All architects seek frame of reference in design.
Some seek it in style and others in theory, it comes down to personal choice
and our instinctive need for reference and context. Mostly, we are moved by
and drawn to originality, the expression of singular thought.
Originality is quite commonly found in published work. Due primarily to the
speed and proliferation of published architectural material, architects have begun
to gauge and be gauged themselves with reference to the publishing eye; we too
often aspire to an international fraternity of the avant garde, to design staples of
a western paradigm. Being drawn to what has been deemed good by virtue of
inclusion, we often relive the strength of that originality in our work; we subtly
duplicate the aesthetics of design already realized, believing it to be our own.
Unintentionality is no absolution.
Plagiarism is the act of engaging in the context of duplicating originality.
There is a deeper frame of reference for style and theory called place specificity:
it is the context of our own originality. When one chooses to draw from place or
site specificity, the search for meaning in what we do comes to resolution since
nothing inspires greater meaning than the uniqueness of context.
In design one constantly finds oneself treading the fine line between repeating
oneself (or another) and being spontaneous in creativity. The originality of an
outcome depends almost entirely on its response to its specific context.