Architectural Foreground and Background

 


Architecture doesn't always have to sit behind our lives, but when it does, we can tell. There are two types of spaces that I can decipher that need the separation between architecture as background and architecture as spectacle: one time use and persistent use. Falling into the one time use category we have buildings like museums, stadiums, and theaters (among others). It's important that each of these serve their purpose for their direct function in how they are intended to be used. There is much less opportunity for the public to interact with the architecture to make it their own because of their intended use. Instead it would make sense for the architecture to be loud and dominate the space because it exists for the function and the people are there for the function. Persistent use spaces I would define as our homes, offices, and shops. The inverse occurs were the architecture is there to facilitate the people rather than the function because the people will bring the function. The architecture steps back to reveal the opportunity of the space instead of declaring itself visible.

Comments

  1. I love this split between spectacle and background. I wonder if these one-time use buildings don't have to be this way. I find stadiums intriguing because they are typically designed with one use/sport in mind but can often be converted for other uses like concerts or festivals. I really love events where they take a football stadium and convert it into a hockey rink for a stadium series. It makes me wonder: if these spaces can be converted so easily for other uses, why don't we make them more occupiable during the off times? Is it even possible to make them accessible more often? Just some food for thought.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts