This is a random thought I had while biking home and it is probably false:
Architecture is so liberal these days, if you can use that word. Gone are the days when people just tried to build the coolest looking building they could. Now we have to appeal to the needs of many different groups. Disabled people need ramps. Old people need to live on one floor. Other’s need bathrooms every two feet. And laws require safety features built in everywhere, like big rooms require big doors and multi-levels require fire escapes. I wonder what buildings would look like if people were still just trying to build the coolest looking buildings they could. I wonder how our modern needs for buildings have limited architecture as an art form.
Jer's Intellectual Adventures 
April 15th, 2011 at 10:27 AM
Of course, the whole idea behind inclusive architecture is that it was only the good old days for those who could actually use the exclusive architecture. Kind of like the good old days of being a knight and living in a castle and eating entire applewood smoked serfs were only good for people who were knights and castle-dwellers/peasant feasters and their friends. Not to say that fire escapes, big doors, and ramps don’t take away a bit from the freedom of architects, but there were always constraints of some sort (tradition, purpose of the building, technology, Hebrew slaves absconded to Canaan). Or so it seems to me.
April 15th, 2011 at 12:30 PM
That’s a good point. It was the good ol’e days for not that many. However, I think that with all of our saftey precautions and what not we may have altered the ‘natural’ trajectory of this art form. Maybe not.