Hardcore or Amateur Architecture

Two popular labels (or categories) for porn website, hardcore and amateur, tells the two mindsets of architects since 1990s.

Hardcore Architects, build for architecture's sake. They take architecture as a high-format of art, and they think it is professional to take architecture as a result or compliance to a far-more important architectural theory or thinking, that they selected to believe in. However, the problems is, they would never agrees on an universal language of architecture.

Amateur Architects, however, knows their limits, and the limits of a short clip ( or a building). They do not worship their buildings, they sell their buildings. They build for the People. Just like a self-made video clip could not express varieties of porn industries. They take every project as a single point of view to showcase what they believes good architecture should DO.  They take architecture as a production of commercial products.  They are problem-solvers, and they are more like engineers, romantic engineers.

Which type of architects do we need? Hardcore or Amateur? Hot or Cool? Critical or Projective?

Comments

  1. I don't think you want to use "amateur" to describe architectural professionals. If you want to stick to the pornography metaphor, I think it's more accurate to say that the opposite of hardcore is softcore. I think there's something there in the sense that one form makes people far more uncomfortable than the other, and one relies more on intention and innuendo than the other.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts