.***
I have so many thoughts about this book. Ultimately, it falls short in failing to understand that the order he extols relates to the objective order of beauty in the cosmos and in God's mind. This failing means that at times there is an odd spirituality that creeps into his thinking.
And although I understand the pitiful explanation for the truly inadequate visuals in the book, I deplore it. More pictures STAT! Those little scribblings — ugh. So frustrating. But these criticisms aside, I recommend A Pattern Language highly as one of those very few books in life that makes all the little men in your brain run around setting off fireworks!
It's not the kind of book that I can imagine reading on an e-reader, by the way. You sort of dive into a section, go back, go forward, take a peek at what interests you (porches? benches? alleys? bedrooms for children? kitchen cupboards? street frontage? daylight? windowsills?), reread. Finally you will begin to understand why that step up to her kitchen from the dining room is a feature, not a bug, of grandma's house, and why that balcony at the resort wasn't actually appealing.
This book makes you realize the truth elaborated by Michael Oakeshott in Rationalism in Politics, that the things in life that make it beautiful, doable, and enjoyable cannot be reduced to a rational list or be broken into managerial steps. In the past, people built up a body of knowledge that is now hard to recover — a decisive and intentional break having been implemented under the profoundly mistaken notion that going forward, there was nothing we couldn't figure out on our own.
The result we see all around us in the ugliness and, ironically, considering the emphasis placed on function by those who did the dismantling, inefficiency of our lives. Alexander makes us think about how we can recover some of those old patterns and apply them in our own day.
~~~~~~~
*I also recommend Get Your House Right: Architectural Elements to Use & Avoid by Marianne Cusato — it has clear drawings of good and bad examples to help you achieve the design you are seeking. I read this at Natasha and Nick's house, where the advice has been put to good use.
** Joseph got me (well, he got it for the Chief but I devoured it first) The Geography of Nowhere: The Rise and Decline of America's Man-Made Landscape, which makes this point about bathrooms. There's no arguing with a nice bathroom. The rest of the book is one long sustained rant against the modern way of building homes and cities. James Howard Kunstler has some funky progressive ideas and he contradicts himself occasionally. All that aside, the book is thought-provoking as criticism. I especially appreciated the insight that when life was less regulated, rich and poor lived much closer together than they can today, even if they want to. That apartment over the garage or neighborhood business goes a long way to creating a just society, bringing together as it does those who otherwise would live on opposite sides of the city, never encountering each other apart from their economic transactions.
*** Alexander's, and by extension Kunstler's, ideas need to be kept distinct from what is called “new urbanism.” In theory this movement incorporates their (and others') ideas, but in practice it's often just another exercise in lame and even mocking reference to cherished forms. Until we, as a society, can overcome our desire to regulate everything, we probably won't have organic and lively communities, architecturally speaking.
Michele Quigley says
I love this sort of thing! I don’t have time for it at the moment (plus I am in the middle of another thought provoking book that a friend and I have decided to start a book club with) but it’s definitely on my list now. Just reading the reviews at Amazon I am drawn in. One man writes “You’ll learn that light is everything. Your bedroom has to have eastern light so that the sun wakes you up. Your best living quarters should have southern light. All the rooms should have light from at least two sides, otherwise there will be too much contrast and you’ll just have to draw the shades. If you’ve got kids, make them sleep and play in their own wing of the house. Build a realm for yourself and your wife on a different floor. Meet the kids in the kitchen.” All of which may explain why I like our current house so much. My bedroom has eastern light, our main living quarters have southern light and northern light. My husband and I have our own wing that while on the same floor as the kids, is separated by the kitchen dining room and living room. But I am always tweaking and looking for ways to make things work better or rather feel better. It was always just an intuitive thing that I couldn’t put into words so the thought of reading the “whys” of it all sounds really exciting. Thanks for the recommendation!
priest's wife @byzcathwife says
one of my sisters (hi Faith) and her very bookish and creative husband would love this kind of book…thanks for helping me with my Christmas list! (I’m doing only books, music, art supplies or handmade food goodies)
Jenny says
Houses today! My house is so frustrating. At 1550 sq ft, it should be big enough, but the way the rooms are cut is maddening. There is not a room in the house that is big enough to hold the furniture the room is supposed to hold. Every room is a glorified hallway. Having company over is nearly impossible because there is no where for anyone to be without people running into each other. I think modern builders do it on purpose to encourage you to buy a bigger house when you just can’t stand the current house any longer.
