In this past week’s reading, “Spatial Agency; Other Ways of Doing Architecture”, the authors started their chapter with a section about briefing. They consider “Briefing” to be, in a sense, the contract or understanding in the client-architect relationship. The client has an agenda to build a specific building with a specific program and gives their agenda to an architect. The architect is paid for their services. But the authors go on to explain that some believe design without, or outside the boundaries of regulations are more appropriate to social conditions. Cedric Price believes, “These instances of space that are found outside the rules and regulations that typically govern the production of space open up a more variable understanding and interpretation of space” (70). Unfortunately clients don’t want experimentation or anything out of the norm because it usually ends in failed attempts, law suits, and over budgeting. The architect must then decide how can you earn a client’s trust to design an unexpected architecture?

This is a question whether you are working in slums or even in the middle of Manhattan. Clients do not want to pay more and developers will strip designs down to the bare minimum. We have seen from case studies that it is easier to cross the legal regulations in the Global South because there are no regulations to cross. These squatter settlements are in themselves illegal. We have seen small information boards put up for news to be shared. We have also seen instances where a can of paint can transform a street into a soccer field or reorganize a market. These projects required no permits or contracts, just planning on construction at the open opportunity. But what about constructing a larger structure that can displace residence for instance? Architects must still find a way to convince not only the client, but the locals.

I thought that the point brought up by the firm DEGW has a good perspective on the client-architect relationship. They mentioned, “The brief is the first stage in the design of a set of social relations” (70). The rules and regulations set prior to the building’s design, is seen as part of the design process. Architects must be included from the start in order to have a productive use of spatial regulations. DEGW is seeing this first process as an opportunity for the architect to have some control of what boundaries can be used or crossed. This is also a good opportunity for the architect to be involved with not only the client but the other organizations involved such as the locals and the government.

Also mentioned by the firm Crimson, “…being able to tell a good story, a gripping story, a touching, exciting, spectacular story is the core of designing and planning” (71). There are many examples of storytelling in architecture from the past and it can be used as a design tool to work with clients. In the past, churches were carved with biblical stories because many people were illiterate. Also seen in the promenade architecturale by Le Corbusier, he tells a story through a montage of views. Architecture has told a story in the past, why can’t it be used to win over clients now. We can make up our own stories which engage the clients and locals. The key is to win over the clients for them to agree with the design.

Now I am not saying that architects should deceive clients and communities. Deceit will end in even more issues and law suits. But architects should learn how to effectively work with clients and the community and I believe that being a part of the process from the beginning and learning to win over clients is productive. Story telling can be understood by everyone, and I believe that it is a tool that is underutilized today. Not only can stories be told to communicate with clients, but also the community at the same time. It is an opportunity to connect everyone to the same space.

1. Spatial Agency