I don't see that any buildings should be excluded from the term architecture, as long as they are done properly.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Architecture is restricted to such a limited vocabulary. A building is either a high-rise or a perimeter block or a town house.
I always think of buildings in their settings, but so do other architects.
Nothing requires the architect's care more than the due proportions of buildings.
It's my goal to make a building as immaterial as possible. Architecture is a very material thing. It takes a lot of resources, so why not eliminate what you don't need as long as you're able to achieve the same result?
I love buildings that aren't purpose-built.
I cannot look at modern buildings without thinking of historical ones.
Architecture doesn't come from theory. You don't think your way through a building.
Everyone should be able to build, and as long as this freedom to build does not exist, the present-day planned architecture cannot be considered art at all.
I don't think architecture should be considered as an art form in the first instance. Whenever I say that, it makes people really angry. But this is a very political profession in the Grecian sense. I believe there have to be reasons for every building, and that the ideas should not be self-referential.
It is not with architecture that one can disseminate any political ideology.