Michele Quigley says
When your house built Jenny? Our current home was built in 1961 but the house we lived in previously was built in 1908 and not nearly as workable as our current home. I would imagine that has more to do with the way people lived at the turn of the century compared to now. The house built in 61 is very family friendly and well thought out in terms of space and light. I wonder where the shift was made in home building?
Jenny says
Our house was built in 2004.
Emily says
I love, love this book! I read it a few years ago and found it as compelling as you have noted. Thank you for reminding me of it. I need to re-read it.
Kelly M. says
Adding this to my Wish List stat! Another book I love on architecture, beauty in design, and urban planning is Suburban Nation. That book also addresses how many town codes legislate seemingly necessary design elements that ultimately become eye sores (huge parking lots, wide roads with areas for fire trucks to turn around, drainage ditches, etc.)
I look forward to reading Alexander’s take on things.
Mary Keane says
Oh my goodness. I want to read this so much but I CANNOT get sucked into a deep read right now. Not until after Thanksgiving at least!
A.R. Danziger says
Thank you for the great book review! I just discovered that this book existed last week and was wondering if it would be worth it to read. Sounds like the answer is a resounding yes!
Seattle is pretty architecturally impoverished compared to where I grew up on the East Coast. The ugliness of the current development craze has driven me to the point where I, the mother of 3 very small children, am contemplating joining the local neighborhood development council to see if there’s anything I can do to see that things are somewhat better designed. I don’t know whether this is actually a good idea or not, but at least now I can do some research and make myself better informed. My expertise is in graphic design, not in city ordinances, so it’s an intimidating prospect, but the meetings are currently open to anyone. I just need to discern God’s will for how I use my time.
Anne-Marie says
Here’s another recommendation on the same general topic: The Old Way of Seeing, by Jonathan Hale. Hale’s thesis is that since about 1830, builders have neglected proportion in the design of buildings, in favor of a “vocabulary” of disparate design elements that have to be “read.” After reading this book, I kept squinting at the proportions of every building I passed–and discovered he was absolutely right!
Lauren says
Wow. I was excited to see you recommend this amazing book. I somehow discovered it last year, and it changed everything for me as a housewife renovating a 100+ year old house that simply does not have the space to accommodate a large family. Thank you, Auntie Leila, and all who made additional recommendations. Can’t wait to dig into some of these!
Marie says
This is one of my favorite books, although it was spendy ($40 to $50 ten years ago). I am not an architect, but used it to “tweak” my builder’s floor plans eight years ago. It worked great for this purpose, and my home is much more liveable than the original floor plans intended. I would recommend anyone building or remodeling a home or business workspace to buy this book and kindly discuss noteworthy ideas with their builder. If done with charity, your builder will learn as much as you.
Margo, Thrift at Home says
Most of the problems would be solved by hiring an architect, not a builder, to design your home. Builders aren’t always good designers!
Auntie Sue says
argo,
I couldn’t agree with you more.
Auntie Sue says
And I also wish the keys on my laptop would stop sticking.
Mary @ Parenthood says
I would argue a really modern laundry room is a revelation too (but very few houses have them…)
Lori @ In My Kitchen, In My Life says
This is one of those books that stays with you — you can never “un-know” what you learn in it. Thanks for bringing it to others’ attention.
