An architecture for people rather than one for architects and critics.
It should not be a thing of fashion that are merely artifacts on the latest covers of glossy architectural magazines.
A responsible and responsive architecture which engages in most if not all of human senses thus transforming from a singular dimension approach to multi dimensions.
It should not be a form making exercise whereby architecture is reduced to a sculpture. The responsibility of an architect is to serve not only the basic need of shelter but create a place whereby it enables the possibilities yet unforeseen as opposed to adherence to a strict set of rules to create the perfect image.
Architecture should be about people and not dead objects - the material things which makes up the physical aspect of architecture are only means to an end and not the end itself. One may choose to express the qualities of wood not because of the qualities in themselves but of what effect it will have on the people experiencing the architecture.
From taking such a stand point - it is hoped that the resultant architecture is not only functional/aesthetically pleasing/cost effective etc. but ultimately allows the flourishing of the better qualities that resides within each of us. It should make us smile if not happy in the least.
Therefore I propose a happy architecture.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
How specifically can architecture open up possibilities? Can it do this by only cutting off other possibilities? Are material things only of extrinsic worth, can they be of intrinsic worth? Is Villa Savoye of intrinsic worth? Is the barrier reef of intrinsic worth? Is happiness the ultimate goal? What does happiness consist of? Will answering this question provide resources for designing a happy library?
Post a Comment