|
|
马上注册，结交更多同城好友，享用更多功能！
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看，没有帐号？立即注册
x
----------------------------------------------------------------
It is common today for the buildings to have various appearances. Some buildings’ exteriors and structures, however, are individualized beyond our wildest imagination, which has impacted its original purpose. As a consequence, an argument arises that the designing of buildings should not be associated with art.
Admittedly, there are some buildings which are designed in an exaggerated way to express some kind of art. Sometimes the exaggerated structures do affect its functions. No one would deny that the building’s original purpose is to provide a place for people to live in or work in. So any form of art works should be carried out based on the satisfaction of the building’s serving goals. While it seems that the argument of rejecting all the art work is over-responding. It is unnecessary to negate all the designing work of buildings.
In fact, architecture is indeed a very essential part of the building. Individualized buildings, featured by varying appearances, represent the world cultural diversity to some extent. It is the diversity that makes the world so different. If there were not architecture, the buildings might look like the same; culture might not be preserved, for example; and most importantly a host of architects would lose their jobs, which might impact the social stability greatly. Besides, the buildings, characterized by outstanding exterior, have become the landmarks in some places, which have profound influence upon not only the local residents but also the tourism.
In my opinion, an intermediate position could be found to address this issue. Creative art work should be encouraged during the produce of buildings, while the crucial function of the building should take the priority to ensure its serving purpose.
[]
|
|
发表于 2012-2-7 11:01:36
支持
反对
楼主
