issues:

The thesis proposal that I have come up with is far more localized than some of the theories tackling architecture as a whole, or trying to define architecture.... mine seeks to simply find a way to relate old and new. I'm taking something I see as an issue, yes, but it is not of the same scale as some of the 'architectural greats'. Mine is far more specific, and yet I still have a great deal of freedom of interpretation. It's like how we discussed whether Hannes and LeCorb's manifestos could be applied to any project or whether they would be too prescriptive. I think that even my problem and project statements are very open ended as far as how one might apply them. The basic concept is there, but how do I put it into play is an issue I am struggling with as we approach the deadline for program. I'm finding the issue to not be one of program, but of site. I feel like the site will determine the program, help to define the concept even further, and basically arrange the project for me. This makes the stress of choosing a site even more acute. I feel as though I have backed myself into a corner, where I must choose and analyze the site before I can even begin to consider program. Whereas I have a very broad concept, that can be applied anywhere, the prescriptive nature of my thesis requires the individual concept application to a unique place and situation. I am wondering how this can be absolved without harming the nature of my thesis through the over-prescription of site requirements, or the over-simplification from generalizing my site specific project to support my more overarching thesis.