1. It must make a positive impact on its community. It must improve the well-being of its users, both present and future. It must be responsible to its larger ecology, both urban and environmental. It must maintain its artistic integrity.
2. Quality building materials. Refined proportions. Significant in its program. Provide a backdrop to the history in which it was inhabited.
Architecture leaves a 'legacy' when it represents the spirit of the time of its respective place. Through history you can see buildings which have been preserved or that have withstood the test of time. Regardless of if the architect or designer is aware of this (probably meaning there building will not stand the test of time) the built environment reflects our culture and society. For instance, now our world is becoming increasingly globalized, this is due to advancements of our internet virtual world (which we have just been connected through) and of course transportation (oil, which is steadily running out). Architecture has definitely been effected by these advancements also has its limitations, architecture exists in one place firmly planted to the ground in the physical connected to its local context, respecting it, rejecting it, but always changing it.
When a building lasts through time it means a couple of things. It is made of a material which is durable against time, or can be replaced easily by those who wish to perserve it. The concept of the building continues to pertain to that culture, meaning the idea is incredibly clear and true and that it has had a strong influence that continues to be relavent to the culture today.
As an example I would like to highlight the Exeter Library by Louis Kahn, a building I had the opportunity of visiting last year while studying on the east coast. I like to only reference buildings which I have actually visited and experienced because it means I have gotten as close as I can to understanding it as a whole experience (not just an image or from a secondary resource) The reason I don't have the full experience is because I am not the actual user, only an architecture student travelling to see it. The building wasn't made for me. So I can only imagine how it would be used in everyday life. Anyways, this building has a real sense of monumentality first in its materiality. Right now it faces a real challenge with advancements of the computer and the evolution of the book - although I don't see this building has anything to worry about. This is just one quick example. But you can look at this in comparison (although different in scale and place) to the Seattle Library by OMA, this building examines and challenges the role of the book in our current visual and virtual world.
Sorry for rambling on here. I'll stop with that.
Let me know what you think.
Jan 18, 12 5:49 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
For Preservation Architects in particular and architects in general
My questions are simple:
1. How does architecture help leave behind a personal legacy?
2. What criteria makes a building eligible to have a "legacy" of some sort?
For criteria, I believe the bench mark for historic nomination is twenty-five years and it must have some significance as a building.
Personal legacy, I would express an opinion that once your dead it doesn't really matter about legacy.
I assumed you were speaking of a personal legacy as attached to a real person, or are buildings people?
A few strays ideas...
1. It must make a positive impact on its community. It must improve the well-being of its users, both present and future. It must be responsible to its larger ecology, both urban and environmental. It must maintain its artistic integrity.
2. Quality building materials. Refined proportions. Significant in its program. Provide a backdrop to the history in which it was inhabited.
Architecture leaves a 'legacy' when it represents the spirit of the time of its respective place. Through history you can see buildings which have been preserved or that have withstood the test of time. Regardless of if the architect or designer is aware of this (probably meaning there building will not stand the test of time) the built environment reflects our culture and society. For instance, now our world is becoming increasingly globalized, this is due to advancements of our internet virtual world (which we have just been connected through) and of course transportation (oil, which is steadily running out). Architecture has definitely been effected by these advancements also has its limitations, architecture exists in one place firmly planted to the ground in the physical connected to its local context, respecting it, rejecting it, but always changing it.
When a building lasts through time it means a couple of things. It is made of a material which is durable against time, or can be replaced easily by those who wish to perserve it. The concept of the building continues to pertain to that culture, meaning the idea is incredibly clear and true and that it has had a strong influence that continues to be relavent to the culture today.
As an example I would like to highlight the Exeter Library by Louis Kahn, a building I had the opportunity of visiting last year while studying on the east coast. I like to only reference buildings which I have actually visited and experienced because it means I have gotten as close as I can to understanding it as a whole experience (not just an image or from a secondary resource) The reason I don't have the full experience is because I am not the actual user, only an architecture student travelling to see it. The building wasn't made for me. So I can only imagine how it would be used in everyday life. Anyways, this building has a real sense of monumentality first in its materiality. Right now it faces a real challenge with advancements of the computer and the evolution of the book - although I don't see this building has anything to worry about. This is just one quick example. But you can look at this in comparison (although different in scale and place) to the Seattle Library by OMA, this building examines and challenges the role of the book in our current visual and virtual world.
Sorry for rambling on here. I'll stop with that.
Let me know what you think.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.