On Sat, 12 Feb 1994, Raymond Lauzzana wrote:
> It is about time that architects (well, everyone) begins to consider
> the meaning of their work and the purposes that it serves.
I'm not an architect but I have dealt with them for the last 12-15 years
and I assert that architects do indeed care about the 'meaning' and--more
importantly--the impacts on people and the environment of their work. They
care far, far more than does the majority of the American professional
class; however, like everyone one in a market economy, they respond to the
wishes of their clients, the codes, and their clients' perceptions of what
THEIR customers want. Much as the proponents of 'deconstructionism' may
claim, there is almost universal agreement that the prime 'meaning' of a
building is 'to keep the rain and wind away.' (Please don't read that TOO
literally.) There is your prime 'meaning' for a building; and a good one,
I believe.
cheers,
David Sucher
> It is about time that architects (well, everyone) begins to consider
> the meaning of their work and the purposes that it serves.
I'm not an architect but I have dealt with them for the last 12-15 years
and I assert that architects do indeed care about the 'meaning' and--more
importantly--the impacts on people and the environment of their work. They
care far, far more than does the majority of the American professional
class; however, like everyone one in a market economy, they respond to the
wishes of their clients, the codes, and their clients' perceptions of what
THEIR customers want. Much as the proponents of 'deconstructionism' may
claim, there is almost universal agreement that the prime 'meaning' of a
building is 'to keep the rain and wind away.' (Please don't read that TOO
literally.) There is your prime 'meaning' for a building; and a good one,
I believe.
cheers,
David Sucher