I have been thinking a lot about what the architect's purpose and responsibility is. The first answer might be to stay within budget, fulfill the client's needs or create great buildings. But I think that there are more imperitive answers to this question, such as: am I respecting the environment and creating a space that works with the landscape, the ecology by being cognizant of sustainability of materials, local geography, etc. Another imperitive might be: am I meeting the needs of all people and not just those who can afford to benefit from great design.
So I keep Buckminster Fuller, William McDonough, and Bruce Mau in mind when I design. And I recently learned about Architecture for Humanity, Archeworks and Stanley Tigerman , who sums up my position by saying, “Designing houses for the rich—that’s not interesting. It’s greater payback to work for those who need me than for those who want me,” Tigerman says. “When you design something beautiful, people appreciate it. Beauty isn’t just the reserve for the rich.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
hmm...that's a thought...
it definitely is a greater challenge to come up with a beatiful design with a tight budget although it is much better to design without restrictions. but! if you do come up with a great solution in fusing the needs and the aesthetic beauty along with the budget, then you must be a real great designer.
do you watch hgtv? compare... design on a dime and divine design. both satisfy the needs of the client but which do you think is most successful in terms of beauty?
Post a Comment