For this final post, I want to focus on relating the new, 'modern' day styles back to the very beginning. First of all, we have seen how architecture has progressed throughout history, whether for better or worse. The overall concept, I think, in class was that of commodity, firmness, and delight. At the very beginning of society (or where we started in class) the people built to achieve commodity for the most part. Firmness is definitely seen as well though, because most of these are still standing today. They built structures to accommodate their needs. For example, Stonehenge was one of the first structures I remember talking about. We are not sure exactly why it was built, but one theory is for worship purposes. In the next several decades, the main architecture continued to be about religion and worship (the Greek and Roman) It was not so much about the homes, but about the experience within -most of the time- large structures that was important (now the Gothic time period). Architecture was in the stage of being built for the community, not so much the individual. Though it was individual in the sense of the person experiencing the space, most of the spaces were large and on a scale that made the person feel small. Important architects were not designing homes for the individual, so the people made do with what they had. They basically took the large, grand size buildings and scaled them down to the size of homes. Let me say, this did not work out so well, especially within the Victorian era (too much bric-a-brac is never good). During the mid 1900s, something shifted. Design began to be more about the people, the individuals themselves, not the huge community areas. The home was focused on more than in the past. Unfortunately, there was another side to this phenomenon, one where the architect/designer could care less about the people and more about the delight of the structure. This is seen big time with the design of the Guggenheim in New York. It looks quite interesting and has a very unique design. But, the concept of rounded edges in a museum was not a good one Mr. Wright. As we deliberated in class, this was a complicated issue to get around while hanging art, or even looking at it for that matter. I feel that it is difficult to engage in an art piece with noise going on about you. Again, that is the case here. There was space in the center of the structure which provided light to all the levels and yet also allowed much noise to travel upwards from the lobby. I do not feel that Wright met the requirements for commodity. In the present day, architects have become quite egotistical. They just want the things they design (specifically in the commercial standpoint) to look interesting, not to necessarily be able to perform well for the humans that inhabit the space. As far as the residential design goes, this has had a huge uprising in the past few years with HGTV becoming a sensation. There are still egotistical designers in this area, but a little less I think because in this case, the people you are designing for have to be thought of, or else they will not hire you again, like Wright. He was not a popular residential designer. He did become famous, but he might have had a more successful career if he listened to his clients.
Anyway, I believe that throughout this whole time, there has been a lot of give and take between who the design is for, but ultimately an expression on the culture of the time, whether looking backwards or forwards.
