Any Architects In The House?

@ Larez, What do you think about architecture in the age of relativism?

I think that is what post modernism is all about. Relativism is the popular culture that says that there is no moral obligation and usually defies tradition.

What in your opinion is the impact of technology on what you call 'purity of form'? In the days of Le Corbusier and even far back to the classical era, hybrid structures that have pushed the boundaries of form making was not possible.

There are other 21st century realities that have taken architecture beyond the imperial concerns of the classical times. For example, sustainability and eco concerns and the inclination to want to do more with less.

If you say good architecture retains traditional links, I would say that 'tradition' is precisely what post modernism revolts against. and that is where the world is right now.

Great Work Mahal, you have mastered the Prairie style. Ever tried the New England / Shingle styles? Will you design my house? lol. Thanks for the welcome. Next time you have a Nice size commercial or Mall,  I'd like to be involved. Where are you located?

Thank You larez, "New English/Shingle Style" Havn't heard of it, but would like to learn and see if it's a style that can work here in Nigeria.
Location? Warri, Delta State Nigeria.

@Larez
I think your buildings are all crap(just a personal opinion) and shows typical american residential homes.
You take a pre-designed style(i.e English Todor / French Manor style, Early American, Classical French Country etc) and you build from there(Its like you havent designed anything kinda like copy n paste) those are the sort of buildings that makes architecture all boring(because they have been done before i.e templates).  
What happened to doing a proper site analysis, use of materials, designing contemporary architecture to suit the clients every day needs. Designers all across the world know that most Americans do not understand style. Good examples of contemporary residential architecture is Australian Sandcastles, Japanese, Swiss, European architecture which they have left post-modern architecture(like yours) a long time ago.
Im currently in South Africa, where there is alot of tuscan houses being built, but the few architects designing contemporary buildings that suits there needs(clients) are very successful and making alot of money.  
Architects like you make the environment look crap because of the redundancy in the buildings and I have no respect for buildings. (sorry thats how I feel)
Nowadays Architecture is moving away from your style and I think you will be left behind.

To add to my last post,

Regardless of what school of thoughts and Architecture that anyone subscribes to, there are still good and bad methods of application. Transitions of forms and how they connect are still basics in Architecture. Orientation and considerations of Negative space exploration of forms are still basics of Architecture. The fact still remains that Architecture is an Art, and while schooling and awareness may help, there is still a requirement of talent in execution. Talent is mostly showcased in Residential design than in commercial properties which have a range of scopes for consideration.

The Bottomline here is anyone can claim, but very few have the finesse.  My Clientele and Multiple awards (always first place) of my designs in competitions in America bear me witness and not just talking Architectural jargon.

Would be nice if you posted some pictures of what you consider relativism. We may debate better if we have omse visuals to pin-point, despite our differing school of thoughts.

For some reason, I knew I was gonna bump into people like larez, old Architects who are non-innovative designers, I could go on the whole day but probably you wouldnt understand because you were taught historic architecture as a principle of design and they dont know the meaning of contemporary

This where you are wrong son, I have more innovation on the tip of my little finger than you can muster in a lifetime. Innovation does not equate to marketability. maybe you should learn the difference. A successful design is relative to the existing target market.

@Mahal

Commercial design is more of an engineering feat in the sense that you are basically designing a shell structure with fenestration. Internal spaces are usually generic and much is left for the leasee to complete by themselves. Religious buildings and and Institutional buildings may be somewhat in-between the 2, because they somewhat focus on group activities rather than separate ones typical in commercial Architecture. The successful Commercial Architect focuses more on fenestration and thematic ties rather than the more intricate details of personal lifestyles and deciphering/interpreting the residential client.

The fact is that a home remains a box, and the rest becomes interpretation of lifestyles and the client's tastes. This is where the challenges of residential begins. The social aspect of being able to deal with extreme ends in your clientele and still being able to satisfy the desires of these opposites in tastes and values is very challenging. It is more of a social quest which brings some sort of intimacy into the picture.

A Residential Architect has to be capable of getting into the mind of the client to read their thinking. This has to then be interpreted and turned into a desirable design regardless of personal preferences of the Architect. The key here which is the challenging part is being capable of getting the general ideas of the client and molding into a form of Art. The next client my have the opposite taste and desires as the previous one. Man (and Woman) is still the most difficult of everything on earth to understand. Now imagine the added burden of when the Wife has extremely opposite tastes as the Husband. I have always felt an extra form of achievement when my design resolved these issues. Many people have been known to end up in divorce over the issue of getting their homes designed and built.

