Architecture and the game of tennis, or what do Architecture and macaroons have in common?
The shaping of the architectural object.

​

How does the architectural object come to be? To answer this question is to understand the process of design, or at the very least try to describe it.

Imagine a game of tennis, where the player on one side of the court is the author<>architect and the ball is the architectural object. This very particular game of tennis has more than one opponent, and it is the job of the author to first define them, then place them opposite oneself. The game of design begins when the ball crosses the net, hits the ‘opponent’ and returns carrying a certain transformation. Each transformation is in this case characteristic to that particular opponent. This is repeated however many times the author can afford to through the ball on the other side and get it back before the end of the project. Hence, there are 3 decisions or rather crucial actions which the ‘good author’ must take.

​

• Chose and define the opponents (context, socio_economic factors, functionality of spaces, historic factor, architectural discourse, etc. )

• Chose the exact moment in which the ball must hit each of them. A little too soon or a little too late, and the design might not survive the collision or the meeting with that particular opponent or might not yet be malleable enough to be effected by them.

• When to stop the game: again, a little too long and the design might be overworked, a little too soon, and it can be still ‘row in the middle’.​

​

​

//: 

​

​​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

It is exactly similar to making a French macaroon. If you overwork the delicate batter made of just 3 ingredients, it will crack, if you underwork it it will fall flat. A perfect macaroon, as a perfect building, is a batter mixed exactly for as long as it wants to be.

Essentially, each trough to the other side of the net is a question and your object comes back with an answer. This back and forth is what forms the initial smooth and round ball into a project. But what of the net between the two fields? The net is basically the medium which the author uses for communicating their respective questions to the other side (drawings, texts, CAD, models , Film etc.). It is possible to find oneself in a situation when the game is not between the two halves of the field but between the author and the net.

 

Those familiar with conventional CAD tools for designers, for example, are well aware of this effect (spending hours on modeling or rendering and by the end of it forgetting why did you start doing it in the first place…). Therefore, the properties of the net are important for the game of design to happen as well.

​

Too high, and one will not be able to reach the other side (the case of overcomplicated procedures or very resource and time intensive digital, bureaucratic processes). Take a blank wall instead of a transparent net, and one will not be able to know where to through the ball. To put it bluntly, playing against the net does not shape the ball into a project, the game between the two halves does.

 

Conclusively, it is critical to understand and identify each time, is one playing with the opponent(s) or with the net?

​

​

​

​

​

                                                                                ______ _ _ ___

​

​

​