Greg Lynn's "Animate Form"

"Without a detailed understanding of their performance as diagrams and organizational techniques it is impossble to begin a discussion of their translation into architectural form." (p. 40-1)

For 31 pages Lynn advocates the use of virtual (not just digital) techniques to generate diagrams. Yet, in the end, the author recognizes the basic necessity to design the spaces within the forms, while offering no solution nor description for the process of architectural translation from the abstract to the tangible.

In a very basic mathematical nutshell, Lynn advocates the use of digital technology given its ability to compute complex vector-based geometries. Quite simply, without the availability of cad software the conversation would otherwise not take place. The understanding of spline geometry (and forms thereof) would not be possible given the inefficient nature of human intelligence to calculate such curves and surfaces.

I agree that the world is in motion and all aspects of the physical world exist in a continuous interrelationship. However, I do not buy that the abstraction of natural movements through architectural translation is necessarily a better solution to the human sensory experience than any tradition "static" architecture. And because the author offers no description for how animated forms can generate interior spaces that also reflect the predetermined exterior, I have little choice but to be skeptical of an animated form's real capacity to produce a quality human experience.