In 1965 Christopher Alexander published an article entitled “The Question of Computers in Design” in the Landscape journal, describing the potential use of computers in architecture. Computers should be considered as “a huge army of clerks, equipped with rule books, pencil and paper, all stupid and entirely without initiative, but able to follow exactly millions of precisely defined operations.” The previous year Alexander had just published his doctoral research, “Notes on the Synthesis of Form,” in which he showed how such an “army of clerks” would be indispensable in digitally remediating modern design’s methodological shortcomings.
Alexander’s simile effectively summarised the historical reorganisations of intellectual labour that, beginning in the nineteenth century with the application of Adam Smith’s principle of division of labour to produce mathematical tables by de Prony and Babbage, led to the technical concretisation of this same principle in the digital computers of the 1940s. Historically this process consisted the analysis of an increasing number of intellectual activities and their fragmentation into menial tasks that could be carried out by unskilled workers and clerks, and eventually mechanised. This sort of Taylorist intelligence became during the postwar embodied in the computer, but also in the arguments, methods and algorithms in the field of operations research (OR), the source of Alexander’s own problematisation of architecture and design.
Thus what Alexander’s “armies of clerks” heralded and promoted was not just a remedy to a design process that had grown too complex for the limited cognition and bounded rationality of human individuals, but the final disintegration of the figure of the humanist architect, shaped by the institutions typical of Foucault’s disciplinary societies, into the numerically modulated, “dividual” subjectivities of Deleuze’s societies of control. In the process, modes of subjectivation and enunciation considered exclusive to human individuals, a restriction central to the discipline of architecture, became assimilated into the technological assemblies of computation, redistributed as mechanical procedures, specialised tasks, and new and lean organisational structures.
Using methodologies close to those of critical code studies, I propose in this paper a close reading of the algorithms and diagrams implemented by Alexander in the HIDECS 2 program and used in the Notes; written in the then recently developed FORTRAN Assembly Program (FAP) language, its code is a record of how discourses of complexity, efficiency and specialisation became inscribed in architectural software from the start, covertly challenging concepts fundamental to architecture.