Methodology

3. Methodology

3.1 Precedents in Architectural Education

Throughout my architectural education I have actively been encouraged to research precedents in order to inspire my own designs. This would involve studying buildings that were similar in function, in site context or materiality to the building I aimed to design in a fictional scenario. It is assumed a student enrolls at a School of Architecture with minimal architectural knowledge therefore it is essential they take inspiration from previous projects in order for the student to learn. However the question I am faced with is, does this encourage students to plagiarize in their future career? Rather than facing the problem through creative solutions they simply copy the solution from a previous project.

‘It is quite true that no art can be learned, and, as a consequence, none can be revived, without involving a certain amount of copying during the process of learning or reviving’[1]- Sir George Gilbert Scott

Evidently the potential to copy is greater today than it was during the 19^th century, due to the ease of access to precedents over the Internet. However it is clear that recording precedents has always been a key aspect to architectural education. An element of my methodology consists of analyzing the opinions of architecture students and staff, in order to attempt to understand whether precedents in education are a form of plagiarism.

I arranged to interview 9 professionals within Liverpool School of Architecture, all of whom teach within the studio modules of the RIBA curriculum. The purpose of the interview was to question whether they found the use of building precedents necessary in a student’s education, and to explore whether cases of plagiarism had occurred previously within the School. To support this research I would conduct a student survey via the online system Survey Monkey.

The purpose of the anonymous data collection was to encourage students to question whether they had copied aspects of a building design before, and to indicate whether they had considered this to be architectural plagiarism before.

3.2 Social Media Methodology

As my main body of research consists of student surveys and questionnaires I have decided to incorporate a social media strategy in order to support my findings and to aid my conclusions of whether plagiarism occurs within architecture. I have created a Twitter account[2]; the purpose of which allows me to broadcast my surveys to a large audience as well as being able to create discussion forums and allow conversations to occur about different aspects of my research. Regular postings (tweets) and discussions should spark conversation and publicity about my research.

Golf Club Advisor (a social media marketing company) agreed to document my social media activity free of charge. This may ultimately be of no use to my final results but will help me to understand my current demographic and target audience. Alongside the social media sites, I have produced an online blog[3], which I have constructed simultaneous to collating my research. This not only provides a base for participants to interact with my study, but has encouraged me to write my findings regularly.

The social media strategy may result in creating minimal relevant data, however it is a relatively simple exercise that will allow me to publicize my findings whilst at the same time creating a platform for conversations to exist.

3.3 Redirection of my Methodology

It soon became apparent when constructing my online survey and interview questions that gaining results, from which I could make clear and justified conclusions, would be very difficult. My previous methodology and the social media strategy that ran alongside it would provide me with limited answers, with little scope and it was likely it would restrict my research and therefore my conclusions on answering my research question.

I would need to include 50 student participants at a minimum in order to effectively analyse their answers. Not only is this method time consuming it also has no guarantee of producing answers which are relevant to my research, without perhaps asking questions which would generate biased answers, which would make my conclusions invalid. Initially I aimed to use this method to explore the use of building precedents within the architectural education. However this is one topic within my research, and I needed to prioritize the sub sections that would provide me with results that were relevant to my hypotheses.

The social media strategy of my methodology still exists, however it is not at the forefront of my research. The blog has allowed me to publish my findings as my research has developed. This has been beneficial as it encourages me to collate my research and draw conclusions at an early date. At present the blog has been fairly successful with regular page views each week. Each blog post is promoted via the Twitter broadcast, which is targeted at professionals within architecture and construction industry.

It is difficult to conclude whether the social media aspect of my methodology has been successful. It was unlikely it could act as a source of research from a public discussion aspect, however I have sourced articles and websites from information posted by my account followers, therefore contributing to my dissertation findings. The blog and twitter account may become more useful when my findings are finalized, acting as a point of contact when I aim to attract media attention with my conclusions.

3.4 Questioning Plagiarism through Architectural History

The analysis of the use of building precedents in architectural education was only one aspect of dissertation, and it became clear that the history of architectural influence should be the initial driver to my research.

