It’s a question of ethics and/or poetics in architecture
When first thinking of the building envelope and social justice, my first thought is about the people on the outside of the building. First in terms of permeability and transparency - how to make people feel welcome or not excluded. Especially while walking down a sidewalk - do buildings seem permeable? Can the envelope create shelter for people trying to escape rain on the street? However the more I think about it, the broader it gets - it’s as much about the interaction of the building and the people inside as it is for the people on the outside. I think that the envelope should activate the spaces for the building users as well as the people on the outside.
On the other hand I wonder about the obligation of buildings to the general public - more or less in terms of aesthetics. Should buildings have a more poetical approach to their envelope for the general public that can’t access the inside? I do think that we have an ethical obligation to the public in terms of how buildings should perform, but does the built environment have an obligation for activating public life on the outside of the building? A good example that comes to mind is Antoni Gaudi’s buildings and how they are so engaging on the streets of Barcelona.
(this one seems more additive - but still more engaging on the street)
I like your post because it's formulated more through questions and doubts than through statements and certainty. That's usually a better way to approach a complex issue like this. However, Gaudi's example is less clear in my view. La Pedrera and his other urban works were not meant to be integrated but to disrupt and provoke. In time, they have become part of the city's identity, but they were creative bombs in their time.
ReplyDeleteI love your question about a building's aesthetic obligation to the general public. I understand how the owners of Casa Batllo in Barcelona wouldn't necessarily want a transparent envelope for their home, but the facade still brings so much beauty and life to the street, allowing the general public to enjoy it.
ReplyDeleteI think buildings do have an ethical obligation to respond to a sidewalk. This makes sense in an urban setting, but I wonder do those obligations apply the same to the suburbs? Should they?
ReplyDelete