8 de octubre de 2020 ddelae

U1-What is architecture

What will architecture be? It is a very complicated issue, in my view. It’s not that it’s an idea that is unintelligible or imaginary, because we can see, touch, smell architecture too much. Because of how changeable, relative, and open architecture is as a definition, I think it is a difficult question to address. So, with only one definition, it is almost difficult to delimit it.Architecture is a lot of stuff, or so it seemed to me when we were asked to describe it one day in class. It was too complicated, it was too big.

In the end, though, I came up with the belief that architecture is an art after some thought. Yet it is an art conditioned by truth and delimited by it. You can avoid reality while drawing an image. Whatever comes to your mind, you should paint. There are no rules, no boundaries. In contrast, an architect can’t neglect reality. An inevitable and enduring connection exists between architecture and reality. He or she’s gotta face it. It is important to tailor each job to it. I am referring to the fact that the end outcome of a work is very different from the architect’s original conception. The theory cannot be brought to existence in an exact way. This is because, for example, architecture must adapt to the circumstances of the landscape or the environment of the region, but, most importantly, to the needs of people. This is the contrast in most arts. There is a clear connection with these matters of architecture. Painters chose whether they want to conform to reality or to represent human nature’s more delusional facets. A decision is taken by the painter: fact or imagination. Since he or she can’t, the architect doesn’t. This is mostly because an artist job relies on no other than themself, while the architect’s depends on several factors.

Architecture, with the implications of this, is elegance brought to life. Architecture is thus a synthesis of both ars (art) and tecne (technology).

Architecture is subject to the reality of the artist, and time and space are conditioned by this reality. This suggests that each work depicts the age and the location where it was made. It is a reflection of time, certainly. Architecture, then, suits fashions or patterns, and can change the same way history advances until they are outdated. In addition, architects are actively finding changes in terms of aesthetics but also efficiency, which is the awareness that it must be subject to the needs of people, which can contribute to change. Architecture, in a more strict sense, is the building method or the development of spaces. This areas would be populated by individuals. As a matter of fact, there is also a strong connection between the health care of individuals and the spaces in which they live. This is why architecture is so sensitive to humans, which is why it has to adapt to our needs. Understanding that we spend most of our lives in space, architecture should not be overlooked at all. Functionality is central. Nevertheless, versatility can never, from my viewpoint, outweigh aesthetics. Beauty is immutable, even as trend shifts. No matter the time, perfection will always be flawless. Functionality, though, is ephemera. Functionality relies on persons, and our reality, which is continuously transforming, influences us. By this, I mean that architecture can grow into elegance at all times.

Finally, social consciousness of the climate has increased in recent decades. Especially after rapid industrialization and, of course, deforestation, we are starting to realize the importance of protecting the world where we live. So, just as humanity has a duty to nature, so does design. Because of this, architects in their practice should strive for sustainability.

The house has to please everyone, contrary to the work of art which does not. The work is a private matter for the artist. The house is not. The work of art is brought into the world without there being a need for it. The house satisfies a requirement. The work of art is responsible to none; the house is responsible to everyone. The work of art wants to draw people out of their state of comfort. The house has to serve comfort. The work if art is revolutionary; the house is conservative. The work of art shows people new directions and thinks of the future. The house thinks of the present. Man loves everything that satisfies his comfort. He hastes everything that wants to draw him out of his acquired and secured position and that disturbs him. Thus he loves the house and hates art. Does it follow that the house has nothing in common with art and is architecture not to be included amongst the arts? That is so. Only a very small part of architecture belongs to art: the tomb and the monument. Everything else that fulfils a function is to be excluded from the domain of art.

-Adolf Loos, in his 1910 essay “Architecture”.
Adolf Loos Muller House
Sources