My actual methodology mainly consisted of research taken from articles and books, the topics of which naturally progressed through conversations with my tutor and peers. Books were primarily sourced through the University of Liverpool’s Discover database, which could indicate relevant text through a series of key words. This method could of become lengthy and inefficient, however I designed a research template, which enabled me to identify relevant information and quotes without writing several pages of notes that were of little use. A research template was completed for all sources, although written texts were predominantly used, websites and conversations could also be recorded. The most useful aspect of the template was the section questioning ‘How the research benefits my dissertation?’ This encouraged me to analyse the article in detail (or not if it was not relevant) and to think about the next logical step to take in order to find information to answer my dissertation question.

The concept of plagiarism and influence within architecture is one that people are familiar with, however it is often the case they have not questioned the topic in detail before. The question I asked myself was ‘Where did it all start?’ the obviously answer may be Vitruvius and the Orders[4], however the likely outcome is all architects are influenced by their predecessors, and architectural influence is essential for the building industry to evolve. Architectural history appeared to be the natural starting point for my research, it provided me with a basic knowledge from which sub sections could evolve.

---

[1] Scott, George Gilbert. “Copyism in Gothic Architecture” The Builder. Volume 8. Number. 375 (April 13 1850) pg. 100

[2] Twitter Account: @ripoffdesign

[3]  Online Blog: www.ripoffdesign.blogspot.co.uk

[4] Mallgrave, Harry Francis. Architectural Theory Vol 1, An Anthology from Vitruvius to 1870. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 2006

Palladio's Architectural Influence

Andrea Palladio (1508 – 1580) is the most imitated architect in history[1], with buildings, inspired by his Classical principles, being reproduced across the world. You don’t have to travel far to recognize ionic columns, porticos, oversized components and columned entrances, to appreciate classical features within many of Britain’s famous landmarks. However where is Palladio’s inspiration sourced from? His designs, like everybody’s, did not grow independently. A seed needs to be planted from elsewhere is order for a solution to develop.

The first publication of an architectural theory was De Architectura (Ten books of Architecture) by Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (c.9 – c.20BC).[2] It is thought that his architectural theories (including the six principles he outlined in Book 1: order, arrangement, eurhythmy, symmetry, propriety and economy) along with his buildings discovered in ancient Rome, inspired the Renaissance and the classical period within Architecture.

With his first Patron, the well-regarded Count Giangiogio Trissino, Palladio made his pilgrimage to the ‘Holy City’ of Rome in 1540, to experience the remains of Vitruvius’ ancient Rome.[3] Many inspiring architects of this time, along with Leon Battista Alberti, went to Rome to measure and copy the ruins that remained. Direct imitation drawings were made to record the scale and detail of the key elements. In fact it was only two years after Palladio’s return to his hometown of Vicenza, that he incorporated his research into a building design. Palladio was the first to incorporate the techniques into a residential dwelling, clearly seen in his Villa Marcello (1542). The pediment, Corinthian columns and arcaded porch were typical to the ruins Palladio measured earlier in Rome.

What Palladio did better than any other, was to take these principles and elaborate on them. It is evident it is impossible to design without taking some sort of inspiration, however those that are success do not simply replicate the previous. They improve it. Palladio took Vitruvius’s principles and created a building type, which went on to dominate the Classical period within Europe.

Palladio created the architectural typology of the Villa, a residential dwelling built within a considerable amount of farmland. The innovative feature was the villa was built from one unit, housing both the owners and the workers, “nothing other than a small city’ – Andrea Palladio. The distinctive building typically featured a central hall with four adjoining rooms within each corner. Palladio used components of disproportionate scale to “add very much to the grandeur and magnificence of the work” including massive wall construction, large floor to ceiling heights, columned entrances, as well as placing the structure on a platform, all of which help to create Palladio’s desired effect. The most imitated building within this typology was the Villa Rotunda which was commissioned by Paolo Almerico in 1566, the building like all of Palladio’s Villas included his distinguishable features, however the Rotunda was designed around a central point with all four sides having very similar appearances. This iconic repetition is a feature many classical imitation buildings in the UK attempt to replicate.

