Miloš Kostić, Vladimir Milenkovic

DOI Number
First page
Last page


Considering both the visual and narrative character of architectural discourse it is possible to examine the capacity of a drawing as an autonomous form, but also as one assigned to it throughout the course of creation of new architecture. This paper's intent is to examine the place and the role which the architectural drawing of the detail has within design research. Thematically different, the narratives are instruments used for creating a relationship between the project as a whole and its parts, while the detail defines the path from an idea to the realization of architecture, that is, from abstraction to concretization within the above-mentioned process. The notion of scalar imagination has been introduced in order to indicate the relationship between the traditional modernist understanding of the roles of detail and scale have, while the question of the real size of designed architecture has been moved aside. The scalar imagination reveals the relationships between the elements of architecture, while its visibility reveals the architect's ability to build the necessary information network while moving throughout the diverse levels of those relationships. The goal is to avoid vagueness of architecture represented by the drawing and favor the polyvalence of its meaning by presenting concrete information.  In that sense, for the benefit of achieving clarity within the methodological approach, we researched the conditions of visibility within the relationship between the drawing and its meaning. Therefore, this paper focuses on the scale as a direct connection between the drawing of the detail and the continuity of the idea of architecture.


detail, Mies van der Rohe, scalar imagination, distance

Full Text:



A.Perez-Gomez, “Questions of representation: The poetic origin of architecture”, Architectural Research Quarterly, vol. 5, pp. 217-225.

D. Mertins, The presence of Mies, New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1996.

D.Mertins, Modernity unbound: Other histories of architectural modernity, London: Architectural Association, 2011.

Đ. Šušnjić, Metodologija: kritika nauke, Beograd: Čigoja štampa, 2007.

E. Huserl, Ideja fenomenologije, Beograd: Beogradski izdavačko-grafički zavod, 1975.

D.Buntrock, Japanese Architecture as a Collaborative Process: opportunities in a flexible construction culture, New York: Routlage, 2014.

I.Wingham, “Mediating lines“, in Mobility of the line, I. Wingham, ed. Basel: Birkhäuser, 2013, pp. 106-118.

J.C. Jones, Design methods, London: David Fulton Publishers, 1992.

Le Corbusier, Modulor: Harmonične mere prema ljudskom obimu univerzalno primenljive u arhitekturi i mašinstvu. Belgrade: Jesen:Lisina, 2002.

M.Carpo, The alphabet and the algorithm. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2011.

M. Frascari, “The tell-the-tail detail”, in VIA, vol. 7, 1984, pp. 22-37.

M. Frascari, Eleven exercises in the art of architectural drawing: Slow food for the architects imagination. Oxon: Routlege, 2011.

P. Emmons, “Size matters: Virtual scale and bodily imagination in architectural drawing”, in Architectural Research Quarterly, vol.9, 2005, pp. 227-235.

R. Evans, Translation from building to drawing. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1997.

S. Hedges, “Scale as the representation of an idea, the dream of architecture and the unraveling of a surface”, in Interstices: A journal of architecture and related arts, vol.11, 2010, pp. 72-81.

S. Lavin, Flash in the pan, London: Architectural Association, 2014.

S. Vyzoviti, Folding architecture: Spatial, structural and organizational diagrams, Amsterdam: BIS Publisher, 2004.

V. Milenković, Forma prati temu: petodelni metodološki esej, Belgrade: Faculty of architecture University of Belgrade: Museum of applied arts, 2015.

V. Milenković, “Contingency of architectural critical approach“, Serbian Architectural Journal, iss. 3, 2011, pp. 200-213.


  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN 0354-4605 (Print)

ISSN 2406-0860 (Online)