Hello, i just notice that internet can motive all student do discuss more about architecture. As this site, we create a website for french people http://aroots.org cause be believe in the roots of architecture. We belive in the truth, the vernacular, the site, the place, the void.
We belive in architecture, not the image but above all the essence. We believe in the walls, we believe in the architectural roots.

Does all that means that the french are the only ones who conserve the architecture basical principles ?...

Not really i thing architects like luiggi snozzy (switzerland), Alvaro Siza (Portugal), Edouardo Souto De Moura and many more are in the same way. I just notice that they are different ways, and we are really interested by this way, coz i think this is the eternal way, the way that leads architecture to his essence. I encourage all contemporary architects to think like this.

Siza, Souta de Moura etc, are all regionalists. The relavance of their work at this latitude is debatable. Try the Church de Santa Maria in Dublin or Bomb Jesus house in Donegal, I dont think so.

I don't know if regionalist is a word that really correspond to their idea. Truth, i think is better. Architecture with the research of the truth instead of architecture with the research of the image. But yu right, we cannot escape to the international movement linked to our society, to our communication ( ex: the internet), and it's hard to resist. But i think this our task to give a sense of local culture, of memories to our builings.

see yu!

regionalists?... i think what´s missing here is the basic fact that architecture is directly linked to the site. The comparations you are doing are true but limitaded: think about placing traditional japonese architecture in dublin! of course Álvaro Siza and Eduardo Souto de Moura are regionalists...the site can´t be separated from the building.

I don't think that Alvaro Siza and Souto Moura are regionalist... check out same of their projects in Spain... or the arguments of the projects by the authors!... Popularity (increased by internet for example) conducts less informed minds to seek in a specific solution made by a knowned architect forgetting that the site, the moment in time, the clima, the country, the traditions, etc... aren't the same!

no matter if yu are a regionalist, a japanese, a gehry, a Siza, a Ando, ...etc...architecture id just a reply to a site and to a program. THe builing becomes the meeting point between a site and a programm.
The answer should always work, but the soul that exists in the building, is the hidden face that comes from the culture, the "paradigma", or the philosphy of the architect.
The architect is the orchester of new rules that leads his construction. tThat's why Siza says, "architecture is the art to control decisions".

So what are the good examples of that "goal: Image!" Architecture?! ...

aldesvan, im so sorry to disapoint you but Siza is not the best exemple of successful projects conserning the site, the program and, mainly, the people. I could give you quite a few exemples of some of his works that really dont "work" here in Portugal but the warning goes to all of you who "belive" in authors texts and nice photos in the media, specially on the internet. On the other hand, other less known architects are producing work with much more quality (being "regionalist" or not!)... maybe you schould concern with those.
And Mafalda, there are no good images of Architecture, just nice photos. The best exemples are hard find because they would not depend of a nice picture like everyone seems to think. You have ALWAYS to visit the site, use it, smeel it, feel it and understand how others explore it.
Arch. magazines become almost unsefull but Internet can help us to have a better look (but never total, unfortally).


[This message has been edited by Rita Ochoa (edited 28 October 2001).]

I never said that Siza was the best example, actually :my master is mies van der rohe, and i know what you gonna say about him.
But i just respect Siza for what he did, the way he reach the end of a project. I'm not interested by the image, but i think architecture is a language procuding images of course, but as a language it is more interesting ot learn and to understand the grammar than the words.
right now, i reach what was my question, the new way of communication, coz we are talking together and this discussion is the new possibility that offers the internet. When i meet students, over here in france i feel the lack of discussion about architecture.
who is interested by rules in architecture?