Architecture's usefulness

I happened to come across a book called "Genius of Architecture or the Analogy of that Art with Our Sensation," and found the following quotes:

The human world is governed by the principle of 'the priority of appearance'. What is hidden from us has no meaning. To know how to build, therefore, you must first understand appearances.

Architecture is useful only if it is not absorbed in being useful. Human purposes change from epoch to epoch, from decade to decade, from year to year. Buildings must therefore obey the law of the 'mutability of function'... The capacity of a building to survive such changes is one proof of its merit: one proof that it answers to something deeper in us than the transient function which required it.


The above are two of the eleven principles that the author laid out for education of the nineteenth century architects. Just these two already contradicted the basic differentiation between architecture and art: architecture being functional and art being functionless.

The first quote calls for the importance for aesthetics in architecture, basically art involving in the design process. But how much art is to be involved? Or even, what kind of ornamentation? The idea behind the second quote can be used to answer these questions. The usefulness of architecture lies within its flexibility of transforming into different spaces, which is also a 'useless' space because there is no definite purpose. To answer how much and what art is to be involved, flexibility and changing are crucial. And also, 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder'. Nobody can determine how much and what kind of art is to be incorporated, other than the architect who understands the need for the flexibility of putting in how much ornamentation.

And the definition of 'ornamentation' in architecture can sometimes be as simple as a splash of light onto a brutal concrete wall or colored illuminations.



Church of Light, Tadao Ando

James Turrell

Frank Gehry

Frank Gehry is one of the most famous star-chitect nowadays. His works are iconic and very sculptural. Below examples are the Disney Concert Hall in Los Angeles and the vase collection that Gehry has designed for Tiffany.



Resemblance of the strange angles and curves can be seen. In viewing the city in a larger sense, the Disney Concert Hall can said to be simply a vase (just like his Tiffany collection).

Differentiation of Architecture and Art

Architecture and art have been categorized as two different subjects in modern days. The two are born from the human needs of aesthetics and beauty, diverging on the verge of function and practicality. While architects divine architecture as art because of the pursuit of aesthetics and design, artists do not see buildings as art because of the functional nature of architecture.

The relationship between architecture and art has been changing over the history. At Renaissance period, both subjects fell under the same category – arts. During the Industrial Revolution, technology flourished and suddenly architecture turned its focus on technological challenges rather than aesthetics challenges. In reaction to this movement, architecture once again stepped back and reinvents its direction – the nature of architecture. This is the birth of modern architecture and departure from art ever since. However, with the realization of aesthetic needs, architecture struggles to earn back its relevance in art nowadays. Iconic architecture then becomes the trend.

The fuzzy link between architecture and art can be described as a love-hate relationship, as seen in history. To explore the relationship between the two, one must know the definition of architecture and art, how the two share a symbiotic nature, and how important they are to each other.