Perceptions: Which is of greater value?

Just throwing this out there as a debate topic:

What is more important in terms of successful design? Is it public perception or valuation of peers?

A number of projects in recent times would seem to have drawn a divide in opinion among the perceptions of individuals when it comes to defining an opinion on buildig designs.

An example – the Marshes Shopping Centre in Dundalk, becomes the subject of jibes by the design community (incl. architects, engineers, lobby groups) but as a commercial building accepted by the public – is often the subject of praise.

Equally, where Victoria Mills in Cork is often the subject of poor opinion among the public, it is praised by many factions of the design community.

One argument is that members of the design community assess such structures with a professional eye – dictated by their experience, studies, practice development, existing trends and understanding of the involved processes. This is of course relevant – the public may often preceive a building to be of adequate design quality without understanding of say, the underlying, structural problems (just an example)! But in focusing purely on aesthetic perception – should the broader community perception (which exists in the main outside design professionalism) be precendented over professional opinion where a community is satisfied with the outcome of a building’s aesthetic?

Indeed it may be said both opinions are equally valid – but as the inhabitants of a community generally have to ‘live with’ the consequences of or design of a new structure – at the end of the day, which perception is of the greater value?

(And I have considered the argument that if it looks right, doesn’t necessarily mean it is right – e.g. just because the de Haviland Comet had trendy rectangular shaped portal windows on the roof of its fuselage, doesn’t mean it served the aircraft any justice!)

Perhaps the question “which is of greater value?” – is not so much the issue, but rather, which perception should be considered foremost?

It would be foolish to think that the architects made a considered and informed decision to adhere to existing conditions and hierarchy

As an extension of this post – a further issue for consideration – noted in another thread by munsterman:

@munsterman wrote:

architects will give them (developers) what they want

With consideration of this]https://archiseek.com/content/showpost.php?p=3086&postcount=2[/url]

…but if architects only give developers what they want – does that not say little of the professionalism and skill of some of these individuals?

Just thoughts – playing devil’s advocate a little too.