contemporary life is spectacle. not sure where that leaves architecture.

without a larger understanding of the world, real or superficial, architecure becomes merely building.

in hongkong, i took the high school kids from a poor neighbor to zaha's channel pavillion, they were all inspired by her work, the same degree to other walks of life in the pavilion.

architecture has always been a way to inspire people, whether u define it responsive/non responsive to the rich or poor.

a building doesn't have to be modest or non-stylish to respond to common mass.

i thought the article i linked was very convincing of the conditions that created today's system of architecture's workings (lack of better word at the moment) and as i added with the second demographical example, i meant to point to a whole different set of emerging conditions, facts, rules and foundations.
they are two different things but also related.
we often talk about or i hear about "new" forms or form making technologies and methods and even some mindsets to create perimeters for new architecture. this is mostly very incomplete. the real reasons that will give birth or change the present ways of doing "architecture" might not be for form based but more about conditions brought by the second link i gave. that was my point. i pretty much used varnelis' essay for the description of the conditions architecture adopted or operated within the time period writer indicates and that covers pretty much up to today. there are other descriptions and final example in that essay i am aware but somewhat i see secondary to any relevance to mightiness of the demographic area i linked and attributed to a new "chapter" or "continuation."
my initial argument or made up statement 'custom designed' for this thread was inspired by the fact the changes in architecture into the new new century might not be form based.
that creates all kinds of arguments into the real building blocks or physicality of architecture itself, that there are others out there to reference better than i can.
maybe this will clear some of the things you guys are questioning or make it even worst or more incomprehensible, whichever is better.;.)

You cannot catch the "contemporary conditions" just as cannot define forms in architecture. Also form and condition are not separated from one another.

You are saying "conditions", but that is actually a social "form".
We don't believe the form exists in an "object" any more, then why are you still trying to find a social form?

'form' as in physical form. a shape and weight, volume of a wall, window etc.. "a form based form..."
i don't want to go full circle into arguing what to salvage. but look at the change of conditions that give birth. i agree of course everything has a shape some more easily recognizable than others.

great ideas and arguments coming out here... i want to thank everybody for participating so far.

how relevant would this be, for, let's say, someplace like this?
there is a need for new software as well.

the form making including the distribution of volume is very intimate to social condition... the new software technology can help to configure minima/maxima in compaction, surface area, volume capacity, cost control, sunlight distribution which is pretty much socially, economically and geographically responsive architecture.

I agree, which is why I am doing what I'm doing!

form>program>social activities.

different form> different distribution of program> different social aspect.

the math was there centuries ago, not until the past decades there are software to visualise the math formular... so i wouldn't say is new technology...

behind the slum in brazil or a upper class suburb, there is some underlying principle relate to those math formular... u just need to look in deeper.