Let me ask myself something - What is architecture?
I don’t know if any architect knows the right and comprehensive answer. Yes, of course, there are generally accepted definitions such as Architecture is the art of building, planning, designing and making the most diverse objects with different functions (Wikipedia) or Architecture is the art that shapes space with volume. It belongs to fine art and has a practical purpose – for living, shelter or just passing and similar. These and other definitions suggest that architecture is an activity created by human action.
But is that true? Does the concept of architecture exclude all construction activities that occurred before the appearance of man, and exist parallel to man even now…?
According to these theses, is architecture only an artificial creation of man? Are we the only creators of “space” or “volume”? Are the forces of wind and water also architects? They also create real arches, canopies, holes, pits, caves and other formations of interior spaces…
Why do we call this nature (which we take for granted every day) and not architecture?
Cerovac Caves
And we recognize this as top architecture without any problems?
I am an architect, but due to awareness and awe of nature, I do not know how to answer the question of What is architecture? And I’m not ashamed.
Even before college, I developed the opinion that the greatest and most powerful architect in the entire history of mankind, but even before that…NATURE. The older I get, the more confident I am in my stance.
Personally, the best book I read at university is Architecture of Nature, by architect Zvonko Pađan. His other books were also a revelation for the young me, but this one was my favorite.
Atypical literature full of pictures and illustrations of natural construction activities and creations that activate my memory every time I see the imposing forms of great architects of the new age such as Frank Lloyd Wright, Renzo Piano, Santiago Calatrava, Zaha Hadid and others.
The limestone formations of today’s living KREDNJAK prehistoric animals show the enviable height to which this construction managed to rise, “Architecture of Nature”, Zvonko Pađan, Fig. 19, p.52. (Školska knjiga, 2005)
Then every time I realize again that everything that people achieve as an innovation actually already exists in nature…
RADIOLARIA Doratspis builds a ray-spherical creation, “Architecture of Nature”, Zvonko Pađan, Fig. 26, p.56. (Školska knjiga, 2005)
Production of RADIOLARIA Actinomma sp.,”Architecture of nature”, Zvonko Pađan, Fig. 21,
p.53. (Školska knjiga, 2005)
SECTION OF THE DOME OF THE RENAISSANCE CHURCH, Genoa,
Illustration from the book “Constructive elements
of the building”, Đuro Peulić (UPI-2M plus, 2014)
We find new ways and new materials to make forms that have existed in nature since time immemorial. Of course, the scale and medium in which it is found is different, and the technical characteristics of the material must follow it. That is why there is always space for improvement and new ideas.
But since I read the mentioned book, it seems to me that the meaning of human architecture has become a reinterpretation and reinvention of nature’s architecture.
Envelope creations of RADIOLARIANS, “The Architecture of Nature”, Zvonko Pađan, Fig. 27, p.56. (Školska knjiga, 2005.)
I see the difference between two currents in contemporary architecture. The first one that exists in parallel with nature and does not respect it. He adapts it and tries to tame it, all for the purpose of making quick money.
In the long run, nature always wins.
The other, which accepts all the positive and negative sides of nature, does not defy it, and over time becomes stronger and more complete precisely because of surrendering to the action of nature, and exploits all its characteristics in ways that are not harmful to it.
I’ve always been intrigued by that other type of architecture.
That’s why I’m going to run this blog in exactly that direction.
