The World Of Architecture And Design

There are 25 major specialties in engineering that are recognized by professional societies. In any one of those 25 specialties, the goal of the engineer is the same. The goal is to be able to come up with a cost effective design that aids people in the tasks they face each day. Whether it be the coffee machine in the morning or the roads and highways we travel, or even the cars we travel in, it was all an idea that started with an engineer. Someone engineered each idea to make it the best solution to a problem. Even though engineer 's goals are similar, there are many different things that engineers do within their selected field of engineering. This paper will focus on the architectural field of engineering.

With Constructing the Good Life, we’ve looked the ways in which architecture and specific places in the environments we inhabit are defined by a sense of cultural and personal connection or significance, beyond the physical conditions or even basic function of the space. This week’s readings, “Subconscious Landscapes of the Heart” by Randy Hester and “Replacement” by W.G. Clark in particular, help to show the ways that meaningful spaces are often designed and constructed by the people who use them, and the deeper connections to the land that may develop.

A lot has happened in architecture since Louis Kahn death in 1974, some of it are really good, some are dreadful and we have different preferences about which is which. However, Kahn’s work look better than ever on its own terms. Better in its solidity and gravity. He was an architect of beautiful contradictions and one of the few to create architectural elements out of scale with the human figure. His buildings are very elegantly designed but are constructed of basic, often crude materials. Consisting of

This concept of space being defined pertains to the ideas of modernism in reference to the importance of space, and exactly how to efficiently utilize it. Similar to that seen in the courtyard in front of Wiess Law, the large open space helps create a more communal and interactive area for the visitors to be more aware. Such as Mies embraces the idea of creating areas for individuals to become more contemplative about their surroundings, William Watkin had similar ideas when designing the original building and its landscape. This concept coincides with the building itself and its architectural

Architecture matters, it is omnipresence; we use and encounter it on a daily basis, but most often one tends to focus on the building’s function and the way it looks. Architecture is more than mere buildings that serve its function to meet our own human needs; it has a lot more to offer. Architecture matters because it can become a symbol that represents something that has a deeper meaning as well as an “ultimate representation of a culture.” Architecture is a powerful icon because it symbolizes experience that we as a community share, which is far beyond what other forms art can offer.

Architecture should be nurturing, responsive and alive, dynamically shifting spatial balances, organically expressive forms, subtly luminous colors and biologically healthy. To achieve such life-enhancing architecture, it has to address all the body senses simultaneously and fuse our image of self with experience of the world. By strengthening our sense of self and reality, architecture serves its all-important function of accommodation and

As a paradigmatic place of public involvement and symbolic disclosure, theatre has always served as a suggestive source of inspiration for architects and played a role in relation to architectural theories and ideas. Every collective memory unfolds within a spatial framework. Space is a reality that endures: since our impressions rush by, one after another, and leave nothing behind in the mind, we can understand how we recapture the past only by understanding how it is, in effect, preserved by our physical surroundings.

Mies van der Rohe is one of the most prominent figures in modernist architectural history, the man who popularised some of the most influential phrases of the era, e.g. “less is more”, and strove to push his ideas and philosophies, not just on what he thought a building should be, but of what he thought architecture itself was. He changed the cityscape of America, showing the world a style that was simple and elegant, with such a controlled palette of expressions that shone through in its geometric beauty.

This book was written by Juhani Pallasmaa with regard to ‘Polemics’, on issues that were part of the architecture discourse of the time, i.e. 1995. It is also an extending of ideas expressed in an essay entitled “Architecture of the seven senses” published in 1994.

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 ‘The architecture of happiness’ by Alain de Botton says, “If our interest for buildings and objects truly is being defined by how they appear to us and in which way they perform their material existence, it would be praiseworthy to sedulously examine the quaint process, according to which, the structures made from stone, steel, concrete, wood and glass are able to communicate; yet in infrequent occasions they give the impression of talking to us about important and emotive things.” This statement give by Alain de Bottom determines the meaning of what is considered to be good architecture. Fortunately, this kind of examples can be seen more frequently nowadays.

Katrina Touw in’ Firmitas re-visited: Permanence in Contemporary Architecture’ defines static and dynamic modes. Static is ‘’permanence rooted in a fixed location producing stability and continuity in the built environment’’. (Touw,2006, p.26) In contrast, dynamic mode could be understood as: ‘’ permanence through flexibility of location and/or potentially of function: involving all scales from building parts to entire buildings.’’ (Touw, 2006,

The book consists of twelve chapters that propose this idea that designers should explore the nature of our senses’ response to the spatial built forms that people invest their time in. It tries to cover a specific topic in each chapter that in order to deconstruct the book, it is necessary to cover each chapter individually.

“ Architecture organizes and structures space for us, and its interiors and the objects enclosing and inhabiting its rooms can facilitate or inhibit our activities by the way they use this language”(Lawson pg.6).

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