Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Is Inevitable: Yes Change Parekh House

    Uploaded by

    Raval Shivam
    - Change is inevitable as needs and necessities evolve over time. Preserving buildings just for the sake of preserving is illogical if they do not serve a functional purpose. - Many existing buildings occupy high value land but provide no utility. Developing modern, functional structures can generate more revenue and better serve growing populations. - While some iconic works of great architects may be worth conserving, merely preserving buildings because of an architect's past fame if they do not meet current needs does not align with the philosophy of functionality.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Is Inevitable: Yes Change Parekh House

    Uploaded by

    Raval Shivam
    21 views1 page
    - Change is inevitable as needs and necessities evolve over time. Preserving buildings just for the sake of preserving is illogical if they do not serve a functional purpose. - Many existing buildings occupy high value land but provide no utility. Developing modern, functional structures can generate more revenue and better serve growing populations. - While some iconic works of great architects may be worth conserving, merely preserving buildings because of an architect's past fame if they do not meet current needs does not align with the philosophy of functionality.

    Original Title

    debate 1

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    - Change is inevitable as needs and necessities evolve over time. Preserving buildings just for the sake of preserving is illogical if they do not serve a functional purpose. - Many existing buildings occupy high value land but provide no utility. Developing modern, functional structures can generate more revenue and better serve growing populations. - While some iconic works of great architects may be worth conserving, merely preserving buildings because of an architect's past fame if they do not meet current needs does not align with the philosophy of functionality.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    21 views1 page

    Is Inevitable: Yes Change Parekh House

    Uploaded by

    Raval Shivam
    - Change is inevitable as needs and necessities evolve over time. Preserving buildings just for the sake of preserving is illogical if they do not serve a functional purpose. - Many existing buildings occupy high value land but provide no utility. Developing modern, functional structures can generate more revenue and better serve growing populations. - While some iconic works of great architects may be worth conserving, merely preserving buildings because of an architect's past fame if they do not meet current needs does not align with the philosophy of functionality.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    You are on page 1of 1

    YES CHANGE IS INEVITABLE PAREKH HOUSE

     Navrangpura Ahmedabad is a densily populate area and preserving a house for four people is just illogical when we can give shelter to so
    many people by building a skyscraper or a public accomodation.

     on the other hand the economy of the country can also be enhanced by creating world class project which become a great source of
    revenue.

    CAPITALISM POPULATION DENSITY OLD IS UGLY PRESERVE OR KILL


    Just because an architect is famous ,
    The capitalist buildings today can be doesn’t mean that all of his work has to be The buildings like Sanskar kendra are
    great source of revenue because the Population is a major problem in India merely existing with no maintenance and
    conserved even the ones that
    people are attracted towards such today and the thing to be more
    he did at earlier stages of his career even if they are declared as heritage,  YES CHANGE IS INEVITABLE
    concerned about is the shelter of these they are in very bad condition roofs
    buildings and tourism can be used for this
    people. The buildings which are neither
    (example gun house by Charles correa)  The minimum quali cation of a building is that it should be
    purpose , now if we compare a Zaha and which are absolutely useless today. leaking, reinforcements visible. If these
    Hadid building with a L e Corbusier being used nor are declared as heritage
    For example now a days air conditioners is buildings of architectural importance are function also many Architects like Charles corea ,le corbusier
    can be used for this purpose. And it is the
    building we see that people pay loads of
    responsibility of the architects to be
    a necessity where as such old buildings to be conserved this way then they better have done great work with this philosophy of functionality .
    money to see such shiny , beautiful have no setup for AC and no ducts laid . be broken.
    facades and they barely know about the sensitive towards such problems ,the  The buildings which are not functional in current scenario , the
    so what is the use of such a building which
    existence of a brutalist buildings. awareness of one architect can change a
    is not functional in current scenario just for mere existence of them is hurting the core philosophy of
    lot of things example Laurie baker.
    the sake of a name of a famous architect. functionality.
     And it is illogical to waste such property of high real estate and
    value while so many things can be done on that piece of area
    which can genetrate more revenue.
     The people are attracted towards good looking buildings with
    facilities according to current climate and requirements they
    don't even know the existence of these buildings until and unless
    they become a tourist attraction or a museum.
     And what is the point of conserving So many buildings of all the
    famous Architects ,you can conserve some buildings but they
    are they should be of very high architectural importance which
    can be converted into a Museum , tourist attraction that the
    people are aware of.
     And to create something new the old needs to be destroyed
    and the question that is change inevitable yes absolutely the
    change is inevitable as the necessity and needs change of a
    person in order to keep the things functional the form changes.

    BILBAO EFFECT HARDCORE BRUTALISM BAD SOCIALISM MODERNIST VIEW


    The Bilbao effect is a great example it The brutalist buildings like legislative socialism is all about creating similar Modernist buildings can be beautiful as
    pertains to cause an effective relationship assembly by Le Corbusier seeing from an facilities for all the humans beings but it is well as functional and is new for people, it
    that occured when a single world class eye of a layman looks just like an practically not possible due to the can generate high amounts of revenue
    project became the catalyst for reviving incomplete building with on going different economic classes and the helping with the economy.
    this economically distressed , post construction. Same is for all the brutalist repetition of senseless boxes is taking
    industrial city. And when the old will die buildings may it be any great architect place which is expanding very quickly in
    then only we’ll have a chance to built including Le Corbusie, Charles Correa, the populated suburbs and is a threat to
    something new, if we stick to the old ideas Achyut Kanvinde the vernacular architecture .
    then there would b e no scope of
    development.

    You might also like