Taming the Rhinoceros: A brief history of a ubiquitous tool

This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.

At the turn of the millennium, architects and educators, propelled by the demise of critical theory, found a space to speculate about technology’s role in the future of architecture. As Michael Speaks wrote in 2002, “if philosophy was the intellectual dominant of early twentieth century vanguards and theory the intellectual dominant of late twentieth century vanguards, then intelligence has become the intellectual dominant of twenty-first century post-vanguards” ( Speaks, 2010 , p. 211). This emphasis on intelligence fostered a progressive narrative around the increasing reliance on software in design processes. This paper examines architectural practice during this period, with a specific focus on the rise of a new set of values, priorities, and factors that transformed architectural thinking and making . In contrast to existing accounts of digital design’s history, this paper places less importance on outputs and more on the shifts in modes of working and enacting design labor. More specifically, it narrows in on a software application that, as will be argued, drastically changed both cultural values and design knowledge: Rhinoceros. Beyond simply facilitating the production of geometrically intricate and complex architectural assemblies, Rhinoceros helped shape the discourse on parametric, computational, and algorithmic design, redefining the role of the designer as a creative technologist. In doing so, it also engendered a specific community of practice, which in turn produced its own culture and folklore. The spread of this software greatly contributed to the rise of two new kinds of architectural technologists: the “parametric designer” and the “digital fabricator,” two actors who would significantly impact how architecture was imagined and produced from the mid-2000s through the 2010s.