Posted by JWmHarmon on May 10, 2002 at 10:14:21:In Reply to: ArchWeek - Designing Houses posted by Kevin Matthews on May 09, 2002 at 09:58:06:
McInturff and I would sometimes not agree on the following:
"McInturff does not believe in the "seamless" addition, where the new architect's work should disappear within the language of the older building. In any project, McInturff explores its underlying order. He attempts to draw what is interesting out of what is there, taking that as a starting point upon which to base his own design."
Sometimes it is appropriate to replicate what the original architect tried to accomplish. Would you change something at Jefferson's Moticello or University of Virginia? Would you change the character of a Frank LLoyd Wright house (other than to put on a roof that didn't leak)? Sometimes the architect in a restoration project needs to follow the lead of the original architect and put one's own ego aside.
When one is asked to do a needed addition to an existing building then there is more flexibility. Sometimes it would be appropriate to follow the original architect's design elements, sometimes it is appropriate to apply one's own interpretations of the original architect's design, and sometimes it is appropriate to use a different design that either complements or contrasts, rather than duplicates the original.
Some architects, particularly those who cannot control their own egotistical needs, should stay away from certain restoration projects and leave that kind of work to those who can be more sensitive to the local or regional context in which the original structure was built.
|
ArchitectureWeek
Search
Buildings
Architects
Types
Places
Pix
Free 3D Models
Store
Library
|