Aesthetics Should Never Take Precedence Over Function Essay

Interior design and architecture are essential, and often overlooked, aspects of everyday life. In modern society people rely on function, durability, and visual appeal when selecting designs for their homes, businesses, and places of leisure. The way that a space is designed influences such things as mood, which, in the case of a business, can impact the productivity of employees and either draw or repel customers. In residential design, the design becomes very personal and, to be considered a successful design, must properly reflect the home owner while at the same time offering some practicality that makes the space livable. An effective design, for any space, must solve some problem, be it function, flexibility, or some other criteria. Simply solving a problem would not please the customer, however, unless it offered some visual appeal. Creating function with style is the real job of any interior designer, and is essential in a content society.

In conclusion, the secretary after they moved into the building said it was too damp. So they then requested there be fireplaces and chimneys be put in. This was okay until 1747 when the building caught fire demolishing it. The importance of the capital, the value of now, and the connection to the motto, are all just some reasons why the

Architecture was born to serve the essential needs of human life. But architecture is not simply a function, capabilities such as objects, objects. The existence of the same architecture of human life has created the spiritual values​​. Architecture itself has aesthetic value, artistic value is part of the factors. There are small works, with the ancient architecture, over hundreds of years still exist. Many buildings that were built with permanent materials, not too stable structural, mechanical and material in its original meaning; but it still exists, and shine. Because his works contained the great cultural value. In other words, it is the culture of sustainable architecture. Government sustainability "invisible" This has tremendous power, a force without any harm, destruction was, whether natural or man. Conversely, can sustainable building structures, sustainable beauty is destroyed by other factors, such as planning, or administrative guidelines on the management of any construction or it be eliminated by bringing the non-human elements, without the support and consensus of the community.

Leon Krier was criticised for publishing a costly monograph on Albert Speer’s architecture (1985)in which, while acknowledging the crimes of the Nazis and the man, Krier nonetheless claimed the book’s only subject and sole justification was “Classical architecture and the passion of building” (cited by Jaskot, ‘Architecture of Oppression’, 2000). Discuss this claim, the controversy and the issues (historical, philosophical and ethical and possibly others) they raise. Can architecture, Classical, Modern or otherwise, be autonomous from politics and valued independently of the circumstances of politics and history that adhere to it?

The human body is the ultimate tool for discovering the environment. Human anatomy is considered to be nature’s peak of perfection and certain features serve as inspiration for many architects. To study the relationship between the human body and architecture, one must not be limited to human body parts resemblance to architectural works but to a larger extent consider human emotions, sensory nerves, the mind and general human psychology. In essence everything that makes us human. In its simplest definition Architecture can be described as an art or practice of designing buildings. It is practiced in a way that accomplishes both practical and communicative or expressive requirements. To relate it to human body then Architecture can widely define the place, the site, the energy, the systems, the building, the flora and fauna. These components that bring aesthetic property to humanity apart from the utilitarian purpose it serves. The perfect balance of a normal human body and the proportions are incorporated into architecture from a point of view of imitation, idealized allusion and the actual human use. Evidence of such human incorporation into architecture is seen from the Ancient Greek Architectures where it was common for tower columns to take shape of a human being like in the colossus of the Ancient

The “Five Points of Modern Architecture” was a manifesto for architecture written in 1926 by Charles-Edouard Jeanerette – better known as Le Corbusier - emphasizing what he believed were five principles that any building meant to be modern should have. One building which exemplifies each of these points is Corbusier’s own Villa Savoye, built 1929-31 in Poissy, France. Corbusier’s first point of modern architecture is known as inclusion of ‘pilotis’. Pilotis refers to Corbusier’s innovative idea of a vertical support system used to hold the horizontal planes of a structure. In Villa Savoye, this can be clearly seen in both interior and exterior by the rounded pillars holding up the floors and roof, essentially elevating the home and

As suggested by the title, this piece of literature attempts to highlight the importance of sensory experience in architecture. It is indeed a response to what the author terms as ‘ocularcentrism’ of Modern Architecture. Ocularcentrism is the act of prioritizing visual stimuli to all other sensory stimuli available to a human perception. He quotes famous German poet, Goethe, in his defense, “the hands want to see, the

Architecture is often mistaken as purely an art form, when in actually it is where art and engineering or art and practicality meet. For example, painting is an art, when preformed well it yields a beautiful picture that evokes a deep human reaction and brings pleasure to its viewer, however this painting provides no function, it cannot shield us from the rain or protect us from the wind or snow, it is purely form. An insulated aluminum shed provides shelter and protection from Mother Nature; however, it is a purely functional building, it was drawn by an engineer, not conceived by an artist to have form. The culmination of form and function is Architecture, the Greeks and Romans fathered this idea and Palladio’s study of roman architecture taught him his valuable truth.

