Individual Architecture, or Life Size Legos?
More often
than not the world has looked to architects to plan out their futures and
buildings. We have left an impression of this world that has lasted lifetimes
and will affect more lifetimes as we proceed. However, no matter how hard we
try we’ve found that architecture it self is a consumer good that one must pay
for to enjoy. They often say architecture is for the people. It’s for the
client. The one who pays for it. Which is why often people must find their own
architecture.
You might say this is not true. There is architecture that is designed for the public. They have a say during the design, they can object if they don’t like it. Maybe so. But where is their individual architecture. They architecture that lets someone surround themselves in a space that is theirs. That is not a mainstream idea pushed upon them because the man with the deeper pockets made it so. Enters Walter Segal who said “architecture should work with society.” He had a great approach to this continuous issue and created a modular and life size Lego set so people can have their own architecture. A base system easily modified to encompass their need yet simple enough to build with basic skills already obtained or easily learned. So don’t forget that everyone deserves their own architecture.
It's interesting that you say that everyone deserves their own architecture. Do you think that point of view of " designing for society and community rather than the individual" is detrimental to the development of architecture? I can see this as something that puts pressure on others to conform and design for collective enjoyment rather than the individual. However, as you mentioned, Walter Segal took this opportunity to include both perspectives, introducing the user into the design process. This allowed Segal to develop the base design for the whole of the community while allowing the residents to personalize and design for the individual.
ReplyDelete