Outline

1.0 INTRODUCTION

§  Define the death of architecture

§  What lead to the death of architecture? Identify in points only.

§  How can we determined and rate a good architecture? Famous architect who build it (extravagant without specific purpose) or the function of the building (quality of the space by prioritizing the needs of the occupants as the main subject of the overall design)?

§  List out what will be discussed later in this dissertation.

BODY

2.0 ATTITUDES TO ARCHITECTURE & ARCHITECTS

§  Main purpose of architecture.

-          Meaning that allows us to liken the architecture to texts (e.g. railway station – we can sense the certain behavior and purpose of it rather than treating it as assemblage of stones and bricks).

-          Serving public in general (needs & desire; beliefs & aspirations).

-          Relates directly on our identity and culture.

-          Architecture affects everyone (design, touches us all, scale, holds up a very revealing mirror of the kind of society that we live in, reflects how we feel and behave).

-          Architecture also implies permanent building suitable for a variety of human activities. 

§  Main purpose of architects.

-          Has the power to open up new perspectives but bearing in mind to have a certain limit.

-          Should not gone too far with technologies, distilled by economic, greed, ego, orient themselves with certain dream catcher’s trends and ambivalence.

§  Compare the architecture back then and today. List out the major differences.

-          The way of olden days people look at architecture and the way people look at it now.

-          Question changed when value changed. (how architects and designers think nowadays)

v  Past: - how to make a building/ space more functional and beneficial to the occupants; how to fulfilled the public’s needs and desire?

v  Current:-  how to make my building more famous; how to make it most extravagant, tallest  and mega amongst other existed buildings?

§  Public interest. Analytical number and pie chart showing what kind of architecture people prefer/looking forward through questionnaire.

§  List out how architects, designer and people now emphasize on wealth, fame rather than prioritizing human and function of space as the subject matter of the overall design.

-          Shows no concern with social buildings(school, public buildings, hospital and university); only concern with commercial, private and rewarding projects.[ WEALTH]

-          Tons of buildings build by politicians and architects without the right attitude which are supported by a certain kind of paid press(media) that makes us believed that this is the current trend of architecture – emphasize on fame forget the basic of what architecture should be – no morality/human touch – the end of architecture.

-          Case study: Arab/UAE & China architecture [FAME]

3.0 LEARNING FROM THE PAST

-          Ancient architecture has design, form and materials (ancient builders even touch, smell and knock the materials unlike architects now who emphasize on how good looking it is or whether it suits their concept) that relates and carrying a very strong message of the identity of the community itself-feel attached and connected between architecture and humankind.

-          Case study from either the Greece or Rome architecture, most probably the Parthenon (most social able place back then). The ancient builders are proud to show importance of the beam and column as the main structure of the building and their identity (e.g. Doric, Ionic and Corinthian) whilst architects today try their best to hide away all these beam and column (assumed as poor workmanship/ unfinished work if show the beam and column). Some even build something without function, merely for aesthetic purpose only.

-          What can we learn from the past? (form follows function, public as priority of all design, practicality, utility and aesthetic - Vitruvius law)

4.0 FATHER OF ARCHITECTURE

• Vitruvius’s belief (three basic laws in a successful architecture: durability, utility and aesthetic).
• Case study of building that has forgotten this laws & building that follows the laws (New York Railway Station).
• Find out why this law still plays a huge role in today’s world. How does it affect us? Why it is still relevant to us although they are created a long time ago.
• Scope of functionality (architecture is not consider successful if it is not following and incorporate the three laws together; the meaning won’t be the same if one of the law has been left out; we have to understand an architecture inside and out- embrace the law).

5.0 INTROSPECTION IN PROGRESS

§  What are the values that are dying? Why it is vital to us, the public?

-          The lost of  human touch in most buildings, especially high rise and the mega architectures that are starting to grow like mushrooms after the rain.

-          Why is having this value important?

v  Convince public that this value of human touch is being left by us too far away.

v  Mirror image of society

-When living lifestyle improved - needs change (basic needs to needs for entertainment and luxurious living)- change of value (no human touch, too commercial)

v  Effect: - people feel alone and homeless when architecture do not speak.

-if there’s no morality and emotional meaning, then we can neither    be happy nor sad when the architecture comes about, because we cannot even be surprised. (Ironic because it opposed with what architecture is intended to do at the first place).

-dozens of sterile and self-conscious buildings that lack of familiarity and charm of identity and traditions.

-leave us with no ability to have joy, excitement or despair, values and skills because architecture now has failed to unite us – lack of social bonding with human, surrounding and buildings).

-architecture’s visceral relationship with mankind (low ability low passion about it).

6.0 MISSION OF SAVING THE DEATH OF ARCHITECTURE IN MALAYSIA

§  Changing the perspective of the public, especially those who are involve with architecture.(new perspectives, new programs)

-          There’s a great conflict between the interest of architects and publics. Therefore, this interest coincides in some way. Architects should make publics understand their role; this is through education and the way they design in future. It may not happen within the next year but it will eventually.

-          Architects should pursue the general and forward looking agenda. A serious draw back. This will lead to a new form without new programs and new ways of life (social).

§  Design an architecture that can meet the needs and function of Malaysians, not just adore the architecture from the Western country and try to copy and build the same architecture style in Malaysia because some style does not suits and belongs to us. It will make our country look awkward when every architecture that we build is being taken from each and every part of the world.

§   Architects and designers can work together to sought out the needs of the public and try to apply them in their buildings (e.g. why build more car parks when we can build a tunnel(due to the hot and humid tropical weather in Malaysia) for bicycle riders and pedestrians? These not only help to promote green, reduce number of accident, but also to keep us willing to exercise and stay healthy all year long).

§  Building something that is meaningful to the users and last long are much more important than building something that only can impress people for a short while and serve no function at all after a period of time.(e.g. stadium)

§  Case study : a proper case study will be added later.

7.0 CONCLUSION

• An overall view of what have been discussed earlier.
• Question the reader; allow them to think whether they contribute more into saving the death of architecture or encouraging more to the death of architecture.