Inside or Out?

“ The architectural interior is not occupied, and instead is a void; it is not a source but a sink, it is not a machine but an architectural space with a specific configuration and materiality , which is often the focus of social life at different scales.”

Interior: The Achilles Heel of Modernity
Iñaki Abalos

When architecture is talked about as only the skin of a building I think we have missed the main idea behind creation of space. Yes, the envelope of the building had a great impact but if we think of architecture as only that one element how do we create dynamic spaces for the interior user. This goes back to the intention of user based design and my personal thinking of a building as a whole, not just parts and pieces. I think architects have the ability to mold and transform the space created through the envelope and interior spaces. The envelope of a building does determine a great deal of limitations and restraints on the interior but why not work with both sides? Also as we design we have been blurring that line of interior and exterior with transitional spaces, who owns these aspects of the design?

From the quote I am particularly interested in the  “focus of social life at different scales” this incorporates all aspects of design from the interior and the exterior. Again I question what an architect’s role is, just to “own” the envelope or be pragmatic about the design of space as a whole.