The term ‘Architectural Forensics’ varies in definition. In short, it refers to the investigation of the built environment, whether that be in relation to crime and injustice or an investigative process to discover the root cause of damage and deterioration in buildings. Often forensic architects are invited to identify potential issues and advise in how to avoid them. The role of this architect is to remain unbiased, identify issues within construction, determine potential causes and suggest solutions. They are to uncover factual evidence, which may aid in future construction or provide answers to issues associated with a particular built environment.
Failed Architecture: The Latest Architecture and News
In Defense of Renders and Trees On Top of Skyscrapers
In a recent article on Vice (in Dutch) and on his research platform website Failed Architecture, architecture writer Mark Minkjan comments on the phenomenon of architectural renders, arguing that “digital visualizations and hollow sales pitches hide the ugly sides of architecture.” In the article, Minkjan takes MVRDV's proposal for Ravel Plaza in Amsterdam as a “case study” to discuss the misleading quality of the render. This criticism – of renders in general and MVRDV's renders specifically – is a returning point of critique: on ArchDaily in 2013, Tim De Chant begged in an opinion piece “Can We Please Stop Drawing Trees on Top of Skyscrapers?” Though that article did not mention MVRDV in the text, our Peruri88 project in Jakarta was given the dubious distinction of being the article's most prominent image.
We'd like to discuss this common critique. The point of the role of visualizations in our communication is relevant but, even though we fully understand where the criticism comes from, arguments such as these are in our opinion not correct.