James Stirling, who is famous for untraditional design and rejecting functionalism, designed Florey Building of Oxford University in 1966. The building presented the idea of Brutalism, focused on the form beauty of itself. Alvar Aalto, an architect sparkplugged the theory of humanism and functionalism, designed Baker House of MIT in 1947. For him, functionality is an important way to provide harmonious life for human being. These two buildings with different styles were both designed as the student dormitory for university, however, some similarities still can be found. This essay will compare the differences and similarities about relationship between form and surroundings, function and circulation, and material expressing of them.

“Architecture or Revolution?” in Le Corbusier’s belief was the only way to avoid class-based revolution in industrialized architecture (Quirk, 2012). Le Corbusier, born Charles Édouard Jeanneret, was born into an artistic family in 1877 in a small village in Switzerland. His mother was a pianist and his father was a designer of watch dials. Even though he learned piano and father’s trade he got interested in the architecture when he was 13 years old. He learned from L’Eplatenier, a teacher in La Chaaux-de-Fund. His teacher opened his eyes and led him to the direct observation of life. He was an instinctive genius by turning older building designs into newer more modern designs. Le Corbusier is one of the most significant architecture’s of the 20th century, and one who led architecture to the modern era.

The mixture of buildings of different conditions are necessary to public life because it otherwise would be neither interesting nor fascinating. But the main reasons are because they ensure low rent yields, encouraging the growth of small enterprises. Large swatches of new construction would only prevent income since not many would afford it, and the demand for it would not be as large as it would need to be.

Different architects have different styles because they are trying to get at different things. Architecture is not just about making something beautiful anymore, it is about trying to get across a set of ideas about how we inhabit space. Two of the most famous architects of the twentieth century, one from each side, the early part and the later part up until today each designed a museum with money donated by the Guggenheim foundation. One of these is in New York City, it was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. The other is in bilbao, Spain, and it was designed by Frank Geary. My purpose of this paper is to interrogate each of these buildings, glorious for different reasons, to show how each architect was expressing their own style.

In relation to this the book ’Le Corbusier ‘by Kenneth Frampton (British architect, critic and historian, born: 20/11/1930) also holds a link within some of the opinions, movements and beliefs of Le Corbusier. Focusing from the early stages of Corbusier’s life to his last works, we find ourselves indulging in facts and creations of Corbusier himself such as the Dom-ino. As featured in the previous reading ‘towards a new architecture’ Corbusier talks about the engineers aesthetic ‘two things that march together and follow one from the other one at its full height, the other in an unhappy state of retrogression’. After some research in to this I was lead to the dom-ino design (image above). The dom –ino was an early example of the engineers aesthetic and became the theoretical basis of most of Corbusiers houses up to 1935 and extended on a scale much larger than the two story house. The dom-ino led to a number of prototype buildings such as the United De Habitation. The design allows the concept of the free facade, The pieces were to be pre-fabricated allowing the construction time of the design to be reduced and thereby a product of Corbusier’s application of

The five principles of architecture that Le Corbusier proposed in 1923 can be noted in, not only Le Corbusier’s work, but also in other modern architecture, because each principle contributes to the overall aesthetic of the building, as well as providing a functional use. However, all five principles don’t have to be incorporated into one design, which is what this essay will explore. It will attempt to show that one principle can prevail over the other four, but all five are needed to create a full representation of Le Corbusier’s envision of architecture. This is shown through Le Corbusier’s villas, specifically the Villa Shodhan and this essay will analyse how the principles contrast against one another. Furthermore, a small scale design project will be created alongside the essay in an attempt to produce a unique villa through the embodiment of Le Corbusier’s five principles of architecture. Through further analysis of the Villa Shodhan I will also argue that not all principles are independent and that some principles can function efficiently without the rest. Nonetheless, Le Corbusier’s most renowned villa, Villa Savoye, utilizes all five principles; therefore, it is the most accurate image of Le Corbusier’s five principles of architecture. However, after this villa had been completed it became clear that the flat roof, which served a domestic purpose as a roof garden had failed

Architecture can be viewed with two different types of properties. Properties that can be seen like shapes, their composition, the spaces they create and, the colours and textures that make up their appearance. These properties are considered to be visual while other properties are considered to be abstract. These properties can only be described using words; the meanings behind the architecture and the stories that can be told about it. The context, its cultural background and its function also affects how we view architecture. The question is, what