Any opinions? Something I picked up was...... Is architecture an art or not?
Well, taking up this line of questioning.... I do think that almost all of Mr. MacMahon's Architecture displayed one very interesting characteristic, which may have been thanks to a background in art and crafts. In a painting, nearly every detail, every colour, texture, square inch is considered. I was once shocked at seeing the Mona Lisa in reality, by how small it really was. Yet its image seemed to be so universal. I have to say, I haven't encountered this way of looking at architecture so much before.... but it is interesting.
How every little sketch done on week 1, when 'throwing about ideas', finds a relationship to a very slick presentation graphic - which was done at more cost, time and effort to benchmark that 'little idea'. How every detail in the finished work, relates back to the 'concept' in some way. How even the section of Croke Park Stadium could be compared to the clay pot, which was carefully created by a potter. In some way, in this case, architecture was
an art.... because like in a good painting, every area of the canvas was not just 'incidental'.
In fact, this all fits rather neatly into my own impression of architects, who are individuals capable of looking at the same problem from many different angles. In contrast to any good engineer, who is capable of seeing many different problems from the same angle.
Brian O' Hanlon.