Point: Theories
Architecture is the art form that we inhabit. It effectively communicates a dialogue from the past to the present as a conscious reflection of our ideology as humans. It is important for us to understand our past successes and failures in architecture in order to move forward. Throughout time we have seen the lineage in architecture of our foundations, a search for alternatives to those foundations, reflection back upon those foundations, and then exploration of new ideas all together.
“ Design deserves attention not only as a practice, but as a subject of philosophic investigation.” A quote from the book Discovering design: Explorations in Design Studies speaks to the level of architectures ability to affect us on the deepest levels. Buildings are not just structures that meet our basic need of shelter. They are tools used to manipulate our thoughts, ideas, emotions, and mood. Through good design methods we as designers are able to bridge the gap between the material world and the world of the perceiver through sensory engagement. At the same time if a space is dulling to senses and its function does not meet the needs of the user through a mass of bad design principals, architecture can wreck the soul.
Roth brings up the notion that architecture stands upon a tripod of the three ideals of commodity, firmness and delight. This means that the building must be functional, safe, and pleasing to be in and around. If a building is missing one of the three it will be sure to fall into the pits of mediocrity and the mundane. However if an architect is to give close attention to these three things, their work will be praised for lifetimes to come.
Although commodity, firmness, and delight do aid to the success of a design it does not mean we may stop there as designers. Architecture is a language. How can a building communicate to the whole world the glory of its ideals if we do not all speak this same language? The answer is it cannot. Every building ever imagined is subject to the lenses of culture. In Japan, a designer will confidently place a dining room table, which stands at a height of 17”, in a space. How ever if a European designer were to do this, the question of there acceptance would be asked. The difference in these two designers is culture, what is accepted and what is not. Therefore as designers we must be sensitive of how and what we design, according to who we are designing it for.
Austin- I really liked how you brought culture into your post and went into detail about Japanese designs and how it would relate to other cultures. I agree with you that architecture and design is a language and speaks differently depending on where it is. It can be a beautiful piece anywhere but some cultures may not understand the purpose. I also thought it was smart of you to bring up things we talked about in class and expand upon them from the material in our readings.
ReplyDeleteAustin,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate how your first paragraph ties together topics from the different class units - foundations, alternatives, reflections, and explorations. You communicate your thoughts quite well.
Maybe next time write a little bit more (at least 500 words), although I think your post did say a lot.
The image is great. It would've been nice to see a little paragraph about the image and why you chose it.
I really like your cultural design thought. you are right.. We need to think about who we are designing it for more deeply.Architecture represents not only culture but also communication, people like us try not to follow world trend without thinking.
ReplyDeleteI think doing what i like is not important,what i can do for people is more important
It is very good that you used some strong phrases in this entry suck as "wrecks the soul" and "pits of mediocrity," as these phrases really help to make your point. Just be careful to make sure these phrases do not become cliche in the future. You should also be careful of how you incorporate quotes into your writing (see beginning of paragraph 2). Also, "commodity, firmness, and delight" were not notions by Roth (though they are covered in that text).
ReplyDeleteYour writing flows nicely from one subject to the next. It seems that you understand the concepts from the unit and how it changes your thought process as a designer. The image you chose is interesting and eye-catching, but perhaps a few sentences about why you chose it would help connect it to your text. Other than that, I think you did a good job of showing how all these elements and ideas must interact to create successful architecture.
ReplyDelete