Posted by  nadia on June 22, 2002 at 10:32:25:

In Reply to:  Re: psychology and architecture posted by Shwan on June 22, 2002 at 04:38:30:

"How can you disagree with facts? "

i am not disagreeing with facts, i am disagreeing with your interpretation of them

"A lot of the architects take it for granted that they are one of the most powerful men on the face of this planet, shaping societies in the long run"

mmm..no..even the most egomaniac of them do not go that far....historically (and within architecture), it was the people that commisioned certain buildings that were egomaniac not the architects (see Ceausescu, Hitler)

"So my argument would be when you put an architect in the position of social housing.."

again no, you do not just put one architect in the position of social housing, architecture is a collaborative work and it is business, you have to understand the more complex organisation behind architectural firms, contractors, government, etc and if the particular organisation works well the project will succeed, if no, then you cannot really blame the architect for much

"It is not the fact that human beings can not get along living with each other that I am criticizing, but the amalgamation of architecture and psychological implications."

people CAN get along living with each other

"What social state housing architects do not understand is that a house is the most personal piece of architecture there is."

they do understand it, but they usually work with a very low budget...also, self-explicatory, there are VERY SERIOUS reasons why there is a need for social housing and everybody doesn't just go to build or buy their own

Responses:

• Re: psychology and architecture shwan 10:53:49 6/22/2002 (1)
  • Re: psychology and architecture nadia 11:06:32 6/22/2002 (0)

Post a Response -