An inate problem with symposia is that they are exclusive. They happen at the institution that hosts them, in a time frame that is limited and often they deal with, or attempt to deal with, a particular issue at hand. Is Drawing Dead at the Yale University School of Architecture may have pushed the hyperbolic limit. 

That the answer is "no" at Yale is not a shock, nor should it be a shock that the theoreticians collected there should make a plea for considering the drawing in it's different formats. 

From the twitter feeds, student whispers, and the panelists, a question seems to have been missed - what are we drawing? Isn't that the more interesting question any way? Are we drawing machines, assemblages, collages? Is this artwork, or communication or documentation? 

Ten years ago we drew program (OMA) or fields (SANAA) or deconstructed objects (morphosis) or lines. The act of drawing is in itself problematic within the design profession. Drawings have a purpose beyond the artifact and beyond their role to communicate. While drawing may not be dead, the art of drawing, the art of understanding depth and weight and assembly, is not being taken up. The 3d model is in a way the drawing itself, but drawings may serve a different purpose. The time may have come again to reconsider how we draw.