ArchiMindBlogger

Appreciated, valued 

I create setting 

You create within me 

I am tall and strong 

I stand as a whole 

Almost a sculpture 

But I have further use

Within I hold variety 

Long and short 

Connected or apart 

Loud or quiet 

My many puzzle pieces 

Together create me 

Elements combined 

A skeleton enveloped in covering 

Designed and engineered 

Withstanding all thrown at me

I adapt and convert 

The wind blasts against me

The sun beams down on me 

I keep out the unwanted 

But I need love 

I need care 

I need you 

Without you I crumble 

My puzzle pieces weaken 

My skeleton in need 

Reinforcement and renewal 

Leave me behind 

I crumble 

Gravity pulling me downward 

I fall silent 

The sound that once filled me

Silent as eternal burial 

A pin drop echos 

The wind penetrating 

The sun lighting through 

Hitting spots it has never seen 

I am weak without you 

The engineered strength diluted 

The envelope cracking 

My bones brittle 

The cold cracking my joints 

The heat melting my glue 

The sun glistens on my wetted surface 

My roof like a colander 

The weather penetrating anything it reaches 

At night the critters arrive 

Crawling in through my cracked facade 

My decor falling 

The ground no longer a smooth surface 

What use am I 

Has my purpose passed me?

Will you love and care for me again? 

Are there similarities between the anatomical elements, that is, the ‘essential spaces’ of a building comparable to that of human anatomy? Can we argue that buildings may have a brain, extremities, a heart, circulatory system and so on? Is the way to develop a successfully functioning building to follow human anatomy; that is to say that if the essential body parts are ingrained into the building that the building will hold its function well and adapt successfully to future generations? 

Arguably, the ‘spaces’ of a building do not at all possess anatomical elements but if one were to examine the essential spaces of a building that make it a whole unit, would they not be too dissimilar to that of human anatomy? 

Architecture by definition, is the practice of designing and constructing buildings; but equally, the complex or carefully produced design of a structure of something, such as a body part. Therefore, the discourse for discussion on anatomical architecture in a literal sense is almost inevitable. 

Architecture exists as the result of need from the population that it serves; whilst many would insist that the term architecture pertains only to buildings of complexity (in terms of construction or appearance); however, for the purpose of this discussion the term architecture will include all buildings. As every building is of value to someone or to a group of people, a building’s national status or even community status is not essential for it to be of great value. All buildings have their own functions and purposes, often buildings are constructed with a specific purpose in mind, I.E like a library or school. However, as dynamic as the human body is, populations and cultures are continuously changing; therefore, this places demand on architecture to adapt and evolve alongside these demands. The need for certain types of building within communities is always changing; whilst a library may always remain a library an office building is likely to change purpose through its lifetime.

No matter the purpose or type of building it is one can argue that in regards to architectural elements they all possess anatomical architectural aspects; these are parts they possess to be ‘living’ architecture (not to be confused with living buildings which refers to biophilic architecture, which will be explored later in this blog). Buildings that are used by many members of a community such as churches, libraries and other communal buildings are often regarded as buildings that are the heart of a community. This is because they are considered buildings of increased community value and therefore are often named accordingly as the heart of the community (or specific area, such as a town). 

The future life of a building? : a building’s life?  - 

Is a building complete at the point where the architects and design team have completed the necessary drawings, models and of course completed the construction of the building? Or is it the point at which the building has reached the end of its life and has become derelict with no further use or plans in sight? Is it at the point where it becomes a ruin that it is complete as it has progressed through all the stages a building can, perhaps the end is when it is demolished but arguably a building in ruin is it no longer architecture? 

