FORM AND FUNCTION

FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION

Form and function used to be closely related in the previous decade, especially back when the quote “Form follows function” still rings true, coined by no one other than Louis Sullivan.

However, the quote has now only become a guidance to those who are new to pursuing architecture, to not deviate those who are overeager to achieve radical forms and forgoing the basics of architecture and the needs of those who occupy the buildings. That is when form follows function play its role flawlessly.

However, it is much different in the surface of things in the current landscape of the architecture scene. More and more forms are shaking off the defaulted forms of buildings from the past. With more weight and attention placed on the higher echelons of the architecture scene, especially those from the current line of starchitects, the newer buildings are ever defining new forms every now and then.

From skyscrapers to museums, from bridges to train stations, it is never a dull form who blindly follows its functions any longer in this era. So I would conclude, in the current times, function’s relationship with it’s form is no longer as closely related as it used to be.

Case study 1 : Mahanakhon at the Bangkok skyline, by architect Ole Schereen. Nothing of the skyscrapers' form shows any default style of the past, and also does not show any relation between the functions of the building/ skyscraper and it's form.

Case study 2 : The Oculus by Santiago Calatrava. The radical formed transportation hub by Santiago Calatrava is well known, not only the form of the building does not represent the function of it as a transportation hub, it also houses a radical form, just to support the notion to have a skylight. That is one of the examples where function unnecessarily means it dictates the form of the building.

Case study 3 : The Amalilo Bridge, Spain by Santiago Calatrava, it is a suspension bridge, but done in the fashion where the supporting slants on side and with the wires only heading in one direction, unlike the traditional design where it pulls the tension cables from both side of the supporting pillar.

New materials, uses and technologies of the current era are as we know, transcending what materials used to achieve in the past, for instance, floor slabs are made using new mix of concrete, are lighter yet stronger than the past, with steel bars slanted to produce different and new forms, yet are as strong as a straight steel bar should be.

Following the advancement of technology, the quality of materials are similarly on the rise. Just as per industrial revolution, the advancement of technology just provides another platform to push the boundaries on new age materials.

Page 172, Aldo Rossi’s quote, on “naïve functionalism”: Naïve functionalism classifications… presuppose that all urban artifacts are created to serve particular functions in a static way, and that their structure precisely coincides with the function they perform at a certain moment.

2nd quote from Aldo Rossi as a continuity : Function alone is insufficient to explain the continuity of urban artifacts; if the origin of the typology of urban artifacts is simply function, this hardly accounts for the phenomenon of survival.

Page 173, 3rd quote is from Jean Baudrillard, where he lay his words on form follows function :
“ Functionality is nothing other than a system of interpretation. ” This is a attempt to fix the meaning the of object according to their use.

It is of my intention to use these quotes to support my opinion, which is in this time, and the current climate of the architecture scene, is that form follows function is at most just a principle to remind us that we as architects should always be held responsible to produce a suitable space to the future occupants in the buildings, but the form should not be taken into account along with the function every single time.