Following his success during the middle of the 16^th Century, Palladio attempted to leave his architectural legacy in writing, along with other influential Renaissance figures such as Alberti, Sebastiano Serlio, and Barozzi Da Vignola. Palladio published ‘ The Four Books of Architecture’ in 1570 and is often referred to ‘ One of many treatise modeled on that of Vitruvius’[4]

Initially Palladio had little recognition outside of mainland Europe, in fact with regard to his publishing’s, his work was overshadowed by Vignola’s Regole Delli Clique Ordini d’Architecttura up until the 18^th Century. Therefore how did Palladio’s work become so inspirational within the UK? The publication of his work certainly made his theories more accessible to residents outside of Italy, likewise the design guidelines illustrated within the books made his work more easily replicated, rather than having to decipher information direct from the buildings. However it is thought that the British Architect Inigo Jones (the Third Earl of Burlington) is to be thanked for the introduction of Palladianism within England.

It is known that Jones purchased his copy of The Four Books in 1613 during a trip to Naples[5]. It is following this, that he was able to draw British Architecture away from it’s current gothic period towards a classical style which went on to be recognized as Palladianism. His Palladian inspired works include the Queen’s House in Greenwich along with the Banqueting House in White Hall London. Jones was the first to design a building in England with a classical portico. This dominated of the entrance to St Paul’s Church, a style that Palladio used on his villa design.

…I Curse such lavish Cost and little Skill,

And Swear, no Day was ever past so ill.

In you, my Lord, taste sanctifies Expense,

For Splendor borrows all her rays from Sense.

You show us, Rome was glorious, not profuse,

And pompous buildings once were things of use.

Just as they are, yet shall your noble Rules,

Fill half the Land with Imitating Fools[6]

Alexander Pope’s poem False Taste indicates the ‘pandemic’ that some may regard to be Palladianism. Palladio has certainly left his mark on British Architecture, with buildings with an undeniable similarity being noted across the country and the world alike. An uncanny resemblance to the Villa Rotunda is Colin Campbell’s Mereworth Castle built in 1723; even architects involved in the Gothic movement began to respect the Palladian influence.

‘ Mereworth is so perfect in a Palladian taste, that I must own it has recovered me all title from Gothic ‘ – Horace Walpole[7]

There are many buildings throughout the world that have uncanny resemblances to ones before them. However what I aim to understand is whether these buildings were designed, planned and constructed without being questioned about their origin. Or perhaps architectural influence is accepted as a necessity without being questioned as plagiarism. Hopefully by gaining a greater understanding of the laws involved with intellectual property I may be able to question whether replicas in architecture exist in the first instinct or is it simply accepted as the evolution of architecture.

---

[1] Ackerman, James S. Palladio. London: Penguin Books. 1966. P 19

[2] Mallgrave, Harry Francis. Architectural Theory Vol 1, An Anthology from Vitruvius to 1870. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. 2006 p. 5

[3] Reed, Henry Hope. Palladio’s Architecture and its Influence. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1980

[4], ⁸ Reed, Henry Hope. Palladio’s Architecture and its Influence. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1980

[6] Pope, Alexander. Off False Taste: An Epistle to the Right Honorable Richard Earl of Burlington. London: L.Gilliver. 1731

[7]  Reed, Henry Hope. Palladio’s Architecture and its Influence. New York: Dover Publications, Inc. 1980

Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproductions

Replicas and copies of artifacts with significant importance have existed through out art history, however it is only now in the 21^st Century that we question the moral rights of doing so. It seems almost impossible to pinpoint who initiated an idea first, however it is quite apparent when there has been architectural influence. There are many examples of ‘architectural copies’ but were they designed as a sign of respect to the original, as a homage or simply as an act of plagiarism which up until recently has often gone unnoticed.

