Over time, it has become evident that the process of design is something much more complex than simply having an idea and putting it into action. The job of a designer and, subsequently, their design process revolve first and foremost around the needs and desires of the society which they live in. Secondly, it is discernible that good design must strike a balance between functionality and aesthetics to be truly relevant. Bearing these two arguments in mind, it is clear that the process of design is, in fact, more complicated and arduous than it would seem at first glance, but also that it depends on— and is therefore fueled by— the impact they have on the ever-changing society for which the design was conceived.
Design is not limited solely to buildings and houses; design is present in all parts of society, from the way walkways are aligned within a city, to transportation methods in dense metropolitan areas. The needs of one society will most likely not be the same needs of another, and therefore what qualifies as effective and efficient design in one might cause disorder in another, or simply serve no purpose at all. One example of this are the lengthy escalators in the underground train stations in London, meant to hold hundreds of people at a time. For a densely populated city like London, this kind of escalator design was crucial to maintaining order and directing/managing the flow of pedestrian traffic inside of the already crowded stations. However, assume that this escalator design was installed is stations in much less densely-packed cities where overcrowding has never been an issuer would be a waste of space, energy, and especially time, as they take much more of it to get all the way across (since they are wider and move more slowly to accommodate the hundreds of people that use them at the same time in busy London stations). This is where the lack of efficient, useful, and situation-specific design comes in; what works for one society might cause irritation in another; therefore, in order for a design to prove useful and relevant, it is crucial to consider the specific needs of society during the design process.
Architecture as a profession revolves mainly around designing and building spaces which serve a certain purpose, while still being aesthetically pleasing. Both utility and beauty are key to making a space relevant for society; however, a balance must be struck between the two. A building that is built purely for utility will not be memorable, and a space built solely to be aesthetically pleasing will not prove useful. Architecture provides a lot of freedom, but in order to make and design relevant architecture, we must know how to utilize that freedom in a way that still works within the delicate balance of purpose and aesthetics in society. However, when discussing the subject of purpose, the issue of sustainability seems to pop up frequently. Arguably, the “new industrial revolution” will have a lot to do with sustainability, as that is one of the most prevalent and important worries that our society has about the long-term impacts of architecture. Incorporating the argument that the process of useful design and its outcome depend substantially on the values of society at the time, it makes sense that the next big leap in technological advancements will be based on how to make our current design process more sustainable; some aspects of this idea can already be seen around the world, and evidence derived from studying the societal reaction as well as the overall impact on the environment suggest that this is an overall positive and major advancement in the process of design, and it was brought forth by taking into consideration the values of society.
The process of design is made complicated by the restrictions imposed by the needs and desires of society on the inherent freedom that architecture provides. The process of design seems difficult to define only because it is sometimes vastly different depending on the society for which the design is being made. One thing does remain the same though: design without purpose, and purpose without beauty are two things that any good designer will try to avoid. Purpose depends almost completely on the society that the design is built around and for; without taking that into consideration during the design process, the outcome will serve no purpose (or, rather, no relevant purpose). Beauty, on the other hand, is a bit ore difficult to manage, but provides much more freedom for the designer; but, it is relevant all the same. Purpose is important, but spaces without meaning have no value or relevance to society.
Comments