Greg Lynn: Folds, Bodies, & Blobs - Probable Geometries: The Architecture of Writing in Bodies

In the essay "Probable Geometries: The Architecture of Writing in Bodies," Greg Lynn discusses architecture and writing as is pertains to descriptive geometries within architecture. Writing is presented as being an anti-architectural art, in contrast to the pure forms found in architecture. Writing is presented as heterogeneous and indeterminate, while architecture consists of ideals based on proportional systems. These proportional systems are given reason by relating back to the idealized form of the human body, a tradition that has been in place since the times of the ancients. Proportional geometry is presented as being important to governing the forms of buildings; without symmetry and proportion, there are no rules in architecture.

In contrast to this view that architecture must have proportions to have reason, Lynn brings up anexact forms. With respect to geometry, anexact forms are not exact, or wholly able to be simplified, but are able to be reduced on a local level, meaning these forms are not inexact. This leads to blob architecture and general anexact forms. While idealized, classical, proportional architecture is exact, blob architecture is anexact. The different sections and parts can be reduced to a rule set, while the form as a whole cannot be reduced. It is through anexact forms that architecture takes a step towards becoming more heterogeneous, more like writing. These anexact forms are not a complete departure from the former proportional systems; even anexact forms can be traced back to nature. Geological forms are also anexact, as geologists are discovering ways to make convincing representations of geological forms through anexact geometry. A common method for breaking down the anexact forms of architecture and nature is through the section; section planes break forms down into understandable two dimensional forms, readily able to be analyzed. One instance of this representation in architecture would be Le Corbusier's Maison Domino. It is through the analytical potential of the section that anexact forms can be studied and applied to architecture, bridging the gap between architecture and writing.

Lynn presents writing and architecture to be fundamentally different, however, both writing and architecture have their rule sets. Take works of fiction, plots build up to a climax, and settle down into a conclusion. This approach is a fundamental to works of this type. However, the rules of writing are not as restricting as the formal rules of architecture; this is where the difference lies. Lynn's suggestion that blob architecture can bring similarity to the professions of writing and architecture is right on the money. Blob architecture is more free form, but has a distinct, yet open ended, rule set. Works of writing follow some rule set on some level; sections of works could be labeled, and rules exist to suggest a proper order for sections fitting these labels. Blob architecture can also be broken down into component parts. These parts, as do the parts of writing, also have suggestions for how these components should be tied together. Given the generic rule sets available to both writing and blob architecture, perhaps the two professions are no longer as different as they once were.