What do architects think about? In short, we think about design. What is design? According to Oxford English Dictionary, design is: the art or action of conceiving of and producing a plan or drawing of something before it is made. To break it down further, let’s think about the ‘art’ of that definition. When something is artful, it’s thought of as imaginative and creative. It embodies something that satisfies a human condition beyond basic needs. Take the sistine chapel ceiling for instance. The ceiling could have been left as a nice beige color and served its function just fine. However, no one would travel around the world for centuries to see a beige ceiling, but they have done so for the work of Michelangelo. Architects think about function first, then attempt to elevate a design to something beyond basic needs and into the realm of art.
Let’s open that thought up a little further and review some thoughts first presented by Abraham Maslow in his paper, ‘A Theory of Human Motivation.’ Maslow divided human tendencies into a basic pyramid of motivators. At the base, we find basic survival needs, one tier up from there we see psychological needs, and at the top we find self fulfillment and transcendence. While Maslow’s pyramid is used in the field of psychology, it lends itself well as an architectural metric and can aid in understanding the thought processes architects go through when designing a piece of architecture.
At base level, an architectural design must satisfy its functional purposes. Does it stand up against natural forces? Does it protect inhabitants from weather and climate and does it do so efficiently? Does it fit the appropriate number of people or objects? Once these criteria are satisfied, does the design include elements that represent the owner’s intended social/psychological views, i.e. is the design big and bold, or small and muted, clad in gold, or weathered wood. Lastly, does the design include true creativity that elevates it into the realm of art?
Relative to architecture, we might label transcendence as the ‘it’ factor. The reasons for designs being well received and popularized aren’t always clear. If they were, anyone could do it. Take the iphone for instance. Smart phones had been around for a while before the iphone release. Even when the iphone was released, there were competing phones with similar properties fighting for their market share. The iphone solved several functional issues for certain. However there was something about the feel of the phone, the look of it, the weight, the materials, all of those ingredients which made it such a success. It would be challenging to identify an ‘it’ factor for why it was so revolutionary.
Architects review the design criteria that they’re given and work towards creative solutions that elevate the end result to its maximum potential. Unlike actual product design, such as the iphone, architects work directly for individual clients. Architecture as a profession is a service industry. Architects work to provide the best end product, relative to the input and desires offered by their clients. The end result should satisfy the goals the client wishes to achieve with their new building. These goals may or may not be for the design to achieve something that has the ‘it’ factor.
Harkening back to the article ‘Shelter-The Sound of Architecture,’ two questions were asked: ‘when we look around in the American built environment, are everyone’s basic needs being met, and when they are being met, are they as good as they could be?’
The client base/public ultimately set the standard for what is acceptable in our built environment here in the United States. Governments and developers will continue to build buildings that will sell and meet current demands. According to the EIA, 39% of the total U.S. energy consumption in 2017 was consumed by the residential and commercial sectors. According to the EPA, the average American spends 90% of their time indoors. These statistics strongly endorse a close examination of the two questions presented. For instance, If buildings are using 39% of energy consumption, are basic needs truly being satisfied especially when considering the abundant passive and active energy technologies available to us? If we are spending 90% of our time indoors, shouldn’t the quality of those spaces be at maximum potential?
Sources:
EIA: https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=86&t=1
EPA: https://cfpub.epa.gov/roe/chapter/air/indoorair.cfm
Maslow, A.H., A Theory of Human Motivation, Psychological Review, 1943: 50, 370-396