The Nature of Space
Opinion / 2019.03.03
Understanding Sensitive Architecture.
Understanding the idea of Architecture seems to be a conundrum for many. Architecture is often seen as a fashion statement where formal design languages and styles became the filters through which one perceives its value. Moreover, architecture is often limited to be the ‘art’ of designing ‘buildings’. Equating or rather reducing ‘built spaces’ to ‘buildings’ alone is the gravest of mistakes that anybody trying to understand architecture makes.
Many people still believe that putting an artistic facade on an ‘engineered’ structure is what ‘architecture’ is. This popular consensus about architecture as a sculpting art has been carefully exploited by most of the famed and celebrated architects in creating a career that is thriving but valueless.
To understand architecture, one should start with clearly differentiating Art, Design and Architecture. While ‘Art’ is an expression of a thought, ‘Design’ is the physical manifestation of functional art. Architecture goes beyond the realms of conceptual clarity and functional ability by reacting with its context. The ‘context’ in architecture is not limited to elements of the physical environment. It includes the emotions and feelings of its users as well. Architecture is therefore reactive to the social, political, cultural, economic, religious and ethical context of a place. Sensitive architecture thus become so embedded in its contextual landscape that it morphs and then merges with its context. Architecture, therefore, when freed from its contextual obligations becomes a mere artefact.
Works of architects like Ralph Erskine and Geoffrey Bawa are standing examples of sensitive architecture. Their understanding of architecture as the creation of ‘built-spaces’ rather than mere ‘buildings’ is clearly evident in spaces they design that doesn’t try hard to be prominent by being formally distinctive or to capture attention by being out of context. Pop architecture, on the other hand, has created a culture of building magnificent artefacts. If we look at the history of architecture since ‘Modernism’, all we see are those popular images of architects who upheld stylistic ideologies. From Gehry to Hadid, pop architects have almost always overshadowed their contemporary rationalist architects.
Architecture inherits the curious nature of any occupied space, that is it essentially remains an unfinished business throughout its lifecycle. The occupants and its context continuously changes its nature by varying or re-arranging any functional object, artefact or other living or non-living elements within the space by virtue of movement and interaction. These mechanisms of ‘life’ attributes space its character and thereby make users highly instrumental in defining the character of a space. Trying to impart a spatial character contradictory to the user character by design only results in failed architecture.
Architecture, contrary to the popular image, is neither a product nor a service as products implies finished business and service requires set terms. Sensitive architecture thus becomes an unfinished process, an extension of its occupants who have unconditional control over its character, a moderator between users and contexts.
Further Info
-
McLuhan, M. (1987). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. Google Books Link.
-
Geoffrey Bawa Trust. Geoffrey Bawa & his works. Lunuganga Link.
-
Egelius, M. & Erskine, R. (1990). Ralph Erskine, Architect. Google Books Link.
