>>There is a confusion about the purposes of the academy and the
>>practice of architecture. Part of the problem resides in what I
>>have stated above. This situation is caused by both academics and
>>practitioners.
IMO there is no confusion about the purpose of the academy:
The intention is to make the "language" of architecture as exotic
as sanskrit or latin so that no-one but the initiated can speak
or understand it. That way the high-priests of architecture can
preserve all that is sacred and keep away the profane.
Too often in my school we had discussions which debated the use
and effects of the _axis_, the message of the volume and the
meaning of columns. Not once did I hear anyone talk about the
client/user. That in itself was enough to make clear the fact
that architects were speaking for the ears of other architects
only.
deepesh
Bhopal, India
deepesh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>practice of architecture. Part of the problem resides in what I
>>have stated above. This situation is caused by both academics and
>>practitioners.
IMO there is no confusion about the purpose of the academy:
The intention is to make the "language" of architecture as exotic
as sanskrit or latin so that no-one but the initiated can speak
or understand it. That way the high-priests of architecture can
preserve all that is sacred and keep away the profane.
Too often in my school we had discussions which debated the use
and effects of the _axis_, the message of the volume and the
meaning of columns. Not once did I hear anyone talk about the
client/user. That in itself was enough to make clear the fact
that architects were speaking for the ears of other architects
only.
deepesh
Bhopal, India
deepesh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx