Made in Tokyo?
Made in Tokyo.
What stood out to me in this reading was the concept of 3 orders that classify an environmental Unit and how these orders can be on and off. The three orders were category, structure, and use. These criteria were then used to talk about the buildings in Tokyo. Most of the buildings in Tokyo are not there for aesthetics. They are there to serve a purpose. In the reading it stated that the people of Tokyo’s cultural interest is low but their interest in practical issues is high. This leads to buildings that focus less on category and more on structure and use. For example there is a department store in Tokyo that relies on an expressway for its structure.
I do not agree with this way of thinking. I feel that architecture should take into account all three orders. I think it is clear from the examples in this article that these buildings make for weird uninviting landscapes. The buildings feel congested and there is no sense of place. I believe all three orders need to be working in balance with one another to create a successful building.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteGood post and great pictures! I think this argument, and the points that you bring out, is the foundation of form vs. function. I believe the stance that you take is one that places form higher up than function. Because functionally, it seems pretty efficient for the department store to rely on the express way for structure. But you are correct, if looking through a lens of form-focused architecture, that this combination is aesthetically unpleasing. Its crazy how we can look and say that we live in a polarized world, and that polarization is everywhere, even architecture. But can anyone really make a definitive argument on this subject when the nature of quality of our work is indeed subjective?