In the article, “Architecture and Lost Art of Drawing,” by Michael Graves which was published in September 1, 2012 edition of New York Times, Graves states that we can declare a death of drawing within certain architectural views. By this, he means that the process of drawing in architecture has been partially replaced by computer’s to a certain extent. His point is to tell us that although many ideas can be expressed in the visual software that many architects use, drawing cannot be outlawed by any means. Graves admires drawings more than the software’s because he knows that the drawing reminds him of what the main idea for the project is and it helps him actually study the project. He studies his architectural drawings in three ways. His studies are, the “Referential sketch”, “Preparatory study” and “Definitive drawing”. He says that the final drawing, the Definitive drawing, is used on the computer which is appropriate. As he explains what the role of the other two are, he holds them as an important asset to the project. They are the stepping stones of it which lead to the final computer aided version. Now a days, architects and soon to be architects have to learn that drawing plays a big role in the field and serves as a purpose to your project. Technology cannot take over our talents and must be a second priority when it comes to architecture.
I think you did very well pointing the author’s great points. Drawing should still be prior to architecture. Although, your essay can be a little misleading because you’re jumping from different things the author says instead of letting it flow. But other then that, it was really great! 🙂