The Ordinary Architecture
We live in a society where architecture is considered unique and exclusive. Its seen as a luxury only a few people can afford. But how we define architecture in the present, is becoming a significant part of the practice for contemporary architects; especially the ones joining the profession. This also leads us to other significant questions,
Is the built environment defined by non-architects, not architecture?
Could that be considered as the Background architecture?
Are we, as professionals ready to take the challenge of designing background architecture?
The answers to these questions will definitely be distinct for all practitioners but hopefully, we all agree on John Habraken's ideas that explain that what is common can't be special but it can be of high quality.
Are we ready to take on the challenge to design the ordinary?
The Hauz Khas Village in New Delhi, India, was a slum near a preserved historic site. The area was sprawled with disorganized construction and was not governed by code. Although in the past years, the situation has changed drastically. Small-scale fashion boutiques were attracted to the location because of its central location in the city and cheaper rents, which caused a huge shift in the imageability of this area. It has now transformed into an exclusive village with unwinding streets and shops, and is a unique part of the fabric of the city.
Examples like such, are important to learn from, especially in the context of the urban environment that works as a living tissue. It's interesting to stop and question, how people build a thriving space, without architects and do it successfully. Can it be considered then, that people also have the ability to design architecture?
I like your idea that people can build successful environments without architects and we can learn from them. Like our reading said, most of the cities we visit and love were built without architects or urban planning. At the same time, I think architects do offer something valuable but we must make sure what we offer isn't in conflict with human nature.
ReplyDeleteBy definition, architecture is "the art or practice of designing and constructing buildings." So technically the entire built environment is architecture, be it legal or illegal. Some of the most fascinating structures are illegal architecture, such as the Walled City at Kowloon. So the built environment is defined by architecture, but not always architects.
ReplyDeleteThe built environment is defined by people and if you think otherwise you are wrong. We make spaces what we want or need of them. Every piece of architecture is a backdrop to the ordinary life's we all lead. The built environment can't be anything more than a series of buildings without us, as people, living around and in them.
ReplyDeleteI think the reading was really good about this topic highlighting how architecture has change from a luxury thing to a everyday thing with houses offices and even big deposits. So I think that architecture is actually becoming more accessible to people as long as we become more approachable
ReplyDeleteWhat is the definition of ordinary? I think there is no pure ordinary, because when you put a kind of design in this area, it is ordinary, but at another area, this kind of design is not.
ReplyDelete