Skip to content
Frank Cauthen

Los Angeles, California · AIA, LEED AP BD+C, DBIA

A hundred aluminum boxes in two sheds in Marfa satisfy no requirement at all.

A building can satisfy every measure we know how to take and still be nothing to stand in. We have all helped make one.

Currently

Principal and Senior Project Designer at HOK in Los Angeles. Licensed in New York and California, LEED AP BD+C, DBIA.

Nineteen years at HOK, mostly on airports, hospitals and laboratories. Buildings that are not permitted to stop working. That has left me more interested in how design decisions get made than in the images that announce them.

What the work is for

Judd, Newman, Turrell. For all three the encounter is the work rather than the image of it. Nothing about it can be checked, and that is not a defect in the work. It is what the work is.

That is the half of architecture I care most about, and it is the half no method reaches. Everything else I am good at, the delivery expertise and the checking and the documents, exists to buy the standing to insist on it in a meeting where I cannot prove I am right.

This site is where I work that out in public: art, architecture, and the technology now arriving between them.

The artists I measure against →Read: Judd’s Objection →

And yet, what is arriving

The most useful machine in the studio won’t be the one that draws. It will be the one that asks.

I think AI is going to change design work meaningfully, but not in the way the renderings suggest. The interesting future is not a machine that produces options faster. It is one that works as a critical voice inside the process, checking whether you have answered what the client actually asked for and surfacing the opportunities you have not noticed yet.

Which is why I hold two tests rather than one. Does it shorten the loop between intention and evidence, and does it leave room for what cannot be checked? Rigor isn’t the opposite of art. Rigor is what buys you the standing to insist on the unjustifiable thing.

Where the three meet

Welcoming is not testable. “A person arriving without an appointment can see the reception desk from inside the entry doors without turning” is testable, on a plan, in about four seconds. It does not mean the same thing. It is not a definition of welcoming and it must never be written as one.

Art is why the aspiration cannot be measured and must not be replaced. Architecture supplies the door, the sightline and the plan, without which there is nothing to check in four seconds. Technology is why the distinction now costs something, because the checkable half of the work just got cheaper and the other half did not.

Take any one of the three away and the paragraph stops working. That is what I mean by an intersection, and it is the shape everything else on this site is trying to reach.

From the Brief Conformance Checklist →

Sections

Recent writing

All essays

Get in touch

If you’re working on something at the edge of design and technology, or you think I have this wrong, I’d like to hear it.