Living up to a building - pleasure or liability?

For decades now, architects have been building structures. The question here is how much meaning do they convey?
Designing a building is totally different from merely erecting a structure. The former holds so much more relevance and significance. It is sensitive and sensible. So one can say when a building is actually “designed”, living up to it is rather spontaneous. That is one doesn’t need to force oneself to live up to it. It just happens. The comfort and convenience goes without saying.
But then comes the argument: Does one actually lose himself/herself in the process of adapting or “living up to” a building? Is it really possible to always be at a high state where every time one enters the building, he/she has the exact same feeling what was felt when the building was experienced for the first time? Is it psychologically wrong for a building to make one feel this way? Do we canon over the building or is it vice versa? This again is a very subjective row since there are different perspectives with which one can see this.
The falling waters is an example which stands for the motion. The weekend cottage is a complete experience and a totally new one every time one enters it. F.L. Wright chose to blend this building with nature, in other words, made it organic. This fact has lead to all the excitement which is achieved in and around the weekend cottage.
On the contrary, the same excitement might not be maintained in the Bilbao Museum. Equilibrium of state of mind will be attained at some point of time. The entire thrill will come to expire.
To draw a conclusion, an architect’s aim should be to achieve a design which is worth living up to and at the same time creating a space where comfort and bliss comes unprompted, where the building and its inmates mutually co-exist!!