Similarly to writing a manifesto, to construct a building means to solidify a set of ideas, views, and principles you believe at that time to be the correct set of beliefs, views, and principles. Of course, like the manifesto, those sets of ideas, views, and principle could and will change. I propose to let one’s pride down and admit you can not be right about everything. I propose to accept the possibility of contingency and the idea of improvement. Note, to not be right about everything is not the same as being wrong about everything. Of course, design buildings to the best of your ability and with the utmost consideration, but leave space for others to contribute. Design to allow the possibility of time, so it is not on its way to become outdated and stagnant the moment it is built.

I propose to leave space and time in buildings for the others. Others who have what you don’t have, know what you don’t know, do what you can’t do. I propose flexibility and humility in architecture, admit that nothing is forever, and confess your limitations. To do so is daunting as it lets go of the sense of omnipotent control we strive for, but still none the less essential as it gives us the ability to collaborate with what you can and cannot see, with other people and everything else.

I believe architecture, in general, should be less important, or at least stop pretending to be so important. If I have learnt anything from Architecture at University so far, architecture cannot make the world a better place. Not on its own. A building without content is nothing but pile of rubble arranged in a peculiar way. An architect isolated on their own is nothing but a peculiar person playing with a pile of rubble. Other metaphors include a playset without actors, a bicycle without wheels, sparkling water without the sparkle. The content gives buildings its point, so how can something so pointless on its own declare it is the solution to everything?

We must admit architecture alone is not the ultimate solution to climate change, inequality, political instability, food security, and loss of biodiversity. We must not fall into an age of formalism in which we delude ourselves with a sense of progress through arbitrary visual forms. To admit architecture alone is not the solution is to break down the walls of autotomy surrounding architecture and begin a process of meaningful collaborations between all fields of study. I believe in making real progress in the face of the complexity and the multi-dimensionality of our epoch; we must learn to merge, intersect, cross-pollinate, synthesize, coalesce, integrate, knead, and interfuse as opposed to the segregated approach to research and practice we are used to.

Architecture should be less original too. In an attempt to create something new, to establish a personal style, to wow, resources are sometimes misused, sites are dis-connected, inhabitants suffer, and so does the participant. I believe that resolving through limitation, designing to accommodate and mediate, combined with the inevitable subtle seeping of personal experience of the architect, is originality enough. I aspire to the effortless elegance that arises from simplicity and practicality organically.

I still believe architects can and should also be artistically sensitive and ensure that the resolved form is also a pleasant one to look at, but the how it looks part should be in conjunction with everything else. I believe architects must be more mindful that the how it looks part does not dominate the entity of the building, as our modern culture has developed a lopsided ocular dominance. Our culture has always favoured sight. To see is to know, to see is the greatest gift, to see is to understand. The development of the digital age further increased our affinity to the sense of sight. I believe there are substantial architectural possibilities and benefits by exploring how we can stimulate the rest of our senses. Humans have created some extraordinary buildings for the eye. Imagine if all senses were given the same degree of attention.

If I become an architect, this is my manifesto to build buildings that anticipate possibility ( unstable ), are collaborative ( useless on its own ), elegantly pragmatic (unoriginal), and engage senses of more than just sight (unsightly ).