User:Nathankhait
Nathan Khait
May 19, 2014
A Brief Analysis of Modern Architecture.
The tendencies, which have outlined in the sphere of world architecture, which defies logic, which is, in fact, contrary to logic, contrary to notion and definition of architecture. Erected buildings and structures, contrary to human nature, refuting the basic purpose and meaning of the architect’s work. Now it is necessary to clarify the meaning of logic in our context, before we go further. Logical in this context it is what is appropriate to human being life. In this article you will witness a revelation, which will change the way you look at architecture.
Whether you agree or not, it will forever change your point of view, your concept of architecture in general and modern architecture particular. Together, we will go into history of architecture, where I will expose the serious misconception of the standard view of the architecture: its role, its purpose, its reproduction and ultimately, its perception. Moreover, there is nothing new I won’t tell you. But then, gradually will change the perception of so-called “architects”, of their task, as specialists.
Humankind was relieved, when was replaced isinglass-stone, which used to apply to window openings for glass. Within the time, man has perfected the characteristics of glass, as a construction material. It is become possible to enlarge window openings. With its introduction into living quarters, more natural light and more sunlight (where possible) the atmosphere of living space has improved. Transparency, the main characteristic of glass, contributed to “opening the window to the world”. There process of enlarging
the size of window openings began. Good intentions have been arrived to the point of running to extremes. The wall as protective cladding disappeared.
People have always, at all times pursued to hide, to be protected from various natural and atmospheric
phenomena, pursuing the desire to feel protected, while staying behind sturdy, strong walls. Also important is the desire to obtain freedom and the right to protect their lives from the outside, indiscreet glance, the right not to have their lives on display, the “right to privacy”.
In the modern and, especially, in the projects of so-called “Architecture of the Future”, there is a feeling, that the top of dreams of these architects is the “glass aquarium”. Do they believe that man, who has not changed for thousand of years, suddenly acquired new properties, new characteristics? This is a
grave misconception and profound mistake, which leads to the erroneous direction in the development of architecture.
The glass, as a transparent material, in human consciousness can not be a successful fencing and protective structure. The use of glass, which is an understandable desire of architects to visually tie the
person to its natural surroundings, has come to the point of absurdity. Create a problem, designers are making enormous efforts to minimize the inconvenience caused by the unbridled desire to use the glass as a walling. This feeling of insecurity is due to glass’ familiar fragility, its transparency, while standing behind the glass wall, should force designers to seek a reasonable balance, the ratio between the glazed surface area and the secure fencing structure. Man made everything possible to make himself feel secure. To do this, from time immemorial, structures were fenced, and man defended himself by building strong walls.
We can therefore conclude that the issue of the outer guards structure, that satisfy the aesthetic needs
and are a solid enclosure design, had not yet been resolved, and requires further research.
It is unnatural for a human to raise its habitat to the height, where it cease to make himself feel comfortable. Sooner or later the natural limit of urban development will be depleted. It is quite explainable, given the steady decline in urban development territory, which constant reduction of free city space for construction, it amplifies the aspiration to increase useful areas at the expense of the city’s growth in height and the only one, appear, naturally occurring, the output of this situation, is a growth of the number of stories and the heights of the buildings and structures. And here it is necessary to discover the real limit of this growth, the height at which the man still feels comfortable enough to remain there. A further increase in the number of stories or heights, generally, turns the building into an attraction. These buildings or structures will no longer play the role, required to maintain the sense of natural human environment for a comfortable way of life.
Without going into a deep discussion into the history of the creation of the world and not pretending to
provide a comprehensive study or explanation, you can see and track the certain stage of architecture’s development. Evolution of nature, the common tread that ties the human existence is the studies of humani- ties as such. It is tied to the humanities by its emphasis on culture, history, meanings, and values. The study of the evolution of development of the construction of human’s dwelling provides the understanding how its moved from using a simple natural shelters, from the beginning, to improve them and, in further, by constructing their dwelling more and more complex. In contrary, the nature in the evolution of fauna has allocated with their protection, with a varieties of shell’s shapes, etc.
