mittens
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 89
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
so much architecture and so much creativity... if i wanted to do soemthing really creative i might design houses... but is archetecture art?
-
Finished your HSC? Check out our University Discussion, Non-School forums or help out next year's HSC students! -
YOU can help the next generation of students in the community! Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
is archetecture art? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter mittens
- Start date
i think this is a question that can never really be answered for sure
it all depends on your definitions of art. personally, i think architecture is an art, but it is so much more than that. it provides shelter, it is a technology and it is functional. the big question is, what are the limits of art.
then there is also the question of what is architecture..would you call your school hall a piece of architecture, it all depends on your defintions of art and architecture
it all depends on your definitions of art. personally, i think architecture is an art, but it is so much more than that. it provides shelter, it is a technology and it is functional. the big question is, what are the limits of art.
then there is also the question of what is architecture..would you call your school hall a piece of architecture, it all depends on your defintions of art and architecture
Daemontreu
What.
Never thought about it much... In general I don't consider the local library building "art", but I'd consider something like the Guggenheim in Bilbao "art".
Maybe it, like Johnson said, depends on the building's intentions; that the architect who is designing the building might be trying to do something new or interesting with materials etc. Then again, lots of people consider old-style masonry to be art... and I have no idea if the masons themselves considered themselves artists. Although, artisans...
Bah. No idea. Yes and no.
Maybe it, like Johnson said, depends on the building's intentions; that the architect who is designing the building might be trying to do something new or interesting with materials etc. Then again, lots of people consider old-style masonry to be art... and I have no idea if the masons themselves considered themselves artists. Although, artisans...
Bah. No idea. Yes and no.
In a world that considers pig fat, junk, and road signs art, I'd say that architecture can pretty definately be classified art. Anyway.
Yes, architecture is art, and the Gugg in NY is another example. The Opera House. Cathedrals. The skyscrapers in the city. And just because it isn't necessarily nice to look at doesn't mean it's not art -- there's nice paintings and ugly ones, but they can still be called art.
>> "i think architecture is an art, but it is so much more than that."
But art can be functional, can use technology. anyway, I think I'm just being nitpicky and annoying here -- you made a good point that this depends on your definition of art.
And mittens, you thinking of a future with architecture? Just curious. I have a lot of opinions about this [which are mostly useless, but hey, thats what forums are for ] and it'd be nice to discuss it
Yes, architecture is art, and the Gugg in NY is another example. The Opera House. Cathedrals. The skyscrapers in the city. And just because it isn't necessarily nice to look at doesn't mean it's not art -- there's nice paintings and ugly ones, but they can still be called art.
>> "i think architecture is an art, but it is so much more than that."
But art can be functional, can use technology. anyway, I think I'm just being nitpicky and annoying here -- you made a good point that this depends on your definition of art.
And mittens, you thinking of a future with architecture? Just curious. I have a lot of opinions about this [which are mostly useless, but hey, thats what forums are for
] and it'd be nice to discuss itmittens
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 89
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
sure mindriot! archetecture is awesome but i dunno if i'd carry it out as much as i'd design it... only im not terribly sure how i'd get into an arena like that as far as careers go... (pun not intended) sure fire away if u wanted to say sumthin bout it! :uhhuh:
i'd be interested in hearing about your opinions, mindriotMindRiot said:In a world that considers pig fat, junk, and road signs art, I'd say that architecture can pretty definately be classified art. Anyway.
Yes, architecture is art, and the Gugg in NY is another example. The Opera House. Cathedrals. The skyscrapers in the city. And just because it isn't necessarily nice to look at doesn't mean it's not art -- there's nice paintings and ugly ones, but they can still be called art.
>> "i think architecture is an art, but it is so much more than that."
But art can be functional, can use technology. anyway, I think I'm just being nitpicky and annoying here -- you made a good point that this depends on your definition of art.
