Marchitecture?

 I found the reading Learning from Pop by Denise Scott Brown rather interesting.  It really brought to my attention some aspects about pop culture and architecture that I would have never paired together before.  Perhaps in architecture, the delivery of the persuasiveness of opinion is just as important as the delivery of the actual structure. 

Another source is physical backgrounds in the mass media, movies, soap operas, pickle and furniture polish ads.  Here the aim is not to sell houses but something else, and the background represents someone’s (Madison Avenue’s?) idea of what pickle buyer or soap opera watchers want in a house.  Now the Madison Avenue observer’s view may be as biased as the architect’s, and it should be studied in the light of what it is trying to sell – must pickle architecture look homey like my house or elegant like yours if it is to sell my pickles?   

- Denise Scott Brown, Learning from Pop (1971)

I was really drawn to the paragraph above from the reading.  There is this idea that taking different indications from pop culture can potentially achieve the understanding of what people look for and desire not only in architecture, but in marketing strategies as well that are somewhat the persuasive aspect in architecture.   

The whole idea of treating architectural design like product as simple as a jar of pickles is so intriguing to me.  Coming from a business undergraduate background, I have a good bit of experience in marketing classes.  Never have I ever thought about the relationship of selling a product and selling architecture as comparable.  I took several classes on selling and the best ways to draw a potential consumer to a particular product.  In marketing, they teach you the 4 P’s which are: Placement, Promotion, Price, Product.  When wanting to really promote and sell a product (such as pickles) to a broad market, it is important that placement on a shelf, quality of product, appeal of packaging, and the price are all taken into consideration.  Wait a minute…  Are these all not important in selling architecture as well?  In my opinion they are.  Those 4 P’s of marketing can all be looked at in a way that could be used to acquire someone to purchase, or at least like a piece of architecture.  The building needs to be placed in an appropriate spot on the site that draws someone in, the quality of the building (product) should be that of the standard of the consumer, the promotion of the product (where pop culture potentially comes in to play – what draws the consumer/client/user in - color, form, etc.) must be persuasive, and lastly (for purchasing clients) the price must be at the right price point. 

  

Now, I’m not arguing that these are the only things that need to happen for architecture to be successful in acquiring someone’s approval or purchase even, but they are all aspects to consider when designing, and not just after the fact when placed on the market or in front of users. 

Attention to built sources for information on need does not imply that asking people what they want is not extremely necessary as well.  This is an important topic, as is the relation between the two types of survey, asking and looking; but it is not the subject of enquiry, which is on what can be learned from the artifacts of pop culture.  

- Denise Scott Brown, Learning from Pop (1971)

In conclusion, I really found the reading intriguing as it lead me to a whole different view of architecture and the connection that pop culture can have in concurrence.

Image site: https://www.archdaily.com/506532/colorful-pop-up-pavilion-forms-the-centerpiece-for-camden-create-festival/53734e1cc07a8038e90000ad-colorful-pop-up-pavilion-forms-the-centerpiece-for-camden-create-festival-photo