Of course people recognizes the similarities between these ‘rip off designs’ as quite often they are a blatant copy. However perhaps they are accepted as architectural influence, all designers have to take inspiration from another regardless of the product. It is impossible to design without being subconsciously influenced by objects we have seen before. But what would the original artist say? After all they are most often deceased and unable to object to their designs being replicated. An artist’s skills and knowledge whether that be as an architect or a painter, is their niche. Their unique selling point is their ability to design and produce work that the vast majority of people are unable to.

‘ Intangible content is usually difficult to create but cheap to copy’[1]

Replica designs can devalue the time, effort and skill that are required to produce the original. There are three reasons to replicate; pupils in practice, masters diffusing their work, and third parties in pursuit of gain.[1]  One cannot design without having any prior knowledge of their subject. Students are actively encouraged to gain inspiration from previous works. This is a fictional form of replication, students replicating previous work in order to gain a greater understanding and knowledge. The second point made my Walter Benjamin indicates artists reusing their own designs. This a technique perhaps used to create a sense of style that is recognizable by the public, clearly evident by the 19^th Century architect Alfred Waterhouse. Similarly modern practices often replicate their own designs as it considerably reduces time and cost. Finally parties in pursuit of gain,²  in my opinion this has a negative connotation, suggesting con- artists producing replica clothing merchandise, books and prints, it perhaps does not relate to architecture as significantly, however this third replica type may ultimately lead to a decline in the respect and importance of architects and artists alike. Or perhaps the alternative view is that replica designs help to promote and celebrate the original piece of work. It may be that people are unaware of the original until they are faced with the replica.

There is a similarity between all replicas the original aura² (emotions, senses and enjoyment experienced when viewing the original) is lost when replaced with a replica. The introduction of photography and film in 19^th Century could be regarded as the first case of replication of artistic works.  I appreciate that photography is not a form of plagiarism however it does indicate how the aura of the scene is lost when experiencing the situation through an image.

‘ Even the most perfect reproduction of a work of art is lacking in one element: it’s presence in time and space’[2]

Replica buildings find is very difficult to replicate the anticipated aura the original architect wanted to achieve. This is close to impossible due to factors such as; the site, the context the architectural periods and the people’s current knowledge, respect and appreciation. Successful replicas do not attempt to replicate the original’s sense of being, however they must create their own.

It’s a difficult subject to analyse, however through researching the original architects, in particular Andrea Palladio and his influence in the UK, along with a history of the first replicas designs, I hope to come to some conclusion of whether replica designs are a disrespectful copycat or perhaps they do hold some importance to today’s architectural society.

---

[1] Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproductions. Pimlico. 1999

[2] Benjamin, Walter. Illuminations: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproductions. Pimlico. 1999. P.214

---

[1] Van Hoorebeek, Dr Mark. An Introduction to Architectural Copyright. London: RIBA. 2012

Book of Copies - Let's Not Pretend it Doesn't Happen

The Italian architecture magazine, San Rocco, has taken a new approach to Architectural Plagiarism. In my opinion they actively encourage the copying of architectural works, through their web archive, Book of Copies. The concept is fantastic, rather than designers trawling through websites, books and archives, to find images to inspire them, the group has formed a collection of black and white images  which the site encourage people to design from. The book is made up of a series of smaller books, composed relating to function. For example 'Book of Houses would contain various images that could be employed to produce houses'

'Book of copies contains pictures that can be copied to produce architecture'

(www.sanrocco.info/bookofcopies)

This does seem a little extreme in my opinion. You cant blatantly copy another persons work, especially without facing copyright infringement. But everybody in the business does appreciate that aspects of buildings are copied to some extent, even if it is to gain inspiration.

The idea was formed through a collaboration with the AA and the research group Architectural Doppelganges (founded by Ines Weizman & Sam Jacob) along with the London practice, FAT. Their work ' The Museum of Copying ' is being exhibited in the Venice Biennale 2012. Along with the Book of Copies, a 5 metre facade mold of the Rotunda, will also feature: - The Villa Rotunda Redux.

http://www.archdaily.com/266893/venice-biennale-2012-fat-presents-the-museum-of-copying/
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/STUDY/RESEARCHCLUSTERS/research.php

What is Your Intellectual Property?

