Is Architecture For People?

Where Denise Scott Brown's Learning from Pop emphasizes the need to look at pop culture to define formal vocabularies, I will focus on the topic that precedes pop in her text, the topic of producing architecture for what people need or want.

Too often, architects believe that they are the "Master Architect," the all-knowing creative mind, with the ability to give people what they didn't know they needed. Yes, we are trained to articulate spaces with a vision of experiences, and assumed uses. More importantly, however, we have been trained to think, listen, and learn. Why do we tend to forget this?

Architecture for people would be sensitive to the needs of its users, not the market. Did the poor choose to live in inadequate social housing, underfunded, underinvested? Had they even been included in the design process?

Architecture that responds to the voices of its users is architecture for people. This does not mean that it should exist within the bourgeoisie narratives of its context. Architects should learn from their context, listen to their users, and think about the possibilities of a better solution with their people.



Comments

  1. I love the statement "Architecture that responds to the voices of its users is architecture for people". As I look back at previous generations of work by renowned architects, I can't help but wonder if they truly believed they were doing the "right" thing during their time? Would they have a different viewpoint of their designs if they could see the impact it has today? Will we as future architects one day become just like them and think that we are designing the "right" thing and it has negative impacts from what we thought we were doing?

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. If architecture was truly used for all the people, we wouldn't have instances where gentrification is used in a negative context. Rather than looking at an area and seeing what they don't have, we should be asking the people what they need. As we progress through out our careers we should use our standings to be sure that projects don't only fit the needs of the people we want to target, but also the people that we aren't directly trying to effect.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Architecture, as a function, should serve the needs of they people it houses. Architecture, as an art form, should reflect the character, craft, and soul of the people who built it. If it is not oriented toward the good of people, then it is oriented towards the detriment of people. Architecture lasts a long time and the effects, good or bad, will be seen for years to come.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I always struggle with how much architects should impose their ideas on others' lifestyles. We shouldn't let any sense of a "god complex" get in the way of listening to what users really want, facilitation solutions through design and architecture.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts