Great book on the relationship between people, places and things (in this case: buildings). The anthropological side is analyzed just like the architectural one and this is what makes this book a great book. And by the way, Brand's observations are always smart, deep and witty. The set of photographs which fills the book is more than a complement, is substantial to the comprehension of the concepts. Great read. ( )

To David Dec 97 Happy Birthday , With Love from Gunhild. Not sure where it came from, bit I think it is cool.

Architecture book that takes a "buildings through time" perspective, boasting a huge variety of annotated side-by-side photographs. I really enjoyed the way this book broadened my perspective. I've been especially enjoying looking at neighborhoods of different ages since starting this one. I'd recommend How Buildings Learn to anyone interested in how buildings change, what makes buildings or spaces endure, or seeing the commonplace in an entirely new light. ( )

First Stewart Brand is an expert observer. Next Stewart Brand is skilled at thinking about what he has seen. How Buildings Learn is a fantastic read from a writer that who has the uncanny ability to take what he has seen and distill it into something more than the obvious. Brand's musings and observation, after having read them, feel like 'oh yeah I knew that' but of course the point is you did and you do but it takes someone like a Stewart Brand it takes Stewart Brand to lead by example to show and teach how to look at what has been around you all along - buildings - and see and recognize and realize the things that you already knew.

How Buildings Learn is a must read not only because it clearly and coherently stands up to the arguments that Stewart Brand is making but it also stands the test of time. From its initial writing to now the arguments ring true. Additionally it clearly lays out how to observe and how to think about what you have seen and if you read well and take notes you just might learn how to present your observations in a compelling way.

A great topical book. A great sourcebook on architecture. A super effective reference book for seeing & writing. ( )

> All buildings are predictions. All predictions are wrong.

Notionally a book about buildings, but is often shared by the Web design community for the inchoate idea around layers and paces of change which Brand goes on to flesh out fully in [The Long Now].

It's a book that's been on my wishlist for a few years, along with a few other design classics, so I was pleased to find I enjoyed it immensely. His advocacy of the vernacular and avuncular chime with my Jane Jacobs inspired views. And there's many a good quote to nick.

this was probably the most influential book i read while in architecture school (aside from Murakami's Hard Boiled Wonderland). Brand reminds us that the number one way to create a sustainable environment is to make it adaptable. He argues that the best buildings are buildings that change with the times. Warehouses are an excellent example. They can become almost anything, from manufacturing plants to high-end condos. a very thoughtful and well-written book. ( )

I will never look at a building the same way again! These are the random notes I had in my Bbrry about this book:

Architects either have too much control or too little
Architecture skills as craft vs art
Inability to adapt during build due to legal contract crap
Buildings leak!
Curse of architectural photography-awards won by picture, not by if clients think the building serves their purpose

And so much more! ( )

My approach is to examine buildings as a whole -- not just whole in space, but whole in time. Some buildings are designed and managed as a spatial whole, none as a temporal whole. In the absence of theory or standard practice in the matter, we can begin by investigating: What happens anyway in buildings over time? [2]

Brand posits a view of buildings as defined by 6 distinct layers (adding to 4 from Frank Duffy). Duffy counseled: Imagine not a monolithic edifice, instead four layers of 'built components' with each layer aging at a different rate. Over time, they will shear apart unless they are able to adapt to both external pressures and internal stresses. [12-13] It is a design imperative to separate the layers to allow for adaptive change, for instance ensuring simple upgrades to conduits and plumbing. [20] It is sensible to think about the nature of these external and internal forces, whether changing real estate or neighbourhood standards or an expanding family, and accommodate them.

• Site
• Structure (Duffy = Shell)
• Skin
• Services (Duffy)
• Space Plan (Duffy = Scenery)
• Stuff (Duffy = Set, primarily furniture)

Added to this outlook is Brand's preference for buildings which succeed either by meeting a specialised purpose through long-term adaptation, becoming ever more suited to that purpose (High Road); or, which succeed by prioritising function and flexibility over any preset design, aesthetic, or even purpose (Low Road). Primarily he looks to vernacular designs. Perhaps this focus indicates an ultimate preference for Low Road, and an intention to redress the imbalance exemplified in such cultural icons as Architectural Digest.

