Consequences to Architecture

    The article by Denise Scott-Brown, Learning from Pop, brings up the subject of ‘form’. Scott-Brown mentions that form can’t arise from function alone. She states that it is also influenced by the ideas of form as well as forces, processes, and technologies. She argues that the forms of the pop landscape are different from that of the Moderns and that of Beaux-Arts in that they speak about more than its aesthetic condition but about social necessity and architectural necessity as well. Her judgments on the purpose of architecture are clear in that she argues that architecture should adapt to society and listen to its necessities. While I agree with her in that architecture should be designed to support the community in which it is located, I would also argue the opposite. Instead of adapting to society, I think architecture should strive to do much more than that. Society’s priorities are ever-changing and sometimes their priorities may be detrimental to our future.

    Architects have a lot of power to influence the built environment and therefore the well-being of its occupants and the environment. Therefore, we should be meticulous when determining the form and purpose of our design and analyze the positive and negative outcomes that it might create. Additionally, I will argue that it should consider not only our current society and its needs, but future worldly concerns that may be ameliorated by a better built environment by moving architecture towards unexplored fields.