theories and practice

Does a theory of architecture exist? If so, what does it involve? Researching and analysing what has already been implemented? Refining methods and matrices based on practice? In other words, is the theory secondary? The debate about this has been going on for many years and even centuries. But today, in the age of robots and computers, the question of architectural theory takes on a new meaning. As the development of technology accelerates all practical processes – from design approval to the construction of objects in material, when million cities appear on an empty place in five years, and single buildings – in a fortnight, the practice of architecture more closely resembles a cross-country race. One can assume that the practitioner behind the wheel is increasingly in need of a theorist, a navigator who follows the road on a map and charts the course of the journey. Or do the theories in this race follow the findings and insights of the practitioners? In this issue of the journal, we have collected several contemporary views on architectural theory. These views are heterogeneous and often do not agree with each other. The map on which the route of architectural development is travelled is pieced together from scraps, sketches and fragments of accurate but outdated plans and outlines. But we have no other map, and we will have to improve the theory and its connection with the practice right on the move. It is noteworthy that the news section also touches upon the theme of the issue: it opens with the jubilee exhibitions of Maria Nashchokina, a well-known theoretician and historian of architecture, and Andrey Bokov, a prominent practitioner and theorist.