All of this seemingly condensed into the 3L rule, introduced in 1972 by Alex Gordon: Long life, loose fit, low energy. [57] Brand also refers multiple times to the Pattern Language of Christopher Alexander and his colleagues, and notes the affinities with preservation efforts and regular, mindful maintenance. At one point, Brand draws a parallel between successful building adaptation and Batesonian cybernetics. [167]

It seems to me that the best designs are those which accommodate the most contradiction. Looked at the other way, the most boring design is that which is directed at a simple, well-defined future. A lot of New Age music exemplifies this, as does, for me, Le Corbusier. They are both addressed to simple world pictures, and to simple ideas about how humans behave and what they want. [189, quoting Brian Eno]

//

Brand's appreciation for vernacular and hybrid design now informs my outlook in keeping up my home, and not merely as a measure by which to evaluate buildings I see around me. Later chapters discuss strategies for builders and architects as well as owner-occupants: scenario planning, financing alternatives to conventional mortgages, adopting methods most suitable for later adaptation and changing.

More broadly, Brand's general outlook underpins my take on architecture, to some extent in articulating a sensibility already held but not closely examined, and partly in introducing new concepts. A commonplace of architecture, I thought, was the ideal of melding function and beauty. It's interesting to read that Modernism receives a good amount of criticism if not outright scorn for jettisoning utility (buildings leak, can't maintain a livable environment, feature layouts which impede occupants), when a plebeian criticism was that Modernist buildings are all function and no beauty.

//

The wide format is well suited to the content, which features a great many diagrams and photos, but not easily read except at table, nor easily notated in margins or back pages as my custom. There exists a six-part BBC Television series hosted by Brand, as well. ( )

On page 188, in a caption to an 18th century architecture drawing and a still from a 20th century television commercial, Brand says, "A building is not something you finish. A building is something you start." This statement pretty much sums up Brand's attitude to buildings as well as his problem with architects who are convinced of an ideal state of completion for a particular building. It's a short statement but one that signals a major change in thinking, one that has taken a bit more effect since the book was initially published in 1994. There are plenty of architects who embrace change in their designs, and many architects are misinterpreted as unable to accept change given the way their buildings are represented (what architect, whose every building changes its context, would not be open to change in their own work?), but Brand, like Christopher Alexander and others of the same ilk, takes aim at (modern) architects for the problems of the built realm. Normally I'd find this stance annoying, but Brand, perhaps because he's not trained as an architect, or maybe because he writes in a common-sense manner, has the idea of transformation at the heart of the book, not attacking a particular dogma...even if he may critique the Pompidou or some other modern building along the way in favor of humble vernacular buildings.

What I like best are Brand's discussions of "programming" in the architectural sense of the word (determining what functional spaces go into a building and, to a lesser degree, how). Brand acknowledges that designing a building without a program does not yield the best results, though he offers an alternative for traditional programming. Ideally, the best result for one purpose will enable the building to be used for a longer period of time, particularly if some forethought and flexibility are considered at the programming stage. Brand's variation on programming is "scenario planning," which I should really reread (the first time was a while ago) since his ideas on finding solutions that give buildings the longevity they should have is particularly important now that resources are more and more scarce and the embodied energy of buildings is so valuable. ( )

A really interesting way to look at buildings and how to make them useful for a long time. ( )

I bought this book while i was in Engineering school on my way to study Architecture. Never went that direction, but finally read the book. A great book on buildings alone, but concepts it has go beyond buildings and into many areas of applied design, including websites and computer software. ( )

Stewart Brand's How Buildings Learn is half detailed analytical study of real buildings, half manifesto. Brand brings front and center the crucial features of real buildings that architects for the most part love to sweep under the rug, or rather love to sweep under the gleaming mock-ups they parade about to naive clients: how well do buildings really serve their intended purposes after they're complete? How are they changed over time as the demands on them inevitably change, often radically? How hard -- and costly -- is it to make these changes? This added fourth dimension, i.e. time itself, is the source of remarkably rich insights, over and over, as Brand analyzes the lives of real buildings as they age and adapt -- or die.

Brand also skewers the whole profession of modernist-dominated architecture with true aim and vigor. If you've ever been involved in a building project, or if you will be, you will never look at an architect in quite the same way again -- and neither should you. Brand's criticisms of architects' egotism, contempt for clients and neighborhoods, and quixotic and destructive rage for making a mark by being 'original' are right on.