And mittens, you thinking of a future with architecture? Just curious. I have a lot of opinions about this [which are mostly useless, but hey, thats what forums are for
and you are right, but it's not so much pig fat, junk and road signs alone which make it art..its what the artists do with these contemporary materials which make it art. its often about giving materials a different context which make it art. again there is the question of what are the boundaries, are they endless?
in previous discussions of what art is and what is not art and all that shit, the only conclusion i've been able to come up with, is that art is a lot of things, but not everything can be put in the category of 'fine arts'
i guess architechture is art....its based on principles of design isn't it? its just merged with practicality....i'm not sure, but didn't Mondrian and the Bauhaus group do buildings that are considered artworks...same with the opera house.
damn, i need that question answered too, because i'm trying to decide between a design course or an artchitecture course for uni next year.
my passion lies in design, but i can't say i've had any experiences with architecture therefore i can't really tell, it seems to be the way to go for a - dare i say - practical career that is still connected to design.
is it art? i'll try to throw in my 2 cents however from however limited my knowledge is, that way, this post will be balanced by an interesting mixture of people who know what they're talking about and me...
i've had a teacher tell me that design and art are very separate things, basically your comercial art - design isn't real art, because it's being created for commercial gain, never mind the artistic expression [she also hated text, that wasn't art either accordign to her].
from what i gather, if i venture out into a career as an architecture, i'll be more likely to design everyday buildings for people's home etc. than monumental artistic pieces like the guggenheim museum. if these houses are designed pureply for functional purposes and not expression, is that then still considered art?
my passion lies in design, but i can't say i've had any experiences with architecture therefore i can't really tell, it seems to be the way to go for a - dare i say - practical career that is still connected to design.
is it art? i'll try to throw in my 2 cents however from however limited my knowledge is, that way, this post will be balanced by an interesting mixture of people who know what they're talking about and me...
i've had a teacher tell me that design and art are very separate things, basically your comercial art - design isn't real art, because it's being created for commercial gain, never mind the artistic expression [she also hated text, that wasn't art either accordign to her].
from what i gather, if i venture out into a career as an architecture, i'll be more likely to design everyday buildings for people's home etc. than monumental artistic pieces like the guggenheim museum. if these houses are designed pureply for functional purposes and not expression, is that then still considered art?
from what i gather, if i venture out into a career as an architecture, i'll be more likely to design everyday buildings for people's home etc. than monumental artistic pieces like the guggenheim museum
you are correct. #1 rule of architecture school- you don't do architecture to build a monument of yourself (unless you are frank gehry..or maybe zaha hadid)
i've had a teacher tell me that design and art are very separate things, basically your comercial art - design isn't real art, because it's being created for commercial gain, never mind the artistic expression [she also hated text, that wasn't art either accordign to her].
i disagree with your teacher, because many artists create art for commercial gain as well. everyone needs to put food on the table, pay the bills etc do they not? just because a designer/artist/architect makes things with monetary value does not mean it is not art.
you are correct. #1 rule of architecture school- you don't do architecture to build a monument of yourself (unless you are frank gehry..or maybe zaha hadid)
i've had a teacher tell me that design and art are very separate things, basically your comercial art - design isn't real art, because it's being created for commercial gain, never mind the artistic expression [she also hated text, that wasn't art either accordign to her].
i disagree with your teacher, because many artists create art for commercial gain as well. everyone needs to put food on the table, pay the bills etc do they not? just because a designer/artist/architect makes things with monetary value does not mean it is not art.
Yey, there's our nice simple unarguable definition right there. Art is exploration, education, imitation, description, narrative, exorcism... and a lot of things more. But it seems these are all related to: expression. Aren't they? Can you guys think of anything else it might be, that don't relate back to expression? which brings us to the question of....johnson said:
Actually, I just had a thought: maybe art is, above all, creation!!! (Is it? :-\ ) if this is true, it would mean that yes, architecture is definately art regardless of the presence of expression, because something is being created.
{ by the way, >> johnson... what, then, would you consider "fine art"? I haven't thought about this yet. }
about architecture then. If you're thinking of/considering a career here, try to think of all the things this would entail, aside from the idea of whether it's art or not. It would mean maths. It would mean rulers and straight lines and OMG calculus. [DAMN MATHS!] It would mean having to think of the whole practicality thing, how the building fits with its environment, how it would house whatever is in it, how the plumbing would be installed and where the toilets are located. Personally I don't want to do architecture because it seems like so much other thinking is involved, thinking about things I don't care about.
