Architecturall theory

ntellectual context in thinking about architecture and the final built work is intrinsic to the understanding of how ideas reoccur, and even old theories have relevance today. Despite its past and present history, the aesthetic beauty and practical usefulness of theory remains a positive and necessary influence on the subject, and the discourse created by it an important element in the future growth and evolution of architecture itself.A good theoretical starting point is undoubtedly Lucas Koolhass and his theory of The Generic City—an idea significantly [and we might assume coldly] modern in its tendency to accept the twentieth century axiom of form follows function–‘generic’ as in having no particularly distinctive quality or application. In essence, nothing in terms of urban architecture should be written in theoretical or historical stone. Koolhass, the Dutch architect, architectural theorist and urbanist suggests that in approaching urban design we stop looking for glue to hold cities together [in the old thinking, town squares etc] and simply allow the place to develop as natural needs apply, where the only judgments are taste and aesthetics (Grönlund, The Generic City par 4). Removing the sociological component, The Generic City then is one that does not rely on history for its identity and disputes old notions of endless repetitions of the same structural module…more varied boredom, [and] redundancy… (Grönlund, The Generic City par 2).But Koohaas does not leave the architect completely without options. He is simply providing a realistic backdrop that allows the professional to judge and create his work from a modern more clinical standpoint. In a1991 lecture at Rice University, Koolhaas, in pointing out the constant movement that occurs between documenting and critiquing the phenomena to trying to interpret what they mean to architecture… explains how his approach to writing and theorizing work in tandem

Back To Top