Monday, August 30, 2010

Architecture Is...


Architecture is an idea, art, function, passion, love, hate, disappointment, hope and comfort. Architecture can be a selfish act, but it can also be a public move.  Architecture is only affordable by the rich, but it should really be something for the less fortunate.

Architecture is not just about the form and the way it looks from the outside.  It should also be about the space defined within; the interior space that has a more direct contact with the users.  The space inside the building is crucial, because if the inside is not successful, then what’s the point of having a 'cool' form.  Architecture is dynamic; it changes over time and changes with different uses of the occupants.  

Architecture is a struggle between what is right and what is wrong; the ethnic issue that plays within all projects and the minds of architects. Architecture is conflict. It is conflict between different class, race and gender; conflict between human and natural environment.  

Architecture is an invention, but will it be the invention that helps to move the world forward?

Architecture is open-ended; it is where an architect’s heart is.  

3 comments:

  1. I think describing architecture as a struggle is so true. Not only a struggle between stakeholders and architects but spaces in a building, light and dark...lots of stuff....and it is this struggle that can make or break architecture. That also totally relates to the struggle you were suggesting between the interior and exterior. The only thing I personally disagree with in your definition is that architecture can only be bought by the rich. Do you believe there is a point where a building is not architecture because it does not satisfy the needs of its occupants..who may be poor? As a thought, architecture can be expensive and still not support people in the proper way...so maybe that isn't good architecture either.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I-Shan, I'm curious how the image might link more directly to what you said about giving architecture to the less fortunate. While architecture might not only be for the rich, I think they are the only ones who can afford an architect. When an architect designs for the poor it is through a government system or through charity almost always. You were talking about being inspired by the homeless you saw in New York...it's actually very interesting, a lot of the people who live on the streets choose to over living in a home. It's a complex topic and a complex psychological issue as well. Maybe you should consider ways in which an architect can successfully lower their rates without losing money themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I very much agree with the open-endedness of architecture. There is no one, solitary definition of the idea of architecture. Perhaps even to the point where it may not even make sense to describe architecture as a "building" as you seem to have defined it?

    But what about the housing projects designed with the working class in mind? Are their utilitarian, functional designs not considered architecture? Is Le Corbusier's works to eradicate the problem of Paris' slums and construct housing for large masses of the general public not still works of architecture? Like a few other similar projects, the residents and consumers were not rich, but they had projects designed and made specifically for them, or with them in mind.

    ReplyDelete