... and I hope this made sense.
on fine art: well i guess this is all relative, it depends on the individual. personally, to me the difference is that fine art is art which is conceptually and technically (sorry to use hsc terms here) refined, with some sort of intellectual or aesthetic meaning. e.g all architecture may be art, but the difference between a standard building and the guggenheim is that the latter is a fine art
which brings the question, would you call a toilet block a piece of architecture, and hence a piece of art? because it may well be designed by an architect (it might not be hard but it still needs to be designed).
creation: i think this is an interesting notion, it suggests that mankind is a work of art too. but that means every single thing in the artificial world is a piece of art according to this notion, such as a book, a computer, a soft toy, a printer etc.
which brings the question, would you call a toilet block a piece of architecture, and hence a piece of art? because it may well be designed by an architect (it might not be hard but it still needs to be designed).
creation: i think this is an interesting notion, it suggests that mankind is a work of art too. but that means every single thing in the artificial world is a piece of art according to this notion, such as a book, a computer, a soft toy, a printer etc.
a toilet block can be art, if you look at the highly ornamental ones at... say, the opera house or somehing... can't really think of a good eg now [and let's not forget du champ's urinal] so my point is, if somethig is created for a purely functional purpose with minimal emphasis on aesthetics, then it's not art, but everything can be considered art, especially in this postmodern context. artworks once not thought of as art is not art. where has the fine line gone?
if creation is art, then are mass-produced-assembly-line created everyday objects art? and then you can really bring out the oxymorons, the art of science, the art of mathematics, the art of... whatever else that's not art.
and with the definition of fine arts, can i just add that, in creating a piece of fine art, the artist's main concern should be to express a concept, an idea, and be concerned with the aesthetics rather than functional purpose or monetary value. that's my opinion, feel free to attack it.
i want to know how much design is in architecture, because that's what i like, NOT the maths bits *shudder* i'm tossing up between a design degree and architecture [johnson, you would know] and if the reality of a job isn't a problem then i'd pick design, but i'm trying to be as realistic as possible, and also if i were to do design, i'd probably get sick of meeting the criteria set by clients... and also if i do architecture i can freelance in design on the side. really, i'm just trying to convince myself.
if creation is art, then are mass-produced-assembly-line created everyday objects art? and then you can really bring out the oxymorons, the art of science, the art of mathematics, the art of... whatever else that's not art.
and with the definition of fine arts, can i just add that, in creating a piece of fine art, the artist's main concern should be to express a concept, an idea, and be concerned with the aesthetics rather than functional purpose or monetary value. that's my opinion, feel free to attack it.
i want to know how much design is in architecture, because that's what i like, NOT the maths bits *shudder* i'm tossing up between a design degree and architecture [johnson, you would know] and if the reality of a job isn't a problem then i'd pick design, but i'm trying to be as realistic as possible, and also if i were to do design, i'd probably get sick of meeting the criteria set by clients... and also if i do architecture i can freelance in design on the side. really, i'm just trying to convince myself.
ahh, you are the girl who has been emailing me thenfrazzle said:
like i said, it's not so much the maths bits which trouble me (there isn't all that much in it at all, more a bit of physics than anything) cos you have like structural engineers and other technicians to deal with that crap. its the fact that most of your office life is spent dealing with clients and councils and contracts rather than actually designing
johnson said:ahh, you are the girl who has been emailing me then
like i said, it's not so much the maths bits which trouble me (there isn't all that much in it at all, more a bit of physics than anything) cos you have like structural engineers and other technicians to deal with that crap. its the fact that most of your office life is spent dealing with clients and councils and contracts rather than actually designing
yes indeed i am. i have yet to reply to that long informative email you last wrote.
glad to hear the maths isn't that bad, i don't do physics at all, but i thought it'd be... calculating dimensions and angles etc? and the logistics of weight distribution etc etc.
clients - won't that be the same as with graphic design? i'd like the people aspect of it, unless they're really aggro or something...
are architects really very employable? more so than graphic designers anyway?
there's a fair bit of work with structural stability and how loads are applied onto structures you design..but its not that hard really. cant say its interesting cos its not relaly my thing.
and yes true i guess all design fields require client contact of some kind
well architects are employable and there's plenty of jobs in sydney at the moment, i think students' concerns are more what sort of job they will get after their degree, i.e will they actually get to design or will they just be CAD monkeys..
and yes true i guess all design fields require client contact of some kind
well architects are employable and there's plenty of jobs in sydney at the moment, i think students' concerns are more what sort of job they will get after their degree, i.e will they actually get to design or will they just be CAD monkeys..
