ARCS 1005
transmediality
publications
A few publications have covered the work done by Professor Federica Goffi, the Teaching Assistants, and the students in ARCS 1005.
March 1-2 2018
Transmedial Time: Unfinished Architectural Drawings
Beginning Design Student Conference. University of Cincinnati, US.
Authored by Federica Goffi, with multimedia exercise descriptions by Adriana Ross.
December 2013
Drawing Thinking: A Lost Currency?
In Uncommon Currency: The Status of the Architectural Studios.
Association of Architectural Educators Conference AAEC Nottingham UK.
Authored by Federica Goffi, with multimedia exercise descriptions by Dave Lepage.
Selected journal publications by Professor Federica Goffi, on architectural representation, include:
December 2013
Architecture Research Quarterly ARQ 22.4: 325-338 Cambridge UK
Authored by Federica Goffi
October 2010
Interstices Journal of Architecture and Related Arts 11: 20-30 Cambridge UK
Authored by Federica Goffi
Selected book publications by Professor Federica Goffi, on architectural representation, include:
2017
Marco Frascari's Dream House: A Theory of Imagination
London and New York: Routledge
Authored by Marco Frascari, Edited by Federica Goffi
​
2013
London: Ashgate & Routledge
Authored by Federica Goffi
“Federica Goffi examines drawings and models made on site at the Church of St Peter’s, Rome, during the Renaissance, the core collection of the Archive of the Fabric. While it has been claimed that the historical emergence of architectural drawings as we now understand it liberated the architect from site at the time, Goffi argues instead that it was immovable drawings and the presence of models that freed the architect, precisely because the tools to guide construction were located in situ. She questions the consequences of “dislocating drawings and models […] from the buildings that they denote,” asserting the danger of reducing drawings to “objectified representations,” asking where drawings and models should properly belong. […] illustrates the difference between in situ representations and their more portable siblings, teasing out the implicit differences in how the architecture to which they pertain is conceived, translated into building, and subsequently curated.” The ARQ EDITORS
​
​
​
​
​
​
​