THEORIES OF ARCHITECTURE DESIGN

Simply Deceptive

​

​

Honesty and deception lies in the eyes of the beholder. For me, it was instantaneous that the current climate of the field of architecture was based on deception. Primarily because of the eagerness of the current lineup of the so called “Starchitects” are pushing boundaries on buildings to build icons out of buildings which most of the time being a building of no larger purpose other than to propel themselves into the higher echelons of fame between architects.

​

Now, there isn’t any wrong in doing so, because I felt that the public was also waiting in awe to be impressed by the latest landmark, be it the CCTV headquarters of Rem Koolhas, to the latest creation of Santiago Calatrava, the World Trade Centre Transportation Hub, the general loves a good showing of the building, rather than reading too much and deep into the origins of the site and the building itself.

​

​

​

 

 

 

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

Figure 1 : CCTV Headquarters in China, the brainchild of Rem Koolhas.

​

​

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

​

 

 

 

 

 

 

Now here's a dose of Honesty, if you will, the public wants to be impressed and be deceived with good looks, they want to see what they want to see. And it sets the tone to the current culture of buildings being built to suit the icons and fame of the world.

​

Although it could be argued that, this struggle of power and fame in the field of architects have propelled the field further, in the sense of producing more styles, which is rarely seen, in this progressive era where we always encourage people to derive elements of the past.

​

New style being born every now and then, experimental and built. This all serve a wider purpose, while some experiments with new material and some produce a new composition of elements and materials.

​

This is where the lines of honesty and deception is blurred. But one thing stays true till this time. Only flattery can garner the adoration of the general public. For instance, they say truth is always the hard pill to swallow. With truth always comes a heavy whiff of honesty. If you were to appreciate a newly built public restroom, would you be awed by the magnificent tiles and marbles and wonderful overly aesthetic pleasing appearance of the restroom, or an ordinary restroom built with the lowest cost and the most basic requirements met, nothing more. I do believe the general public would make a obvious choice of the restrooms being the one with the most lavish designs and rather than sparing a thought about the restroom being true to its purpose, with the floor tiles only aim was to prevent an accidental slip of the occupants in it.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

The argument of preserving honesty in architecture could only run so long along the lines of structural integrity and the purpose of it being built, with the latter condition so loosely used every now and then. As for the former, structural integrity has never been easily compromised with this era of civil engineering advancing in the pace of lightning, namely the companies like Arup, which always open to challenges to build buildings with mind bending physics, and the era where industrialization is so prominent, rising along is the quality and consistency of the material provided.

​

So, is honesty really necessary at this era and period of time? I would suggest it is likely to be overlooked. Not until something radical comes along to bring tides of change to the field of architecture once again. But for now, architecture, like other fields of profession which revolves around precious resources to stay afloat in the realm of relevancy, deception will almost always prevail.