special? boring? high or low quality?
". . . one cannot claim at the same time that the entire built environment is to be architecture and that architecture is special and different. How can everything be special? This question by itself should give us pause to ask what we actually are doing."
later. . . .
"What is common cannot be special, but it can be of high quality."
First, this brings the question of who is defining something as low or high quality + what are the boxes you must check?
I think one of the most important objectives that decides whether something is special, high quality etc...is creating or activating spaces that set up and allow the user to experience it to the fullest. User interaction with architecture can be as much of "architecture" as the structure they inhabit. Sharing the power with those who will generate their own experiences in it is important but how much power? The architect should create / innovate the everyday environment at a variety of scales through a plethora of programs. But also, the user continues the role of the "architect" into the future.
Random thoughts continued......talk about flexibility through a framework.
later. . . .
"What is common cannot be special, but it can be of high quality."
First, this brings the question of who is defining something as low or high quality + what are the boxes you must check?
I think one of the most important objectives that decides whether something is special, high quality etc...is creating or activating spaces that set up and allow the user to experience it to the fullest. User interaction with architecture can be as much of "architecture" as the structure they inhabit. Sharing the power with those who will generate their own experiences in it is important but how much power? The architect should create / innovate the everyday environment at a variety of scales through a plethora of programs. But also, the user continues the role of the "architect" into the future.
Random thoughts continued......talk about flexibility through a framework.
Nice post. Reimagining shipping containers as habitation is a good example of Habrken's questions that he uses to investigate the role of architecture addressing the issues of values within a community, the flexibility of permanence, and design responsibilities of designer and user.
ReplyDeleteI agree on the statement about who it is that regards something as high quality. It is hard to design something with intentions of it being a great building as well as high quality because not everyone will see the building that way. As one person may see it as and building of the future that offers opportunities, another person may see it as a piece of trash that wastes vital space. It is hard to judge exactly what we can do at times but as long as we design it with the intentions for it to be user driven we are on the correct path.
ReplyDeleteBringing up the definition of quality is very intriguing. In another course, we had to read Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, which essentially tells the story of a man that went insane trying to define quality. Is there a scientific way for measuring it, or is simply subjective and difficult to control? People will all see spaces differently, and it is impossible to please everyone. High quality for one will not be high quality for another. David Franco even discussed this during the debate when he said that architecture should not just be about checking boxes, as you don’t do that with art or novels. There is no universal way to evaluate quality.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you and Katie. I don't think quality should be a box that you can check. I think quality is very much subjective but still has a universal sense of order. What I mean by this is that I feel like most people perceive quality as something that can be compared to something else and they regard at a higher standard, it has some sort of "order" that makes it "better" from another similar thing. This may be different for everyone which is hard for us as architects to design for but I think that coinciding in a broad standard can help guide the design. I don't particularly like the images you show but I see them having a high quality in their construction.
ReplyDelete