Residential design

 
 @ yoruba

  it's interesting to know what your area of specialisation is,  are you an art / architectural historian or a practising architect ?

My responses to page 1:

When I created this topic, I waited a few hours but received no responses, I have now returned to it to find that it's bursting full of life.

I believe this is symbolic of what will happen for Nigerian architecture. Whether you believe this or not is a different question.

I've read the responses on page 1, and here are mine:

Justkunmi - I am in my final year of the part one BArch (Hons) course in the UK.

Desse - I agree a project that's supervised by a great architect is definitely different. You can tell.

Tmoni - Why'd you quit - I felt like quitting when I was in my first year, but the internal push just keeps me going that one extra step at a time.

Aasog - I agree with the ideas behind a construction manager who can handle the particulars of building construction much more efficiently however, I don't believe that a person trained in that can assess certain issues that an architect is trained to assess. Issues such as light quality, ambience e.t.c. It is not that I think that one is lesser than the other (since I don't know what a construction manager really does) in the bigger picture, it's just that I believe that the issues I mentioned are very important. We need to realise that being an architect is not just about painting and handing over the piece of paper to someone else to do all the dirty work. In my first year, I had such a broad curriculum, ranging for forces and physics involved with construction and structures to conceptual design, to CAD modelling, to philosophy of design, all these things contribute greatly to the success of a design of a building.

Mahal - I also agree, to many people the word does not exist, I will go on to analyse whose fault that is later, but for now, I think it's 50:50. Our Nigerian-born architects should receive more acknowldegment, the emphasis in my course is on travel - you spread the word, you bring back ideas and inspiration, not copies of American prarie houses, nor huge mansions, but a new vernacular style with a purpose. When a Nigerian architect becomes notable across the world, believe me, the public with know what the word means.

Lovestorm - Some of the blame should go to the mentality of fellow Nigerians, who do not wish to spend a kobo on home improvement - the number of people who drive fancy cars, but who's interiors lack imagination are countless, it's acceptable for the layout of the house to be clumsy, for certains rooms to eminate neglect, it's the norm - nobody blinks an eyelid. In the bigger picture, a lot of us are temporary thinkers, we want the money now, the fame now, the children now, it saddens me that there are no equivalent of 'cathedrals' or 'castles' here, they've all worn away or have been badly maintained - because no one wants to spend money on maintainance, we are easily distracted by new trends, and we never quite manage to convince ourselves that this one or that one will stay so we don't put all our eggs in one basket.
In terms of interior design, we are lacking in taste that appreciates the dawn of a new century, we immitate western styles, okay the occasional family will have a wooden carved painting of a woman carrying a baby in a wrapper. We don't realise that these styles are not in fact western, but a collection of 'what works' around the world. Ornaments were adopted from Asia, the whole idea of a centre-piece, be it a coffee table or a vase, I could go on and on. .

Junjustin - Like I'm implied above, we are short sighted unfortunately, we want the here and now, we want the house completed before we fall sick, we want grandma and granddad to live in it before they pass, or we want something to impress them, after all it took us this long to make our wealth, so why not enjoy it now - that's the mentality. With little or no precedent in great Nigerian architecture, people can't find examples to look towards for 'a better standard' of buildings. Sometimes you even have to remind me that it does exist.

zPixel - Welcome.

Sprumbaba - What do you mean?? As designers we all have various concepts. Most of us haven't been given the chance to develop these.

Woodpecker - I cannot communicate on the politics as I have little knowledge in that area.

Yoruba - I could only find ONE book on Nigerian architecture in my university library, and that was written in the 1940s (if I remember correctly) and it was written by an englishman who wanted to discuss the differences between architecture of the different tribes at the time. As for contemporary architecture, I'm not sure if I'll find anything on Amazon (I've searched. . nothing I could order).

dblock - The best of luck to you.

@Larez

This is to show you, you have no clue what talking about I'd like you to read through my post:

I highly agree, at least someone notice that and among other things.
 

