Christopher Alexander

References

(Wikipedia, 2015) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Alexander Retrieved:2015-6-10.
- Christopher Wolfgang Alexander (born October 4, 1936 in Vienna, Austria) is an architect noted for his theories about design as well as over 200 building projects around the world. Reasoning that users know more about the buildings they need than any architect could, he produced and validated (in collaboration with Sarah Ishikawa and Murray Silverstein) a “pattern language” to empower anyone to design and build at any scale. He moved from England to the United States in 1958, living and teaching in Berkeley, California from 1963. Currently a emeritus professor at the University of California, Berkeley, Alexander lives in Arundel, England.
  Alexander is often overlooked by texts in the history and theory of architecture because his work intentionally disregards contemporary architectural discourse.^[1] However, Alexander's polyvalent approach to the discipline of architecture has had enormous ramifications through his vast corpus of essays and books. He is regarded as the father of the Pattern Language movement, and various contemporary architectural practices such as the New Urbanist movement have resulted from Alexander's ideas, which seek to help normal people reclaim control over their built environments.

(Alexander, 1977) ⇒ Christopher Alexander, S. Ishikawa, and M. Silverstein. (1977). “Pattern Languages." Center for Environmental Structure 2
(Alexander et al., 1977) ⇒ Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein. (1977). “A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction." Oxford University Press

(Alexander, 1975) ⇒ Christopher Alexander. (1975). “The Oregon Experiment." Oxford University Press.
- QUOTE: … Master plans have two additional unhealthy characteristics. To begin with, the existence of a master plan alienates the users… After all, the very existence of a master plan means, by definition, that the members of the community can have little impact on the future shape of their community, because most of the important decisions have already been made. In a sense, under a master plan people are living with a frozen future, able to affect only relatively trivial details. When people lose the sense of responsibility for the environment they live in, and realize that they are merely cogs in someone else's machine, how can they feel any sense of identification with the community, or any sense of purpose there? …