Design vs. Reality
As we look at many buildings designed today, the architects
vision for a perfectly groomed space seems to be unrealistic and ignorant of
everyday life. An example is Richard Meier when he designed the Getty Museum,
white office space was clean and free of clutter in his mind. However, in
reality the offices became cluttered immediately with office “junk”. The vision
was destroyed, and replaced with reality. I think architects overlook the daily life of
the building and the user as they try and design the “perfect space”. Another
example can be found in Nouvel’s Nemausus housing project. Each apartment was
given a balcony intended to extend the apartment outside and give more space,
however most are used for storage due to the lack of storage other places. This
contradiction between design and reality seems to create a rift between the
architect and the users. Can architects design a building that fits the users
perfectly? No, because the user group of most buildings is changing and very
diverse. However, some architects seem to disregard the user in some aspects in
order to create the “perfect space.” How can a better balance between the two
be accomplished? What is an “acceptable” level of coordination between the
design and the user?
 |
| Design vs. Reality |
I could not agree more about this. The vision of the Getty I don't think was destroyed, but rather flawed in the beginning. Not taking into account the users desires, needs, and possibly even existence. It's almost ignorant in a way to think purity can be achieved in architecture when by nature people are different.
ReplyDeleteAll of these "Starchitects" that are trying to come up with the perfect architecture seem to be the ones with the biggest egos. When they don't get their way or when someone uses the space against how they intended they get all up in arms about "their building" rather than allowing the user to create the space that they'd like.
ReplyDelete