On the Impropriety of Modern Architecture
On the Impropriety of Modern Architecture – A Manifesto by Raymond Chow
The growing trend amongst new architects and architecture students is unnerving; How can these self proclaimed professionals place such emphasis on aesthetic form and superficial appearances, very often forsaking concern for the safety of the occupants of the buildings they create? I concede the argument that clients prefer buildings which are aesthetically pleasing, but at what cost? These same clients are often unaware how substantial the continuing cost of maintaining a building is if its original design was focused purely on aesthetics. Besides the simple bad design errors which have a monetary value, these architects often make egregious errors which hurt, or even worse, kill people.
The Ancient Architects understood this quite well. As evidenced by Laugier's famous frontispiece, it is well accepted that the when architecture is distilled, the core rationalization for architecture is functionality and natural structure, not aesthetics. Consider, for what reason was architecture developed as a profession? We, as humans, require shelter from the elements of nature, and that is it, the entirety of architecture can be defined as the creation of shelter from these elements. The aesthetics of such a science, often mistaken as the “art of architecture”, should take a subservient priority.
It is my conviction that the crucial priority architects and students of architecture should be concerned about can be divided into five categories for further emphasis:
On the Meaning of Safety
Primum non nocere- this phrase, commonly attributed to Epidemics, is the principal precept taught to all medical students. Commonly known in its translated form, it means simply “First, do no harm”. This seems to be such a difficult concept for so many architects to master. How many lawsuits have been filed in the last decade alone for such simple design errors which were caused by the sheer disregard of the architect? Stairs where steps are incongruous? Thresholds which simply drop a foot to grade? Window panes which simply fall out of their rough openings? Incorrectly sized handrails? Lack of handrails? There are an incredible number of simple design techniques which may be utilized to ensure the safety of the inhabitants, and they should all be incorporated where applicable.
On the Meaning of Structure and Construction Viability
Consider the level of mathematics taught to architecture students in the modern era. Students who are of a non-mathematics related major still have to take high level calculus as part of their requirements; why don’t architecture students at NJIT? New architecture students are told to think outside the box, but as students, they don’t have any point of reference to define the limits of said box. Very often the result is an aesthetically pleasing, or formally interesting, project, with little consideration to the structural limitations of the materials selected, if any materials are selected at all.
On the Meaning of Functionality and Security
Grand views and magnificent spaces; this is the emphasis for modern architecture. There appears to be a clear regression to this type of sophomoric consideration for architecture. Starting as purely functional, architecture shifted to functionality and magnificence (as apparent in, for example, the Renaissance era), and eventually evolving to pure bravura. Architects do not consider the minutiae of design which can drastically make a space much more inhabitable and functional, rather focusing on the superficial aesthetics. This trend needs to stop, and we must once again consider functionality.
On the Meaning of Building Performance and Efficiency
Formalism and aesthetics not only supersede functionality nowadays, but architects also disregard performance. How often have you seen a multiple-story curtain wall with zero consideration for the thermal loss, solar gain, direct glare, and the multitude of other design problems inherent with buildings designed with aesthetics as their focus? Architects need to consider much more carefully insulation envelopes and performative issues which will become increasingly important as the cost of electricity and heating oils increase.
The growing trend amongst new architects and architecture students is unnerving; How can these self proclaimed professionals place such emphasis on aesthetic form and superficial appearances, very often forsaking concern for the safety of the occupants of the buildings they create? I concede the argument that clients prefer buildings which are aesthetically pleasing, but at what cost? These same clients are often unaware how substantial the continuing cost of maintaining a building is if its original design was focused purely on aesthetics. Besides the simple bad design errors which have a monetary value, these architects often make egregious errors which hurt, or even worse, kill people.
The Ancient Architects understood this quite well. As evidenced by Laugier's famous frontispiece, it is well accepted that the when architecture is distilled, the core rationalization for architecture is functionality and natural structure, not aesthetics. Consider, for what reason was architecture developed as a profession? We, as humans, require shelter from the elements of nature, and that is it, the entirety of architecture can be defined as the creation of shelter from these elements. The aesthetics of such a science, often mistaken as the “art of architecture”, should take a subservient priority.
It is my conviction that the crucial priority architects and students of architecture should be concerned about can be divided into five categories for further emphasis:
- Safety
- Structure and Construction Viability
- Functionality and Security
- Building Performance and Efficiency
On the Meaning of Safety
Primum non nocere- this phrase, commonly attributed to Epidemics, is the principal precept taught to all medical students. Commonly known in its translated form, it means simply “First, do no harm”. This seems to be such a difficult concept for so many architects to master. How many lawsuits have been filed in the last decade alone for such simple design errors which were caused by the sheer disregard of the architect? Stairs where steps are incongruous? Thresholds which simply drop a foot to grade? Window panes which simply fall out of their rough openings? Incorrectly sized handrails? Lack of handrails? There are an incredible number of simple design techniques which may be utilized to ensure the safety of the inhabitants, and they should all be incorporated where applicable.
On the Meaning of Structure and Construction Viability
Consider the level of mathematics taught to architecture students in the modern era. Students who are of a non-mathematics related major still have to take high level calculus as part of their requirements; why don’t architecture students at NJIT? New architecture students are told to think outside the box, but as students, they don’t have any point of reference to define the limits of said box. Very often the result is an aesthetically pleasing, or formally interesting, project, with little consideration to the structural limitations of the materials selected, if any materials are selected at all.
On the Meaning of Functionality and Security
Grand views and magnificent spaces; this is the emphasis for modern architecture. There appears to be a clear regression to this type of sophomoric consideration for architecture. Starting as purely functional, architecture shifted to functionality and magnificence (as apparent in, for example, the Renaissance era), and eventually evolving to pure bravura. Architects do not consider the minutiae of design which can drastically make a space much more inhabitable and functional, rather focusing on the superficial aesthetics. This trend needs to stop, and we must once again consider functionality.
On the Meaning of Building Performance and Efficiency
Formalism and aesthetics not only supersede functionality nowadays, but architects also disregard performance. How often have you seen a multiple-story curtain wall with zero consideration for the thermal loss, solar gain, direct glare, and the multitude of other design problems inherent with buildings designed with aesthetics as their focus? Architects need to consider much more carefully insulation envelopes and performative issues which will become increasingly important as the cost of electricity and heating oils increase.
posted by microzeta at
6:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home