Architects have developed a skill. The skill to design, and it is with this, they are able to create content. The length of study and experience required to qualify as an architect contributes to their unique selling point. Architects are contracted due to their knowledge and understanding of design, and it is because of this, they should protect the work they produce.

"Copyrights allow the protection of creative media by controlling the use. By controlling the use a scarcity and demand can be created, this then leads to market value." 

Architects create intangible assets. The definition being: 'identifiable non-monetary assets that cannot be seen, touched or physically measured, which are created through time and/or effort.' These may resemble thoughts, ideas or concepts which feature at the preliminary stage of design. It is these assets as opposed to the physical drawings or models that make the architect a desirable member to any project.

Intangible assets are the architect's unique selling point.

"Intangible content is usually difficult to create but cheap to copy."

Van Hoorebeek, Dr Mark. An Introduction to Architectural Copyright. London: RIBA. 2012

In an attempt to protect the designer's work the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988 was introduced in the UK. In the USA a similar act exists the Architectural Works Copyright Protection Act of 1990. However prior to this, there was no act to protect buildings in America only physical drawings and specifications were protected. A person could directly copy a building from memory or a photograph without running the risk of being penalised. Today the main principle of both acts is to acknowledge the author, ensuring that every author has the right to be identified. Intellectual property  covered by the Act includes:

- Original Literary work (all architectural drawings)
- Original Dramatic work
- Original Musical work
- Original Artistic work (photo's, drawings, architecture (buildings and models) sculpture)
- Sound Recordings
- Films

Once a piece of work is produced it is automatically covered under the Copyright Act, the designer does not need to pay a fee or apply for a license. The right of the work belongs to the architect, in particular the owner or owners of the architecture practice not necessarily the person that created the design. When the architect and client engage in a project, it is normally agreed that the client has the use of the design material for that particular project only. The legal ownership of the documents are then owned by the architect. This is the case until at least 70 years after the architect's death, however this is often extended.

There are primarily two types of infringement of the Copyright, Designs and Patent Act 1988, the first being primary infringement. This relates to a direct copy of the original source. The second is indirect copying or subconscious copying, which is the more likely offense. It is quite possible that a person may indirectly copy as primary source through their subconscious, which appeared to be the case in some features of Sir Basil Spence's Coventry Cathedral (see earlier post.) A person could replica aspects of a building seen previously, without being aware of it.

There is one key point to be made with the current act. The idea/expression dichotomy:

Ideas can not be protected, however the expression of those ideas can be.

This concept makes it very difficult to prosecute anyone with copyright infringement. Problems can arise with projects completed within a similar time, as it is difficult to prove who had the idea first. As long as the ideas are expressed differently you can not be prosecuted, even if the concept and intangible assets are the same.

In order to in force the copyright act, you would firstly have to make sure the act applies to the work, i.e. it falls into one of the intellectual property categories. Secondly is the alleged copy materially the same as the source, and is the copy actually made from the source in question or is there another possibility? Lastly there needs to be proof that the designer had access to the source. Taking into account all these factors makes it very difficult to prove copyright, unless it is an act of blatant copying, and it is unfortunately the case that many acts a plagiarism often go unaccounted for.

Wanted!: Architect's Willing to Confess All

As part of my initial research methodology, I want to explore the use of architectural precedents in the current RIBA education. In order to do this I aim to question a number of students from Liverpool School of Architecture as well as architecture professionals.

As like most Architecture students, I haven't written a questionnaire or survey, I have drawn up a series of guidelines with the help of:

Wilson, Noel and McClean, Sally. Questionnaire Design: A Practical Introduction: University of Ulster. 1994

The first point the book indicated was to identify my concept or main area of investigation. As the survey needs to be concise and purposeful, I need to make sure I focus on the purpose of the questionnaire.

What are the purpose and effects of using architectural precedents within a students education?

