Structuralism

To begin, I wish to quote my fellow classmate, Chrissy Short: "There seems to be many thoughts on the idea of structuralism and not one clear definition."


I completely agree with Chrissy and that there doesn't seem to be one solid idea about structuralism, the thoughts on structuralism seem to be blurred.  I do like the definition presented in the readings: "Structuralism is a way of looking at the world that focuses on the recognition of permanent structure and the relationships between them." What seems to be confusing as well while reading about structuralism is the difference in what is thought to be structuralism and post-structuralism; however, in reading through our selected essays, I find a recurring statement that signifies the difference between these two.  I conclude from the readings that post-structuralism in merely the opposite of structuralism and its main focus is that anything in design goes. "The architect is no longer responsible to his or her audience...people can respond to however they wish." is the quoted words that I see fit to best describe this period. 


As a student, I really want to express my dislike for the structuralist/post-structuralist studies.  Furthermore, I am a student at Louisiana Tech where we seem to be a more theoretically-based institution that focuses more on conceptual design than pure functional and perhaps even "green" buildings.  With this being said, I firmly believe that concept is the driving force behind a building and it molds what a building becomes.  I believe that concept is mandatory in architecture and without it a building is meaningless, regardless of its beauty.  What structuralism seemed to do was ignore all existence of a concept and all of its inhabitants.   Structuralists seemed to be only worried about how to make a building strong and ever-lasting.  Thinking of what the structuralists did in regards to design is embarrassing to the field of architecture.  Buildings require structure that is planned to last forever, but why ignore all concept and the experience of inhabitants?


Even though I do not agree with the structuralists' practices and design methods, I do believe that structuralism is mandatory for us to review and study.  I believe that buildings should be designed with the intentions of being ever-lasting as structuralists tried to accomplish, but I believe that once you begin to focus on how to make a building last forever while still being directed by a concept you begin to make a sound project.  Once again, without concept I feel a building is meaningless. 


 I view the building below (the Pompidou Center) as a building that focuses on structure, but contains a concept and helps focus on the inhabitants simultaneously.  This building is considered a high-tech design, but it shows small characteristics of structuralist architecture, with how much concern is shown in the structure of the building.