Shades of Theory is an umbrella term I have been using for a long time. Theory is often seen as elite and cerebral, which perhaps explains the general distaste around it. But I believe theory exists across a spectrum of shades — from a diagram to a text — each carrying different roles. Through this series, I want to gather fragments that may not intuitively feel like theory at first. As this collection progresses, the meaning of theory might slowly shift into something more palpable and accessible.
There are two notions I completely subscribe to. First: “theory is an organizing tool” (link) (Malcolm Gladwell). Second: “There is nothing so practical as a good theory” (Kurt Lewin). These two ideas anchor my premise of what theory can be. Through this sub-series on the blog, I will collect and share multiple fragments to extend and test this proposition. These fragments may fall within a field formed by two perpendicular axes: dense–light, text–non-text.
Here is the first in the series
This passage is from “Theory and Elements of Architecture” by Atkinson, Robert and Bagenal, Hope. This text is exactly 100 years old to this year : published in 1926
2. MEANING OF ” THEORY”
“ But when information is in process of being collected and knowledge begins — how apply it? How shall deductions from the experience of the past be used in new problems and new plans? Only by means of “Theory.” Theory provides the link between the necessary knowledge and the activity of design. Theory is the first act of simplification in the mind, it is the planning of planning. A student can make no single design without having first drawn upon some source and linked and arranged a number of confused elements on some kind of a system. That system is likely to be but still it implies a criticism, a picture 1 of the relative factors, a recognition of the enemy chaos and of the fortress design, in other words a “theory?” Theory is the framework of our whole thought it is the wealth plus the critical power we bring to our job. Upon theory unconsciously depends our standard, our range, our direction of development.
“This training is worth while, these preferences are sincere. I will go in thisdirection and not in that.”
Those are the kind of statements a student must be able to make, and to make upon sufficient grounds. His grounds are likely to correspond to his grasp of ” theory.” “
(All the bold emphasis are mine)
My note on this text :
I just love the precision and claim of this text: “Only by means of Theory” — that feels like an excellent point of departure for this series. I deeply align with its emphasis on “how apply it?” and how theory “provides the link between the necessary knowledge and the activity of design.” It establishes theory as something practical rather than rhetorical — not in opposition to experience, but as a sequence and structuring of it. “First act of simplification in the mind” suggests a clarification of thought, while “planning of planning” introduces a crucial meta-level: thinking about thinking. “Deductions from experience” and the sense of thought being “compounded of his borrowings from others plus his native intelligence” strongly reinforce my premise: theory + experience, not theory versus experience.
This paragraph is drawn from the brilliant opening chapter of the book. What follows are chapters focused on the elements of architecture — walls, roofs, materials, and so on — but the clarity of this initial framing, at architecture’s threshold of modernism, is remarkable. The book’s grounding of theory before moving into architectural elements reveals an intellectual precision that feels both rigorous and very relevant 100 years later
The book is accesible on this link to read: https://archive.org/details/theoryelementsof00atki/mode/2up
mofussillab 