Again you are proving to me a point, all you are stating is technical specifications and Ive said nothing regarding to the architectural technology you've placed in, that is not Architectural theory(you still cannot tell the difference)
As I said, you one of those old architects who doesnt know how to be innovative and hence if you study architecture at any top university in the world(yet alone in SA) you wouldnt even make through first year with those sort of buildings.
I would like to read articles about your buildings and see your Architectural Awards(seriously). And I beg you please sir, show me your innovations in your buildings(you copy and paste and call it stylish?).

I have the same problem, when I search contemporary buildings in the world in Africa I only get South African Buildings and Architects.

Considering that you are merely a student at this time who is hardly wet behind the ears in design, you are an arrogant lil fkuc. I bet you that you would not last 2 years in Architecture after graduation if you do graduate.

You posted 2 pictures and decided yourself which one is more beautiful. As you would say in your words, "more stylish". You clearly lack the decorum or manners to even be considered in a dignified occupation in Architecture. You are obviously lacking in culture and therefore prone to be lacking in taste. Another student posts an opinion that is grounded on a statement that may be misconstrued at best, and you come back jumping as if you have achieved something. Since this is the last post that I will make directed to you, it is my intention to attempt to better educate your clueless self. One of the first rules of Architecture is to realize that there are different tastes for different folks.

In the first Stadium, I see what is clearly a Georgian style successfully done on a large scale project. The design itself probably fits the theme of the buildings around it and helps it to blend into it's neighborhood easily. Your clueless self bring a picture of the Stadium out of it's context, and decide that "It is not stylish to be technologically efficient". Your statements and attitudes stink badly of the 'La Riche Nouveau', who is probably a product of looted public funds. The object of education is study. I can bet that you have not taken the moment to check on the facts about that building and the probable efficiency gems embedded in it. Just from my experience and knowing that it is a structure in an academic institution will make me assume that there are products of research used in it's construction.

Architecture is about class and not plasticity. Good Architects are continuous students of society and her general behavioral patterns. They are aware of thr numerous gray areas of life and are not prone to jumping into conclusions without the benefits of good research. You have failed woefully as a mere student who is supposed to be learning, to close up your mind from understanding while you show how pompous you are. You remain clueless on a conceptual level to even grasp the contents of my previous posts. Guys like you back in the days would have dismissed the Porsche Carerra and called it ugly while being oblivious to the clear aerodynamic qualities that it possessed. The smoothness of it's engines as the cams over it's pistons sequence with each other gracefully, like a stage production of the most elegant ballet dancers of the world. The Driver becomes one in unison with the superb product as he is firmly settled in the embrace of it's bucket seats. You won't understand this lifestyle just as you will never get to see the greens of any exclusive golf club outside of Nigeria. There are still some places in the world where "La Riche Nouveau cannot buy there way into with stolen country wealth.

The second stadium is a very beautiful futuristic style building. It articulates negative space nicely. It is clearly 'modernistic architecture'. The problem I have with this approach is how it will be seen in 20-30 years. How will it age? Gracefully or bad deterioration? What is the annual rainfall statistics for the area, and how will the continuous flow from the top which lacks any water collection/shedding qualities be maintained? Is it cost effective maintenance wise? I look at it again, and I begin to see the form of a broken egg shell spaced out. But do you notice that by seeing that it is the natural instinct of human nature to try to identify the unknown with something familiar?

What you are looking at and calling Modernistic/Futuristic I hate to burst your bubble may be considered old by some. Aero Saarinen who is basically the best known Architect for fluidity of forms had been doing projects like this since the sixties. I will suggest that you get familiar with some of this Guy's work, especially the TWA Terminal, since you like 'modern, innovative etc'. Le Corbusier also has a product called Ronchamps (Chapel de Notre Dame du Haut). There is a saying that 'the more you learn, the more that you will realize that you know nothing'. This wisdom will then begin to change the perspective of a wise man regarding absolutes. Looking back in History help to avoid pitfalls in the future, and I can bet you that the second stadium will be imploded sooner than the first of your pictures.

Regardless of your rantings, I see both buildings as being beautiful. Each one within it's own style. Objectivity requires stepping out of personal preferences to judge within context. It will be advisable that you attempt to see more, open your ears more to listen, and refrain from attempting to impose absolutes. Architecture is focused on people, which remains a very gray area for absolutes.

It wasn't stated, but it was heavily implied.