The belief in the importance of architecture is based on the idea that we become different versions of ourselves depending on our surroundings—whether for better or worse—and on the conviction that architecture should vividly reflect our ideal selves
We are often eager to acknowledge the impact of our surroundings, yet sensitivity to architecture comes with its challenges. If a single room can shape our emotions, if our happiness can depend on the color of the walls or the design of the doors, what becomes of us in the many spaces we are forced to look at or inhabit? We cannot stay perpetually sensitive to environments we lack the means to alter for good – and end up as conscious as we can afford to be.
Yet, our longing for aesthetically pleasing spaces remains, pushing us to strive for beauty amid complexity and elusive universality.
Why Make Beautiful Structures and the Hidden Struggles Behind Them
There are plenty of reasons to be wary of the pursuit of great architecture. Buildings seldom reveal the immense effort behind their creation, remaining quietly indifferent to the bankruptcies, delays, anxieties, and dust they leave in their wake.
Their effortless appearance is often a key part of their allure. Only when we attempt construction ourselves do we experience the frustrations of coaxing materials and people into alignment assuring that two panes of glass meet seamlessly, a lamp hangs symmetrically over the stairs, a boiler functions as expected, or concrete pillars connect smoothly with a roof.
Architecture can vividly illustrate the ideals of who we aspire to be…
Residence: Tugendhat House, Brno, 1930
Architect: Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe.
Architecture is also puzzling in its inconsistent ability to create the happiness that justifies its significance. While a beautiful building may sometimes enhance an uplifting mood, there are moments when even the most inviting spaces fail to dispel our sadness or misanthropy.
Ultimately, buildings of stone and steel stand upon the delicate foundation of human emotions and uncertain desires. This makes poor architecture—architecture that fails to move us—as much a failure of psychology as it is of design. It reflects the same patterns seen in other aspects of life—marrying the wrong person, choosing unsuitable careers, or planning unfulfilling vacations—stemming from a fundamental lack of self-awareness and understanding of what truly brings satisfaction.
Architecture doesn’t always have to be joyful or grand; rather, they can be spaces that embrace melancholy, solitude, and introspection can offer comfort and a sense of belonging. Certain architectural styles, materials, and forms connect with our emotions, reflecting our inner experiences instead of imposing a false sense of happiness. From this viewpoint, beauty in architecture is not only about creating delight but also about its capacity to reflect the entire range of human emotions, including sadness.
Throughout history, various architectural styles have embodied different emotional expressions. Let us take a look at some of them
Minimalist and Austere Buildings
Structures with restrained ornamentation, muted colors, and simple forms (e.g., the works of Mies van der Rohe or minimalist Japanese architecture) often reflect a quiet, contemplative sadness rather than excessive joy.
Gothic Cathedrals
Gothic Cathedrals are characterized by vertical proportions, pointed arches, external buttressing, and asymmetry. While awe-inspiring, Gothic cathedrals like Notre-Dame de Paris embody a sense of solemnity and longing, with their towering spires, dim interiors, and dramatic use of light and shadow.
Ruins and Weathered Architecture
Buildings in decay, such as the ruins of ancient civilizations (e.g., the Roman Forum or Angkor Wat), evoke a melancholic beauty, reminding us of the passage of time and human impermanence.
Brutalist Architecture
Finally, we have structures like the Barbican Estate in London or Le Corbusier’s Unité d’Habitation carry a raw, heavy, and sometimes oppressive quality, reflecting a somber or dystopian aesthetic.
The Pursuit of Beauty in Architecture
What makes a building beautiful? It is one that soothes, invigorates, or inspires us—harmonizing our emotions with the finest aspects of ourselves.
But how can anyone assert authority over what is considered attractive? How can one judge between competing styles or justify a particular preference amid the conflicting tastes of others?
It was not always so difficult to determine how to build beautifully. For more than a thousand fragmented years in Western history, a beautiful building was almost universally understood to be a classical one—featuring a temple front, ornate columns, harmonious proportions, and a symmetrical facade.
The Question of Beauty and Style: A Historical Perspective
The question “In What Style Shall We Build?” can be explored by examining examples of various architectural styles from the past.
The Greeks pioneered the classical style, the Romans embraced and enhanced it, and after a thousand-year hiatus, the Renaissance elite rediscovered and revived it.
Historians have often focused on the differences between various forms of classicism, yet the overarching similarities are far more remarkable. For centuries, there was a strong consensus on fundamental architectural principles—ranging from window and door construction to the design of columns, pediments, and ironwork. These conventions, initially formalized by Renaissance scholar-architects, were later disseminated through pattern books, making them accessible to ordinary builders.
As architecture moved through time, it lost its classicism, moving to more utilitarian designs to account for practical constraints. Here’s a look at this evolution:
Chronology / Sequence of Architectural styles
A Call for Architectural Responsibility
For simpler and more affordable houses, there was a general agreement on the appropriate construction methods. However, this consensus arose not from a shared cultural vision but from practical constrains. Chief among these was the climate, which, in the absence of cost-effective technology to mitigate its effects, significantly influenced the practical approaches to building walls, designing roof pitches, and finishing facades.
Nowadays, we are more focused on achieving materialistic goals rather than appreciating the aesthetics and sensory experience of a building—an aspect that once left us in awe. As construction methodologies advance, there is a growing need for solutions that bridge the gap between efficiency and thoughtful design. One example would be Architectural BIM (Building Information Modeling) as it enables architects to visualize intricate details of a structure and verify if a proposed design is financially and temporally feasible.
We should reinforce responsibility to the field of architecture, the land we design on, and the trees we build around, it calls for a much-needed evolution in our thinking. It urges us to seek a meaningful alternative to our current practices and mindset, striving to create the highest and most intelligent form of happiness.
