In much of contemporary architectural practice and education, representation is a story of dichotomies: the pixel versus the vector; the direct versus the generative; the digital versus the material; and the two-dimensional drawing versus the three-dimensional model. Among the many varieties of architectural lines, the “hatch” garners little scholarly attention. Hatching carries connotations of rote vocational procedure in contrast to the more figurative and rhetorical possibilities inherent to the silhouette, the corner, the spatial wireframe, or the particle path. Those lines invoke myriad interpretations, as they are ripe with fruitful ambiguity. Despite its antique roots, it offers the unique possibility of dissembling the comfortable separation between the two-dimensional space of the paper and the three-dimensional space of architecture. Hatching disrupts the dichotomies that stifle the design of new conventions. Hatching can produce a drawing that is also a rendering, a record that is also a projection, or a material code that is also a material effect.