Critique on Conventional Paradigms
Having delved into the discussion on Post-Functionalism and the Doppler effect, I found myself reflecting on spaces where form takes precedence over function. One example that came to mind was one discussed in class, the Wexner Center for Arts. This building's form created spaces that are either unusable or challenging to navigate. In critiquing the conventional paradigm of form following function, it becomes imperative to elevate the consideration of forms serving functions.
I believe the impact of function on the form should transcend the simple sequential approach, developing into a thoughtful and informed decision-making process. The interdependence between the two should be woven so seamlessly that it is hard to distinguish its chronological order.
I agree that form should follow function but ultimately it should be a balance between both. I don't think architecture would be as rich in design if form and function aren't considered simultaneously.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of chronology when discussing form versus function is an interesting point to bring up. We often talk about the hierarchy of one over the other, but this rarely indicates the order of operations in such design. This can open up the discussion further to how even if form were to follow function, does that mean it undoubtedly came 'first'?
ReplyDelete