A City Is Not a Tree by Christopher Alexander, Article Review Example

A review of A City is Not a Tree by Christopher Alexander follows. Alexander proposes that tree models are insufficient systemic representations of cities. Rote understanding of his thesis dictates comprehension of key concepts and basic arguments. For the purpose of applied knowledge, the thesis is couched in terms of relevant systemic philosophies. This necessitates critical examination of the implications of the framework. Relevant speculation about this knowledge releases its impact on current and future interests.

Key concepts and basic arguments are re-iterated here. A tree diagram is a systemic representation where each child node can be traced to only one parent node. Alexander’s basic argument is that this method of understanding is too simplistic to accurately represent the relationship between all of a city’s functional units. He contends that application of the tree concept is more toward the human attempt to simplify a complexity than it is toward a realistic analysis of the actual structure. In reality, the elemental components of a city (fixed or otherwise) are more precisely represented as overlapping with one another.

As researchers become more and more deliberate about planning communities, they gain a richer set of circumstances from which to act with this understanding of systematic representation. This strictly non-linear methodology has already been applied in the sciences of biology and linguistics. Nevertheless, as information systems afford modeling procedures heretofore not as readily achieved, how necessary is the understanding of minute complexities to performing a given task successfully, effectively, and efficiently?

For my own personal and professional interest, the ideas set forth are noteworthy because they free my thinking from rigidity. This flexibility will help me more readily absorb understandings about the world in general, and my hope is that it will help me become a more proficient analyst and developer.

Bibliography

Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(1): 58?62 (Part I) & 122(2): 58-62 (Part II).

[1] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(1): p. 58.

[2] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(1): p. 59.

[3] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(1): p. 60.

[4] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(2): p. 60.

[5] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(2): p. 61.

[6] Alexander, C. (1965). A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum, 122(2): p. 62.