Quote:
Originally Posted by Cirrus
The really ironic thing is that maybe if architects disconnected their collective heads and asses, we might see some new contemporary styles with details that could compete with historic designs and that people actually like. Instead, the architecture world continues to plug along trying to force essentially the same geometric sculpturalism (different shapes perhaps, but the same basic game) that they’ve been pushing for at least 50 years, and which the public has soundly rejected (and for good reason - architecture isn't just art; we have to live in it).
|
As a comparative layman of architecture, but involved on the development side, this intrigues me (and i have often thought the same thing).
Do you see the roots of what could be better design directions anywhere? Where does one look to see the thoughtful 'outer edge' and not the current popularized and sensationalized 'outer edge' of design?
I sometimes find it annoying listening to architects (and planners) blaming developers for ALL of our design-ills when i see little to no viable alternatives being offered by them. Some balance of things like livability, cost-benefit, and sheer beauty. Always one (usually cost) is out of line with what can be acheived with well established design templates.
Pitch to me something better and i will build it. But no one comes with a compelling pitch...
Claeren.