Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
[ Thread ][ Subject ][ Author ][ Date ]lindsie melluzzo
Wed, 08 Oct 1997 17:43:15 -0700 (MST)
We noticed a section in this website relating to environmental design and
began to uncover many reasons for creating architecture that blends in with
the environment; therefore, preserving it rather than destroying the
environment to show off a fancy building. On one hand, this concept seems
like a good idea, but what are the realities of the construction process?
For example, nature is disrupted by the first shovel that hits the dirt.
Is this considered conserving the environment? Or are we fooled by its
appearance? Frank Lloyd Wright prides himself on being an environmentally
conscious architect. Wright states that "architecture should blend into
the land and should follow the earth's line." What are his main concerns:
That his architecture be aesthetic or the environment be preserved? Or is
it possible to do both?
Any wishing to respond, feel free.
Cindy, Lindsie and Lisa
University of Arizona
Art Education students