What is the right balance between aesthetics/human comfort/utility? Does it exists separately?
Aesthetics in any good design cannot be a forced inclusion.
For a residence particularly, overall aesthetics, is a derivate of a sensitive
process. There may be other projects, like pavilions, commercial facades etc,
where aesthetics may be more important, but in residences, it cannot be a
separate entity.
Its widely mis-understood that aesthetics of a good building
is all about its form. What is celebrated is the word “ front elevation”, where
what it looks from a 90 degree perpendicular vision angle from its facade, is
seen as the only important aesthetical need of a building. This involves more
graphics and cosmetics, while true aesthetics are achieved through
articulations of spaces and forms. Fundamental aim of any good architecture is
to be functional.
Being functional and comfortable also mean to create
“positive “ spaces which respond well to the use its meant for. Scale,
proportion, spatial volumes, texture, colour, use of light, ventilation,
usability, comfortability, utility are all essential elements of making a space
positive. Overall aesthetics of a space is appreciated when the effect of all
these qualities slowly seeps inside you. The visual quality of a space is just
one of these elements. When a space achieve a higher degree of coherence of
various elements, it will attain a quality to inspire and elevate the
consciousness of the users. Such spaces have much deeper influence in its users
rather than the direct utility its meant for. This quality of spatial
articulations have been the basis of various religious architecture. When you
attempt such spaces within a house, there is an increase opportunity to create
a space beyond normal.
Comments
Post a Comment