Indisputable, there is much to learn from nature because of it is logical and expediency organized. But
this does not mean that is wise to transfer and apply for people what was created for certain species of phauna by copying the shapes, created by nature.
Man was created by nature to walk on land. Nature has not provided the man with ability to fly independently and make its body and organism to feel comfortable at a great heights as in his own natural
habitat. It is clear to notice that in airplanes and other flying machines, windows designed in small sizes. The interior is designed to meet man’s natural sense of security.
And what occurs in skyscrapers, where more and more the exterior walls are made of glass? Not to mention the fact, they at an altitude of 450 feet and above, there is a noticeable sway of the building, its
amplitude can be up to 2 feet in calm weather, and over 3 feet in windy conditions. During an earthquake the amplitude it is even grater (as experienced in connection with designing of a skyscraper in Taiwan, Taipei has shown). In those skyscrapers the amplitude gives the impression of amusement just for thrills. Plus the lack of oxygen with increase of height altitude ( Denver city height level results on 17% lack of oxygen). The people there are always under the stress, without realizing it for themselves. They constantly have to overcome and deal with unnatural sensations. This will inevitable be reflected in their psyche. Unconsciously, it is gradually subjected to loads, tensions and changes, like so much else, when the natural characteristics of human perception and behavior are not taken into consideration. Humans psychological, social, physiological, physical and biological features are necessary to maintain and optimize human performance,the health and safety of its habitat.
The design and construction of a skyscrapers is carried out without taking into account the human’s sensations at the height of the building and the impact of these experiences on the human psyche: distur - bing and, ultimately, destroying it. The shortage of urban land is huge and has still not been resolved. And, with the decrease of free territory, rising cost of what remains: this issue, certainly, needs to be addressed. The upward growth of the city has its limits, and its excess leads to negative consequences, discussed above.`
How can “with the shield” talking of a building, be considered architecture? Only because of its unusual,
extravagant, extraordinary shape? The pathos with which architectural critics describe the work of these architects is surprising. It remains to be seen whether as the most incredible works acquire such shapes the louder these works are praised. In the work, which where erected at the clients expense, the main aim and purpose of these orders were forgotten. The orders, served as a pretext, an immediate reason for for their design. This situation is generally not taking into consideration, and often, it is not even a part of the discussion. Using the client’s own lack of experience - who was impressed by the unusual, extravagant shape of a designed building or structure - and, who was is not in a position to recognize and analyze the planning decisions, it often acquired an inconvenient in operation the desired space the client often receives a product that not enough utilitarian.
We are familiar and introduce to the architecture of the past and present, based on the articles that describe and explain it to people who call themselves “architectural critics” in the same vein as art critics. Works of art such as paintings, sculptures, music, are figurative and bear only the emotional burden and do not have any utilitarian, functional use.
How can the architectural critics, if they are such, give a professional assessment of work, that could not even be named “architecture”, and that, at best, is sculpture composition, sometimes of dubious aesthe- tic value? Works, which can be and should be evaluated only as sculpture composition, depicting the archi-
tecture, because by their assessment and analysis there is no parsing and essay of their internal space, their planning decision and its relationship to external and its environment.
Architecture, if it is such, wakes up a person’s emotions if it elicits positive emotions with their outer forms and its internal content and décor. But, often, there are buildings, whose mere view is enough to traumatize the human psyche, resulting in a negative influence and impact on human exposure. Due to its
longevity, this type of architecture, created without knowledge of natural features and human properties And its organism, unlike pure art causing its psyche irreparable prejudice. These, include as well, what architecture differentiates from pure art (painting, sculpture etc.). These art forms, by the certain shortcomings, are possible to be fixed, corrected and, in the worst scenario, even destroyed. However, in many cases, it is almost impossible to perpetrate the same abuse on architecture.
Hence the erroneous assessment of the quality of these buildings and structures the incorrectly defined
vector of further development of architecture.
Examples of these abound.
One of the reasons for this situation in architecture (and, it is the main reason, in my opinion), is the incorrect understanding of the role and tasks of the architect's work and a lack of a clear and correct definition of the meaning of Architecture as well. (About that it might be found in the articles entitled “Definition of Architecture” and “Definition of an Architect”).