This a crazy question that any one coould ask. An architect is not an architect if he does not look for the both, the aesthetics and the comfort of living in the building. Its like i will make a car which looks extremly good, but it wont function good, its only to show off. It will be suitable for persons who are rich. Same way, a good looking building may be suitable to show off so that a person going on the road may stare at the building comenting good about it. Only the person living in the building will know if he is living in a hell or in a heaven.
These mistakes are done by great architscts also. For example, if you look at VILLA SAVOY, the building on the whole looks good, but it has many functional defects. When the architect was questioned, he told, it was a piece of art, and he connot disturb it. Only the resident know how difficult it is to live there.
Similar thing happened with Le Corbusiers Pessac Housing. Later when the inhabitants altered the residence, he comented that "Life is right, Architect is wrong"
One thing we can conclude out of this is that the person viewing the building from outside may enjoy it, but the people living in the building may suffer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment