From the article: ... I will add that there are many design criteria that need to be satisfied by building's design. True, the aesthetics of the outside of the building are only one consideration,...
From the article:
Style wars have returned to architectural discourse. And, as expected, social media is the place to see these kinds of conflicts (and the false binaries they often represent) in their most grossly caricatural form. [...]
...
[...] Online, both movements are nostalgic, whether for a recent past or a much more distant one. Both tend to caricature their opponents and treat buildings as abstracted aesthetic objects – little more than JPEGs. Both prefer images in which human life is largely absent. Both keep commentary and history to a minimum (after all, there is only so much history that can be analysed in an online argument). Both work against the reality that architecture is really about space and can be fully understood only by experiencing it in person. But, above all, both perspectives wrench architecture out of its context in a particular place: both the cosmopolitan, urban Left and the ostentatiously nativist, reactionary Right are really celebrating an international style of architecture.
I will add that there are many design criteria that need to be satisfied by building's design. True, the aesthetics of the outside of the building are only one consideration, but how it looks (inside or outside) is just one consideration too.
From the article:
...
I will add that there are many design criteria that need to be satisfied by building's design. True, the aesthetics of the outside of the building are only one consideration, but how it looks (inside or outside) is just one consideration too.