CAD: Species of monkey found in the Great Sandy Desert which attack people with broomsticks while having dinner.
They were bred using Computer Aided Design
And there goes the "art is creation" idea LoL. *Waves goodbye to it*. It was obviously somthing that came into my head out of nowhere. But I still like a part of it, that fact that art links us humans with something greater in that we can create new things.
They were bred using Computer Aided Design
And there goes the "art is creation" idea LoL. *Waves goodbye to it*. It was obviously somthing that came into my head out of nowhere. But I still like a part of it, that fact that art links us humans with something greater in that we can create new things.
mittens
Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2004
- Messages
- 89
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- 2004
i've come to the conclusion that...
i was debating this over in my head all yesterday cause i couldnt get the thought outta my head and since art to me is the expression (yes!) of what one feels is an adequate representation of their concepts. now that can range fromwhatever we can box it up as to something so completely left field that you cant box it up. as far as i'm concerned archetecture is art... thats the conclusion i've come to. originally i admit that i was just posting this to findout what some ppl's opinions were but it got me thinking and i'd have to say that even your school buildings are art...
let me clarify... i was at maquarie university at one stage and i was looking for some books when i bumped into a guy who actually helped me find them but as i got talking to him he was telling em about the course he was doing and that was something archetectural but his latest assignment was to discern what might make learning easier psychologically inside what kind of shape/structure... ie do ppl learn better inside intricately designed structures or dull rectangular ones and so on and so forth... now the buildings with rectangle rooms so common in schools and universities today are being met with the thought that maybe with less to look at there is less distraction. layer of meaninng 1?
when i look at a school building i see walls to separate us from other classes that way each lesson has their own private quarters. the roof is designed not only as a roof to keep rain away from our paaper ans selves but also as a foyer for the classrooms above. the doors vary but the roller doors are very big, hefty objects and they too can be analysed.... but should it take postmonernist architecture to call the some of us to analyse archetecture... or are they trying to say someting about architecture itself... like the layers of meaning we neglect to notice...
what do u think?
i was debating this over in my head all yesterday cause i couldnt get the thought outta my head and since art to me is the expression (yes!) of what one feels is an adequate representation of their concepts. now that can range fromwhatever we can box it up as to something so completely left field that you cant box it up. as far as i'm concerned archetecture is art... thats the conclusion i've come to. originally i admit that i was just posting this to findout what some ppl's opinions were but it got me thinking and i'd have to say that even your school buildings are art...
let me clarify... i was at maquarie university at one stage and i was looking for some books when i bumped into a guy who actually helped me find them but as i got talking to him he was telling em about the course he was doing and that was something archetectural but his latest assignment was to discern what might make learning easier psychologically inside what kind of shape/structure... ie do ppl learn better inside intricately designed structures or dull rectangular ones and so on and so forth... now the buildings with rectangle rooms so common in schools and universities today are being met with the thought that maybe with less to look at there is less distraction. layer of meaninng 1?
when i look at a school building i see walls to separate us from other classes that way each lesson has their own private quarters. the roof is designed not only as a roof to keep rain away from our paaper ans selves but also as a foyer for the classrooms above. the doors vary but the roller doors are very big, hefty objects and they too can be analysed.... but should it take postmonernist architecture to call the some of us to analyse archetecture... or are they trying to say someting about architecture itself... like the layers of meaning we neglect to notice...
what do u think?
lol sorry dude, i didn't mean to shoot down your idea, actually there's an interesting quote by oscar wilde "the artist is the creator of beautiful things. to reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim." just something to think about.MindRiot said:CAD: Species of monkey found in the Great Sandy Desert which attack people with broomsticks while having dinner.
They were bred using Computer Aided Design
And there goes the "art is creation" idea LoL. *Waves goodbye to it*. It was obviously somthing that came into my head out of nowhere. But I still like a part of it, that fact that art links us humans with something greater in that we can create new things.
frazzle, what i mean by CAD monkey is basically an architect who spends the majority of his life on the computer doing other (senior) architects' CAD (computer aided design) work like construction details, changing spec's, moving objects, dimensions, etc etc etc. basically, really boring, really mundane, really mindless 'monkey' work.