Posted by Manuel Oliveros on October 22, 2002 at 10:07:11:
In Reply to: Banalização da Arquitectura posted by escrevo Universidade Lusiada Lisboa on October 19, 2002 at 17:44:43:
I think that the main question is that most people in the world can't afford any architecture. This links well with your exposé, because official theory says that the more effective thing to meet targets is money (really being power and this depending on such things as knowledge and other social tools as money). People is kept under cultural reins, now mass media being very conducent to it. Even so, they have had the freedom of chnoosing whether emphasize more or less dwelling and less other things such cars etc, and well, living quarters take an expensive but moderate rank in this. So a discussion exclusively within the tuition frame of the architects is likely to fail, because what is needed is general wealth and ample culture to generate people wanting to live in the more satisfactory homes, that in such status they will be being able to afford. Whilst they have only the choice of in what zone to live in a flat of very standard construction, our creative work in their service won't be able to be understood, let alone integrally appreciated.
Now, consistently with social realities, architects are much attached by their earning a living to the developers that are, mainly developers with scarce margins for creativitiy (themselves under pressure of ensuring benefits for the continuity of their firm) or institutional bodies wanting to meet some need, if able in the grand way. Not surprisingly, some architects like Gregotti once concluded there was not more architecture than that of public promotion.
Free 3D Models