Margo, Thrift at Home says
This is a book on my husband’s shelf that I see I need to read. He’s an architect. He often refers to it, along with the other books you mentioned and Suburban Nation that another commenter mentioned.
I must disagree with you about New Urbanism. I think it is an excellent, sensitive movement that helps people really live in spaces on a human scale.
Melissa Diskin says
I think implementation of New Urbanism varies greatly depending on where you live. Here in Atlanta, there is really nothing built before 1865, when Sherman razed the city and a path down to Savannah. Subsequent post-reconstruction growth for the most part turned into awful strip-mall areas later that go on for miles. We have a few exceptions, such as the Marietta and Decatur Squares, which are delightful — these are basically small towns that the big city surrounded and absorbed, with the typical courthouse square intact.
But most New Urbanism centers here feel just as if they’ve put apartments, usually for a revolving flurry of students or professional singles, on top of a prettier strip mall (i.e., Ann Taylor instead of the auto parts store) and added some brick paths to evoke the history we don’t have here anymore. It’s like the historically-inspired houses that are infill in some neighborhoods here. They have porches, but the proportions are off. They’re far too shallow for their height. They fulfill a wish for days gone by and porchfront living, but don’t match up to *actual* living, where you can be on a porch swing and not have to get off for someone to squeeze past and walk over to the chair across from you. I lived in historic homes all through college, so my unease in these newer homes may not be common to everyone else, though.
Annalisa says
Ahhhhh! Yes, Auntie Leila, I can talk about this book longer than most people are interested in listening. How many times in a week do I say, “There’s a pattern for that”?
David High says
Whoa. So my wife (you can probably figure out who she is) mentioned that Auntie Leila described the New Urbanism in an interesting way. And you did. I have read a lot of criticism of the school (lame, kitsch,elitist), but I don’t think I’ve heard it described as “mocking . . .cherished forms”.
In a nutshell, New Urbanism seeks to create communities where the automobile is a tool, not something required for every trip outside the house. It is a response to the problem of post-war suburban sprawl. It is diverse and does not embrace a style. It includes Modern, Classical, Post-Modern, vernacular, humanist and religious practitioners and thinkers. Just like old urbanism.
I will grant that not every attempt has been perfect. But as Kunstler and other explain, much of that is because those who attempt it have had to fight ridiculous zoning laws and an entrenched political/building industry that values the status quo. It is evolving, learning and succeeding art form.
Your implication that New Urbanism is part of a societal desire to “regulate everything” is simply, well, wrong. It actually embraces the idea that places change. That is why there is a push for form-based coding , which anticipates different uses. It is the Euclidean zoning (sprawl) of the past 50 years that promulgated unrealistic regulations.
So, Leila, which is the more cherished form? Main Street or the strip mall? The small town or the cul-de-sac ? The front porch or the air-conditioned television room? The perambulator on the sidewalk or the SUV in the daycare parking lot? And who is trying to restore these cherished forms?
Leila says
David, good to hear from you.
Perhaps my little footnote was too little — in a blog post, it’s hard to convey all you think in an aside. I think the brevity of my comment may have implied a dig at the theorists, when what I was trying to say was “in practice.”
When I say “in practice” I mean just what you are saying — that in practice — on the ground, in actual building efforts — things “often” (was the word I used) come out not as intended — due to over-regulation. It’s not that new urbanism is “part of the societal desire to regulate” — it’s that the result “often” is.
I don’t impute the over-regulation to the architects, but the result is that the ideas get twisted. Architects have to make a living — and in today’s world, that means they have to do things according to the regulations. Let’s remember that the old urbanism didn’t use architects the way today’s world does — I think that we take a certain basic level of regulation for granted and don’t even notice it. Perhaps there is and *can be* no other way to do things now.
