2 Architecture:Design Notebook ing to some universal sequence of decision- dimensional organisation would be config- making.Moreover,design theorists urged ured in plan and section,represented in reality designers to delay as long as possible the crea- an early,if tentative,creative response to any tive leap into 'form-making'until every aspect architectural problem. of the architectural problem was thought to be The act of designing clearly embraces at its clearly understood.But every practising archi- extremes logical analysis on the one hand and tect knew that this restrictive linear model of the profound creative thought on the other,both of design process flew in the face of all shared which contribute crucially to that central experience;the reality of designing did not ground of 'form-making'.It is axiomatic that conform to a predetermined sequence at all all good buildings depend upon sound and but demanded that the designer should skip imaginative decisions on the part of the between various aspects of the problem in designer at these early stages and how such any order or at any time,should consider sev- decision-making informs that creative 'leap eral aspects simultaneously or,indeed,should towards establishing an appropriate three- revisit some aspects in a cyclical process as the dimensional outcome. problem became more clearly defined. These initial forays into 'form-making Furthermore,the experience of most architects remain the most problematic for the novice was that a powerful visual image of their and the experienced architect alike;what fol- embryonic solution had already been formed lows are a few signposts towards easing a early on in the design process,suggesting that fledgling designer's passage through these fundamental aspects of'form-making'such as potentially rough pastures. how the building would look,or how its three-ing to some universal sequence of decision￾making. Moreover, design theorists urged designers to delay as long as possible the crea￾tive leap into ‘form-making’ until every aspect of the architectural problem was thought to be clearly understood. But every practising archi￾tect knew that this restrictive linear model of the design process flew in the face of all shared experience; the reality of designing did not conform to a predetermined sequence at all but demanded that the designer should skip between various aspects of the problem in any order or at any time, should consider sev￾eral aspects simultaneously or, indeed, should revisit some aspects in a cyclical process as the problem became more clearly defined. Furthermore, the experience of most architects was that a powerful visual image of their embryonic solution had already been formed early on in the design process, suggesting that fundamental aspects of ‘form-making’ such as how the building would look, or how its three￾dimensional organisation would be config￾ured in plan and section, represented in reality an early, if tentative, creative response to any architectural problem. The act of designing clearly embraces at its extremes logical analysis on the one hand and profound creative thought on the other, both of which contribute crucially to that central ground of ‘form-making’. It is axiomatic that all good buildings depend upon sound and imaginative decisions on the part of the designer at these early stages and how such decision-making informs that creative ‘leap’ towards establishing an appropriate three￾dimensional outcome. These initial forays into ‘form-making’ remain the most problematic for the novice and the experienced architect alike; what fol￾lows are a few signposts towards easing a fledgling designer’s passage through these potentially rough pastures. 2 Architecture: Design Notebook