1. Architecture is all around. Everyone throughout the world needs shelter of some kind. This means wherever I travel, whether it be the back streets of Melbourne or the European countryside, there is always something interesting to look at and consider – be it a gutter detail or some unusual cladding material. Perhaps this makes architecture the ultimate universal language…
2. Architecture encompasses all senses. Not only is architecture a visual entity, it appeals to your aural and tactile senses. Even the smell of timber beams can affect the way you experience architecture. The way noise bounces off walls and the smoothness of the concrete floor are also elements which can have a profound affect on the overall experience of architecture. Is architecture the only art form which has this ability? Does this help to validate the idea that architecture is ‘the mother of all arts’?
3. Architecture has the ability to affect the way people feel. I think this aspect of architecture is so extraordinary. Deconstructed, a building can just be a pile of steel, timber and glass but the way in which those elements are put together can bring people to tears. But I wonder how much does this have to do with the function of the building (Libeskind’s Jewish Museum in Berlin) or the stories behind the building and architect? (Kahn’s Capital Complex at Dhaka).
Libeskind’s Jewish Museum
Kahn’s Capital Complex at Dhaka
3 Responses
Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.
“The building is like a book. Its architecture is the binding, its text is in the glass and sculpture.”
Malcolm Miller
“All architecture is shelter, all great architecture is the design of space that contains, cuddles, exalts, or stimulates the persons in that space.”
Philip Johnson
Interesting thoughts. I like what you are saying and I agree with it all!
Although, on closer reflection, if I were to replace “architecture” with “nature” in your spread, it would still make sense, and maybe even sound better to me : “… Nature encompasses all senses. Not only is nature a visual entity, it appeals to your aural and tactile senses. Even the smell of fresh pine sap can affect the way you experience both nature and yourself. The way noise bounces off trees and is dampened by the forest, and the smoothness of the moss under our feet ….” and so on.
Would that suggest then that architecture – even though made by man not by nature, and therefore ‘un-natural’ by definition – tries to compete against nature? Or is it just that we are longing for nature and therefore interpret all these natural attributes into architecture?
To me, one element of good architecture is if it is inspired by or does have a dialogue with nature – but that still doesn’t answer where one stands against the other. Any thoughts?
That is a great last point Amelda, I am wondering if the (perceived) significance of the building or complex pre-empts your emotional expectations ?