David Leatherbarrow and Moshen Mostafavi, On Weathering: The Life of Buildings in Time (Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press, 1993) 4-135 (text only)
Adolfo Natalini, "Forward" and "Places," Figures of Stone (Milano: Electa Editrice, 1984) 7-15
Alex T. Anderson, "Thinking in Shadow" Column 5: Volume 25 (
Question:
Architecture and weathering, for many architect it is their job to create buildings that can withstand the test of time in some way. We look to the past for our examples of how well buildings should withstand the test that time sets forth. Many of the buildings we look at ruins are now, but at the same time they are still examples to how 100years or more should effect a building.
However, recent trends in architecture have lead us to believe that allowing a building to age is a bad thing. We are constantly preforming mini face lifts on building to keep them looking younger and new. By doing so we gradually change the building from what it was meant to be into something else. The building gradually loses its soul. That said if nothing were done the building would slowly fall apart and be no more. Is there a happy medium for building to be allowed to age to that perfect point were we love them all the more without falling into despair? Can we create architecture that bends in the wind but does not break? Architecture that ages gracefully without the constant need for maintenance?
2 comments:
I don't think it is possible to create a building that isn't going to eventually be won over by the elements. In my opinion, the great buildings are those that are still standing and functioning even though they are really old, but at the same time haven't been maintained so the effects that weathering has on it is apparent. Weathering and time are what give a building life and memory, so I think it is more important to let a building age as it will without touch ups.
So beautiful building are old building that are not 'maintained'?
These old building are aesthetically appealing to us, however we tend to forget that 50-100 years ago buildings were built with a different purpose in mind. They were built to last, what we are creating now is just a cheep imitation of what was done before. In Architecture, as in every aspect of environment, we have sacrifice quality for quantity. Nothing we design or build is made to last for any length of time. Houses are being built with the intent of lasting only a couple of decades before someone has to do a major overhaul. Overhauling means changing the building, inside and out, maintaining the building. Constant maintenance means no beautifully aged to perfection buildings.
If we are not creating building that are allowed to age, we are creating building without a life and memory. We are killing our building before they have a chance to become something beautiful. So, what do we have to do to obtain buildings that we are attracted to, buildings that are aesthetically beautiful because they are well aged?
Post a Comment