Abstract

In an effort to analyze the process of producing architectural forms and spaces, this article first studies the designing procedure and its two general stages of analysis and synthesis/composition. It then uses the viewpoints of some well-known theorists to classify the configurations of architectural space and form. These categories are then subjected to a critical analysis comparing successful works of some contemporary architects with the methods under discussion. The article reviews space configuration methods and narrows them down to a single indicator, called ‘analogy.’ It concludes that ‘analogy’ has been a major designing technique for architects who have mostly attempted to produce an ‘analogy’ between the outcome of their works and the elements of design – namely the “site,” “program,” “case studies,” and “themes” relevant or irrelevant to the projects. On the whole, “analogy” as used in this study, is demonstrated to be a meta-method or a chief method of design. Other techniques stem from different levels of “analogy,” from its more direct and objective manifestations to its more indirect and subjective ones.