PEOPLE ARE REPRESENTED BY ARCHTECTURE THAT SURROUNDS

SPIRIT OF ARCHITECTURE
Architecture is a meeting place between the measurable and the immeasurable. The art of design is not only rooted in the aesthetic form, but in the soul of the work. In Phenomena and Idea, Stephen Holl once wrote, " The thinking-making couple of architecture occurs in silence. Afterward, these "thoughts" are communicated in the silence of phenomenal experiences. We hear the "music" of architecture as we move through spaces while arcs of sunlight beam white light and shadow.

Somewhere between the messiness of the building site and the puzzles of architectural theory lies the profession, discipline and art of architecture. It is always under construction. Architecture is built through the development of ideas as much as through the erection of buildings.

The history of modern architecture shows the personality of the architect who designed it. This style began in the United States and Europe. It then spread from there to the rest of the world. Modern architects reacted against the architecture of the 19th century; they thought it borrowed too many ideas from the past. As the 20th century began they believed it was necessary to invent an architecture that expressed the spirit of a new age and would surpass the styles, materials, and technologies of earlier architecture.

It is well known that the building environment influences our emotional state. There are rooms where one immediately feels comfortable and perfectly at ease, while others are awe inspiring or even intimidating.

Yale University Art and Architecture Building: Paul Rudolph

Many more floors than at first suspected lie hidden behind a solid and, at the same time, irritatingly fragmented street front.

Architects work involves designing what they hope will make the world a better place. That work ranges from small conversions to helping to regenerate postindustrial cities, even planning new ones. That means a unique concentration on design work, informed by an up-to-date understanding of the conditions is needed to design and construct architecture.

A degree from the School of Architecture is supposed to prepare the young architects with:

Design and conceptual skills. Team working skills. Communication skills including verbal, written, formal drawing, computer modeling and physical modeling. An understanding of society and its culture, and the built and natural environments.

LEADING AND INNOVATING

Choice and flexibility shall be the themes of approach for teaching architecture. The environment shall be such that the faculty feels free to discuss the key issues with students and the students shall free to do the same amongst one another. This encourages diversity in students. The institute shall be capable enough to train architects to go on to become global leaders of excellence in design, innovation and management. The institute shall have a blend of cultures where the prestige of Indian architecture precisely as the backdrop is examined with perspective.

DESIGNING FOR DESIGNERS -J. L Nasar, W. Preiser, and T. Fisher

There is a need to mark a new understanding towards looking at the learning environments that house architecture and design programs as a building type that deserves special attention. There is need for a fresh look at buildings of school of architecture as a new typology. There is a need to incite a speculative form of curiosity that calls for a deeper insight into ways in which designers design environments to accommodate themselves.

We would have to firstly understand the relationship between the schools of architecture building forms and their users exemplified by students and faculty. A research needs to be done that highlights the paramount value of assessing the dialectic relationships between architecture and design students and their environments.

The activity is the way the building stages its presence.

We need to foster the understanding of issues that students study in their programs by relating those issues to their immediate surroundings. A building for the teaching of future budding professionals should enhance, foster, and celebrate their activities. To add in this context, such a building should foster the development of constructive attitudes that young graduates take to the profession.

BAUHAUS

Gropius chief aim was to demarcate each of different elements quite distinctly without isolating one from another, and at the same time to give an architectural unity to the whole.

Yet, in spite of the special significance of this building type, the architecture of schools of architecture has received little critical discussion. Although some authors have written systematic reviews of architectural education, no book has focused on the architecture buildings themselves.

Another critical statement is introduced to highlight idiosyncrasies inherited in architectural academe Architecture schools have often sought new buildings by signature architects as a way to build a reputation. Although some of these buildings won design awards and praise from the critics, sometimes prior to construction and occupancy, the same buildings did not work well for the designers.

Utilizing multiple approaches for discussing and debating the architecture of schools of architecture, buildings are examined from different perspectives including the evolutionary history of architectural education, typological analysis of architecture school buildings, systematic post occupancy evaluationsPOEs, and comparative analysis of those evaluations.

It is generally argued that buildings for schools of architecture should be the best structures in university campuses. The reason is simple, that is the designers are working for clients and users who understand what their needs are, the design process and its limitations, potentials, and pitfalls. It encompasses two interventions, one about assessing designs of schools of architecture, and the other about lessons learned and the future of schools of architecture.

Designing for Designers is a conscious endeavor towards systematically addressing the relationship between architecture students and faculty and the physical environment that accommodates their needs, wants, and activities while at the same time reflecting or translating their aspirations in a visually pleasing and user responsive environment. The value of this issue can not be realized until the architecture of school buildings is designed in tandem with the thinking of the experiences that take place inside them.

It opens an avenue for future studies on linking different teaching methods in classrooms, lecture halls, and studios, and the qualities and characteristics of spaces and places that house them while fostering architecture students performance and faculty productivity. Strikingly, these issues have been addressed extensively over the past few years in preuniversity education by, but never at the level of schools of architecture buildings. Has not the time come to address this understanding with respect to buildings of schools of architecture?

The reason is that most criteria place emphasis on the quality of programs, curriculum content, knowledge delivery methods, quality of faculty teaching and research, learning outcomes, and standard spatial requirements in relation to the number of students with little or no interest in the spatial qualities of the building that accommodates all of that.

CEPT Centre for Environmental Planning and Research

A proper working environment has to be created which facilitates faculty and students to teach, learn and interact anywhere. The faculty rooms are placed too far from the studios. This hinders the interaction of the teachers with the students. Similarly, an interconnection between the library and the studios cannot be easily made out.

Better designs tend to have: 1. A well-managed process. 2. Compatible exteriors and warm interiors. 3. A gathering space (Atrium) with lots of natural light. 4. Layouts and signs that make it easy for people to find their way around. 5. Some focus on basics to ensure good acoustics. Research shows that architects and the public differ in their values or taste standards for the way buildings should look.

So, whose values take priority, the designer or the public?

Ultimately, this becomes a question of audiences; and part of the problem in answering the question involves treating architectural appearance as a question of aesthetics. Doing so treats good architecture like a photograph framed in a gallery or displayed in a magazine or book. It transforms the architect and juror into a kind of priest, who delivers cultural knowledge to the uneducated masses. The intimidated public often goes along, lacking confidence in their aesthetic judgment and feeling uneasy challenging the expert.
Treated as aesthetics, architecture need only appeal to an elite audience; it can function poorly, look ugly, or require the viewer to have a special knowledge to appreciate.

For places experienced by the public (building exteriors, and interiors used by many people), the values of the public (the consumer) take priority. When a design involves public money, public property, or becomes visible to the public (as are most buildings from the street), it becomes a societal concern. Unlike the high arts that need appeal to only a narrow audience who choose to experience it (in a gallery or theater), architecture surrounds people and does not afford them the choice of avoiding it. For this audience, design appearance does not require a special priestly knowledge to interpret.

Design should appeal to the way the broader public who experience it feels about it.

The overall performance, includes the buildings appearance, its evaluative quality, the meanings and evaluative responses it conveys to the users. Research has consistently shown that vision dominates human experience, and that appearances, aesthetics or the invisible mental image places convey takes first priority in humans experiences of places.

As for visual quality, we need better knowledge of the performance-related outcomes associated with appearance. Do places that look good make workers or visitors feel better in them? Does that, in turn, improve creative thinking, productivity, or the bottom line. Do aesthetic appearances affect property values? Successful designs must convey the desired meaning, a meaning that is supportive of the function, and both to users and occupants. For example, a gambling casino should probably look exciting to work in, while a dentists office should probably look calming..

Guggenheim museum in Spain