I would give this book six stars if I could. ( )

Outstanding survey of how buildings survive and grow or die over the years. What features make a building useful or useless. Excellent photographs showing stages of growth or decline. Educated and lively text. Read with "Architecture of the Absurd" by John Silber. ( )

Really excellent study of how buildings go beyond architecture as the grow, change, and are readopted. See why some buildings work and others do not. ( )

An eye-opener of a book that shocks the reader with its detailed comparisons of archival photographies and the reasons behind many building modifications. His long-term view transforms buildings into quasi-living entities that learn from their inhabitants and constantly evolve to suit their needs. Looking at some of the book’s photographs of the same building throughout the decades is like watching the ever-shifting clouds in the sky: You can tell it is the same cloud you saw a minute ago, it feels the same, and yet you can barely recognize it now.

It’s a very enjoyable book, and relevant not only to architecture but to any design field. As an Amazon commenter pointed out, simply substituting “building” for “software” in the text gives you an excellent essay on software development. I can imagine it offering the same benefits for many other professions. ( )

I finally read this book after stumbling across it, oversized, on a library shelf. I had it on my reading list that I (used to) keep updated on my Palm Pilot, for a while. Twice, in fact, as it had been recommended from a couple different sources, and when I went to browse the list again, I realized I was removing it from the list for the second time. It was a very good book, achieving what so few nonfiction books do - explaining a subject so well that almost all of the lessons carried over to dozens of examples more of interest to me personally. The subject at hand was the evolution of buildings over time, a subject that had no specific interest to me, but since the book came so highly recommended, from so many sources, when I saw it I checked it out.

Essentially there are no permanent solutions for buildings that are worth having - If it's doesn't adapt, it's obsolete before it's complete. Given this, there are two opposite models that Brand proposes are worthwhile; temporary buildings, and permanent ones. Seriously, the two working paradigms are buildings built over generations, and building so obviously deficient that they are treated as permanent projects. The first category includes buildings like feudal manors, where each addition is the permanent addition of an individual to a family tradition. The second are buildings that was designed to be temporary, such as building 20 at MIT built during WWII as a temporary building that is still standing, in which the occupants feel free to make "improvements," such as nailing up shelves wherever they need them, or inserting extra staircases, etc.

Another theme in the book was that short term planning for an object that is intended for the long term is, well, stupid. And recommended against. More money is spent changing existing buildings than building new ones. I am pretty sure the same applies to computer code,
and many other fields. The solution to this type of problem is to separate and layer different aspects - the load bearing elements should not be in the way of any conceivable floor plan, since the floor plan will change more than the structure. If architecture is seen as art, modernist styles are disastrous because they tend to experiment, and like all experimentation, fail often. This is acceptable unless failures must be used - in architecture this is true.

And of course, like any good book, it makes fun of somebody. The lessons here? Flat roofs are stupid - the reason they slant roofs is to get the water off. Flat roofs fail to do this. Fashionability is a bad thing when the building outlasts the trend. And, of course, most importantly, geodesic domes were a miserable idea, but everyone was high enough while talking about it so that they didn't notice. ( )

How Buildings Learn gave me new eyes for buildings all around me. Read this book and you'll soon start interpretting the features of buildings all around you as indicators of the economic life of the occupants and neighborhoods.

This is the book that got me interested in re-photography. As a result, I've tried to take a picture of my house at least once a year. It's amazing to see differences over time, especially on buildings we're familiar with. The change can be dramatic even when it seems that nothing has changed. ( )

I want to learn at least something about how houses and building work. This book was a step along the way.

Reading it, I suffered from the same discomfort I feel when reading geology books: too much technical jargon is used that is assumed known to the reader but is foreign to me.
Beyond that the author cares rather more than I do about the subject matter, so I really couldn't fake an interest in some of what he was saying.

However a reasonable start to my endeavor. ( )

This is one of those rare books that I borrowed from the library, then immediately had to go out and purchase for my own collection.

A whole new way of looking at buildings and what happens to them over the years, and how we can read their histories in their structures.

This is one of the most thought provoking books I've ever come across: it really does change the way you think about buildings, how we live in them, the people who work round them and what makes for a successful or otherwise building. Stewart Brand brings to this book a wealth of experience and research; but you do not need to be an architect or builder to be totally captivated by this book and its philosophy of respect for life that is grounded in its time and place rather than ruled by abstract ideas. ( )

Radically rethinks how we look at architecture and living or working in it. ( )

Exploration of how to build for the long haul, kind of a "death and life of buildings". ( )

architecture, architectural aheory, architectural psychology ( )

shelved in HT Green Library - by Reception - Monograph Library (R)

NA