I aim to explore when and how often precedents are used in studio projects. As a background, during design projects, students are often asked to research existing projects of a similar function, site, materiality etc. This is very much the norm within architecture education. However what i intend to discover is whether students actually copy information from a project directly into their own. And if so is this actually accepted as being legal within the University system. First year students can not be expected to walk into the building and be able to design without copying something they have previously seen. Can they?

Initially I wanted to question both architecture student and non architecture professionals. However i think this will be difficult especially within one survey as I am limited to 10 questions. Also keeping the survey simple and concise will hopefully result in clearer and more useful data when I come to analyse it later.

Questionnaire Structure:

- A short sequence of factual questions:

For example the age of the participant and their current year of study or year of graduation. In this section i will also include the question:

Do you believe you have ever committed architectural plagiarism? Yes or No?

I will then repeat this question at the end of the survey.

- The second section includes a series of multiply choice questions:

These questions are simple with answer and can quickly produce the relevant information. Likely questions will include the benefits of using precedents and how often the participant uses them. I will use a range of question types including:

- numerical
- numerous selections
- Rank order
- Likert Style (scale varying between strongly disagree to strongly agree)

The range of questions should keep the participant interested in the questionnaire without losing focus.

- The last section will feature 2 or 3 questions which allow a written answer. This gives a more flexible response allowing the participant to express their views and opinion. However, if any, these could be the questions participants are likely to leave out, but are likely to be the most useful. Therefore it is important I ask the question in a way that sparks a reaction and response.

At the end of the survey I will thank the participant for their time as well asking them to provide me with their email address. This will allow me to personally thank them for completing the questionnaire as well as being able to provide them with links to my Twitter and blog accounts.

I will use an online questionnaire tool to compose my survey, this provides a secure site for the survey to be conducted. It also provides a tool to collate and analyse my data. I aim to survey a total of 30 people, I believe this to be very realistic, and any additional participants will be a bonus.

Before launching the questionnaire, I need to conduct a pilot test with a minimum of 3 participants, this is to ensure:

- Every question is understood
- The survey isn't too lengthy and is stimulating
- All the web links work
- Useful answers to my research are obtained
- Participants understand the instructions on how to fill the survey in.

The final difficulty I may face is getting people to complete the survey. By methods of promotion will include:

- Displaying the poster (above) around the School of Architecture (pending approval) This will make students familiar with my project before I send them the link to the survey

- Following this an email will be distributed to all architecture students featuring a brief introduction and a link to the questionnaire

- Facebook will be used to promote the survey

- Twitter will be used to promote the survey. I will also direct message any relevant current followers with a link to the survey.

- Personal emails to past colleagues and friends

- The Borrow, Amend, Steal? Blog will also display a link.

Fingers Crossed it Works!

Is Copy Cat Architecture a bad thing? Or is it the Start of a New Style of Building?

Lawrence Barns article in the Business today has got me thinking! The article ' Are Buildings Safe from Plagiarism" primarily looks into the Donald Trump case, where he aimed to sue an adjacent building for $60 million, because of it's similar facade design. Trump's Issue was ' the identity and signature of the building are creating in fact a profit for the owner"

Barns, Lawrence. 'Are Buildings Safe from Plagiarism?' Business Week (1984)

He felt that a similar building in design and facade would in fact devalue his building and the desirability , therefore making it difficult to sell the remaining units.

However another issue that was raised was, is copied architecture such a bad thing? Does it not take copied designs to start an architectural style. Quite often repeat developments are often favored as it creates a sense of identity or ownership for a developer. In particular in buildings which act as the same function for example fast food chains, supermarkets, schools, health centers. However this may be a case where functionality drives the architecture rather than any aspect of design being involved.

The majority of housing in the UK are replicas off one another, for example the victorian terraced houses in many British towns. Now i appreciate that one developer was likely to produce an entire town. However it is likely this was then 'copied' almost identically by another architect. In this era it was more a case of practicality that architectural flair however it is still an occurrence where plagiarism has had a positive effect.

This is definitely a research topic I will explore further, in particular whether there were any cases of plagiarism being brought to light during these earlier periods.

Image: www.telegraph.co.uk