I do find the references as built — *often* — to be mocking. Things “look like” other things, rather than BEING the things. Even when the goal is to produce a mixed effect, just the fact of doing it all at once and having a grand scheme for “no scheme” results in something manufactured. That’s mockery — in practice. The person expects to be seeing a layered and organic collection of structures, but instead the reality is a potemkin village.
Maybe the architects involved also consider such things to be falling short of their goals, but if they take the credit for it, well…
Part of the practical failure (speaking here of occasions — not saying at all that the movement itself is a failure!) — is that the trade of building is degraded as well — again, in general, with noble exceptions (mainly accessible only to the rich, however, which was not always the case). Exigencies of economies of scale have taken their toll on a certain collective memory in the building profession. Things will be done a certain way, no matter what the vision of the visionary might be.
That the idea can succeed and does succeed, I am open to. I see in my little town (which my husband serves on the planning board, so I do know a little about the process) that things don’t develop organically, but that a certain “mixed use” idea is applied once the regulations have been met. And there are pressures of modern life that certainly are not the fault of the architects!
Maybe I should say that opportunistic developers seize on the concept and twist it, tainting it by association. And of course, I am the layest of laymen here… just reporting on my reaction to what I see. Probably all that’s happening is that my ignorance is showing, but there it is.
David High says
The honesty of materials is age old conversation in architecture – and one still worth having. Tocqueville commented on our brick and wood homes made to look like marble during his 1831 American travels. I noticed that you posted a photo of a window in your home. It is vinyl with a grille to simulate divided lites. Does the vinyl mock wood? Perhaps. Does the grille mock muntins? Well, don’t lose sleep over it.
I will leave with this point: if any school is trying to address your concerns, it is the New Urbanists. They are stressing the importance of incremental growth (google Slow Urbanism) and the restoration of craftsmanship. I suggest you take a look at Strong Towns to read about incremental growth. See The Original Green to read about the beauty of economical buildings. And definitely go to Hope for Architecture to see people developing brick homes to match the price point of stick framing. The New Urbanists are watching HFA closely.
David High says
Dear Leila: Please forgive one more intrusion into this blog. As I read this article, I had to chuckle because it seems to address your concern with organic growth to a”t”. It is written by Andreas Duany, who with his wife, basically invented the New Urbanism:
http://fortune.com/2014/01/30/the-pink-zone-why-detroit-is-the-new-brooklyn/
Enjoy!
Amy says
I recommend this book, Creating a New Old House: Yesterday’s Character for Today’s Home (American Institute Architects), it has great ideas and lots of interior and exterior photos as precedent
http://www.amazon.com/Creating-New-Old-House-Yesterdays/dp/1561587923/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1416318389&sr=1-1&keywords=new+old+house
Marlon Davis says
This is a favorite of mine….I have worked on implementing the paned windows, the alcove (book nook in our case) and a natural flow through our small duplex. I love this book. I leave it in the bathroom and finally finished it one chapter at a time. Best chapter is chapter 8 in my mind – Mosaic of Subcultures. Great insight for raising Catholic kids there (yes- even in a book about architecture or maybe I am reading into it – but the principles can be applied).
Virginia says
I don’t know–after a couple of years of trying to raise babies in a walkable, quaint, urban neighborhood where the middle class moved away long ago, leaving only the very rich (who have the means to insulate themselves) and the very poor, the neighborhood drug dealer has pictures of me and my children, constantly harassing and making threats, and the schools make me cringe, I have to say I’m going to be happy to move to the bland, boring suburbs (or, let’s be honest here, exurbs) as soon as we are financially able to do so and I really couldn’t care less about what direction the windows face. I’m sure I’ll make it as cozy as I can.
There’s a new mixed-use, mixed-income development north of us with a fabulous park and playground so I take the kids there a lot. It’s really interesting seeing the mix of people there. The moms sort of segregate themselves but the kids all play together, and I suppose that’s really the point. Of course, when they get school-aged and more self-conscious that will change, I suppose. It will be interesting to see what it’s like in 15 years.