What Makes Architecture Great

     What makes architecture, or any other form of art, great is its ability to evoke an emotional response from its audience. Architectural theory has often tried to play down the importance of emotion in favor of quantifiable standards of performance such as functionality. In reality, the power of emotion has allowed architecture to transcend any utilitarian purpose it might have been designed for.

      Architecture is the stage for human drama, we bring the emotional content with us, and so it is a difficult thing to plan for or consistently achieve. This puts architects in a difficult position; we can not guarantee emotional effects. But I think an architect can cultivate an intuitive sense of place: the effect of light and color, scale and composition, material and texture, all working together on the senses, if he understands how we experience space and values it enough to give it his best effort.

      Still, for all this talk of emotion, I am also a rationalist. I value ideas and I respect architecture in which an idea is clearly communicated. I strive for that conceptual integrity; the harmony that results when a design carries that idea through from the parti to the details is soothing; you live in a world where things make sense. When everything extraneous has been pared away, you achieve the most succinct expression of the concept. That has a certain technical artistry; the elegance of flawless execution.

      But architecture cannot afford to become an exercise in virtuosity accessible only to architects. This has led to a lamentable separation between architects and the general public. In our eagerness to establish ourselves as professionals, we have made architecture into something arcane; meanwhile society has forgotten the value of design. Simultaneously, projects are increasing in complexity. We are pulled in so many different directions, we too often settle for an unsatisfying muddle of compromises. The architect is only one actor in this process, but the one ultimately held responsible for the poor results. This has led many to question the role of the architect, or even the future of the profession.

      Architects are one of the few professionals without specific expertise. Each of the professions we work with doubts our competence: we know less about structures or mechanical systems than the engineers, less about construction than the contractors, less about business than the developers. Each of these thinks their area of expertise is the most important. The architect is tasked with arbitrating between them all; often it seems he is left with little or no negotiating power of his own. Building is like conducting a war, and wars need the strategic direction of a general or they descend into chaos. The architect is the one person positioned to provide the overall vision to the project that allows it to be more than the sum of its parts.