Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas

 After reading Architectures Public by Giancarlo de Carlo, it made me think about architectures first origins written about by Vitruvius. We all know Vitruvius's three principles of design (Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas) or Firmness, Commodity, and Delight. According to Vitruvius, If a building is to create a sense of eurythmia - a graceful and agreeable atmosphere - it is essential that it mirrors these natural laws of harmony and beauty. First, a building at its minimum should be structurally sound and built to last. Second, it should be functional and provide useful spaces for the user. Last but not least, it should be beautiful, providing the user with an experience that mimics spaces of nature. As architects, the architecture we create somehow should find its way in the middle of these three values.

One part that really struck me in the reading was when De Carlo was talking about how social, political, and economical classes define how we approach designing architecture. In it, he says "Nobody can be satisfied with an answer that appeals to the scarcity of available resources when we know how much is spent on war." Even before an idea is talked about, the design and construction of the building is based on the economical and social status of the people who are going to utilize the building. I know its impossible to satisfy the needs of everyone, but shouldn't the architecture we design appeal to all regardless of the building type or cost. Using cheap and inexpensive materials shouldnt mean that the architecture wont be as impactful. In fact, it should be more impactful because it requires the architect to think holistically about the design, looking at a building as an entire system. I think the most interesting thing about Vitruvius is how he analyzed the human body and how its proportions related to architecture.  Maybe we as architects could find a way to recover these same ideals, always thinking about how people .