Architecture Is The Highest Form Of Art?
The subject of whether architecture falls under the category of art has always been highly debated and argued by academics and philosophers who have contributed valid reasoning as to why architecture is the highest form of art while others provided rational reasoning as to why it is not. In this essay, I will aim to construct a logical argument which aims to understand the theories of philosophers who had an significant influence on the subject, from the first definitive discourse on ‘fine arts’ by Charles Batteux to the deontological ethical theory ascribed to Immanuel Kant, concluding with a personal opinion, with reference to the introductory quotation, on whether aesthetic architecture can be art despite being attached to utility.
When …show more content…
This is a result of architecture having a function, in this case, the basic function of shelter and the protection from the forces of nature which art does not have.
An important distinction can therefore be made between art and architecture. Kant defines the truly sublime as being a natural phenomenon and because fine art is understood as being an imitation of this very nature, what it evokes is merely a representation of the sublime and an emotion or feeling that is associated with it. Similarly, in Charles Batteux’s analysis, he makes it clear that sublimity has little or no place in fine art and also states that “sublimity should not dominate an artwork” (Longinus, …show more content…
If it does not fall completely within the category of art, what should it be considered as? I believe that architecture is the highest form of art, it is an artform that considers function, location, technique, publicness and structural articulation and these characteristics differentiate it from other art forms. (Noero, 2014).
Architects are optimistic artists who believe that their work will improve the conditions of the future through the fulfilment of a certain social and ethical good. They additionally carry the responsibility of legal, technical and economical restraints, as well as a further consideration of the environment when designing. Architects
To an architect, if there is no need, there can be no satisfaction and it is imperative to arrive at a proper definition of the need in question during the initial stage of the design process as this will generate the programme of the building. A design is not the implementation of a solution directly onto a problem but is the interaction of these two elements and the backwards and forwards process of discovery. This intricate process between programme and form is unparalleled to the other arts. (Noero,
When …show more content…
This is a result of architecture having a function, in this case, the basic function of shelter and the protection from the forces of nature which art does not have.
An important distinction can therefore be made between art and architecture. Kant defines the truly sublime as being a natural phenomenon and because fine art is understood as being an imitation of this very nature, what it evokes is merely a representation of the sublime and an emotion or feeling that is associated with it. Similarly, in Charles Batteux’s analysis, he makes it clear that sublimity has little or no place in fine art and also states that “sublimity should not dominate an artwork” (Longinus, …show more content…
If it does not fall completely within the category of art, what should it be considered as? I believe that architecture is the highest form of art, it is an artform that considers function, location, technique, publicness and structural articulation and these characteristics differentiate it from other art forms. (Noero, 2014).
Architects are optimistic artists who believe that their work will improve the conditions of the future through the fulfilment of a certain social and ethical good. They additionally carry the responsibility of legal, technical and economical restraints, as well as a further consideration of the environment when designing. Architects
To an architect, if there is no need, there can be no satisfaction and it is imperative to arrive at a proper definition of the need in question during the initial stage of the design process as this will generate the programme of the building. A design is not the implementation of a solution directly onto a problem but is the interaction of these two elements and the backwards and forwards process of discovery. This intricate process between programme and form is unparalleled to the other arts. (Noero,