WHICH WAY DO YOU LEAN?
How
do we learn and practice architecture? Should it be theoretical and boundless
or should it be more realistic? For many it goes one of two ways: either they
want students to learn the theory and test the boundaries of design, or they
want students to learn a more technical and graphical approach as that is what they
will need most in practice.
Peter Eisenman would say that we should innovate and resist the
influences from the outside. He was more interested in separating the form from
the function so that he could invest himself into the form. While this sounds
really crazy to me, I do think that school is probably the only time that this
could work. Any building that is actually built from a design that only cared
about the form and disregarded the function, is bound to become an object
rather than a useful addition to society. Sean Griffiths, a professor of
Architecture at the University of Westminster, says that “the task of
architecture education is to carry out experimental research, to critique practice
and provide the tools, skills, and attitudes needed to reinvent it”. So maybe
we let the students experiment so that the current practice can improve.
While Rem Koolhaas ideals are opposed to Eisenman’s, due to his
lack of interest in the details and décor and his focus on the function of the
building, I think his approach is more of a blend between theory and technical.
Just because a building functions well, doesn’t mean it can’t push the
envelope. Koolhaas is more interested in the experience of the user and the distribution
of program which means that while everything is very organized, it still engages
the user’s senses. I think this is the most ideal blend for the future of the
practice. Realistically, we shouldn’t cut out theory since it can improve practice,
but we also have to meet the needs of the user. So maybe we just learn to
balance the two.
I agree with your thoughts on Koolhaas. After studying the Seattle Public Library for a previous class, I can attest that he is more focused on the user experience. What I find interesting is that his initial beginnings in architectural theory is what eventual led to his primary focus being on the user because as he puts it, "The result is better architecture."
ReplyDeleteYou make a great point about theory in education being important so that students can improve on current practices. Maybe not knowing about theory would be like not learning about different philosophies in the English class. If you didn't know that a book was written by an existentialist author, you might not really get the full meaning of the book.
ReplyDeleteYarely, I agree with the statement you made about letting the students experiment to improve the current practice. I also think that the balance between practicality and innovation is where the future lies.
ReplyDelete