“A building is only complete when it is demolished” - MS 2022 

Buildings are always built with a purpose in mind, which is taken account of and refined in the design process. Although it is important to recognise that buildings are not static, they routinely change and adapt to fulfil increasing and changing needs of the humans that use them. A building can change with the desires of the occupants or cease to fulfil needs if it is left uninhabited, however potentially even then it will be reclaimed by nature and fulfil some of the environmental needs around it such as wildlife inhabiting it whereby a flock of birds may nest in. The ideal architecture in order for the building to ‘live to the full’ should be adaptable to its users needs, sustainable and face the test of time. For example John Ruskin firmly believed that a building should be conceived not only for current use, but for its future descendants too. 

The way a building is used is forever changing, even if the purpose remains the same. For example, a library will likely remain a library for many years but over time the demands, requirements and interests of humanity will change. This in turn creates demand for architectural changes. In the case of a library, whilst there will always be a need for physical books and records, the demand will likely shift over time toward digital media which will inevitably require architectural changes within the building. Furthermore, the demand for a more diverse and dynamic working space will increase, for example as a result of an increase in the need for newer technologies. Insofar as libraries are working spaces, this shift will affect how buildings are used. 

Libraries are just an example of how many buildings will stray from their original purpose as the need for space and/or different functions will increase through time.  Although the original purpose of the building may forever be told in the fabric (basic structure) of the building the function may change multiple times through the building’s lifetime. Therefore, arguably, a building will only reach the end of its evolution when it is demolished. 

This even includes buildings in a state of abandonment or disrepair, the building continues to evolve and provide a purpose, although arguably this purpose may no longer solely serve humans. The construction of buildings does not solely serve the purpose of providing people with a place to inhabit, but also for many animals. Although often unwanted whilst the building is occupied, once the building becomes derelict, animals such as birds, often occupy in large numbers. Therefore, the building still holds a purpose to serve animals once we have moved out of the building. 

Unfortunately, it is common for buildings of importance to be left derelict for many years, left to rot, to essentially ‘die’ without the care they need to keep ‘living’; they are still valued by communities who fight to bring them back to “life”. Examining a building in the view of human-like qualities one can argue that without necessary and appropriate care a building will fall into disrepair, the most dire of situations especially for a building of considerable historical value (historical value and building conservation to be discussed later in the blog). Often, a building of significant value within a community that has stood through generations providing multiple generations with a purpose and most importantly memories will often be considered the “beating heart” of a community or specific area; some might even argue that a place (city, town, village) is not identifiable as that without this building. 

We as a world-wide population are continually told to recycle; but arguably the majority of materials is in our built environment and not the items that end up in our recycling bin. We are the only species other than beavers to directly modify our environment to create the optimal habitat in which we reside. Architecture is a strong contender in environment modification to suit our needs; we have buildings for every type of need. Whether it be a house, a school, a library or even a prison the building is designed with a specific purpose which does inherently evolve over time but unfortunately some buildings, such as factories inevitably become obsolete, They reach a point in their life where the adaptability on the surface level is no longer possible; although, arguably some buildings are much harder to adapt, convert and repurpose but this is not to say that they should not be. 

Materiality in buildings is extensive, in the structure, the envelope and to the furnishing details, therefore, this should be recycled. The scale of a product or item should not determine whether they can be recycled or not. Repurposing architecture is all over the place, clearly visible in many cities around the world; although it is not only limited to the developed world. However, arguably a repurposing of a building that holds a better range of adaptability is far more simple and does not require the official redesign purpose. 

Some repurposing and regenerating of old buildings is fraught with many and complex design challenges, such as the Shelby vaults under detroit, a bar that resides within an old bank vault, (The spaces). With modern technology and innovative design concepts, no challenge seems too big for the regeneration of our precious and valuable historic architecture. Whilst the cost for regeneration can be costly and often much more so than demolishing and building brand new, how much of our history and stories of previous generations are lost. 

Much like we will ‘upcycle’ old or deteriorating items, such as furniture, we should equally view our old, perhaps now obsolete architecture as an ‘item’ to be upcycled and repurposed. After all, the materials on this planet are finite, recycling should not only apply to small domestic objects but also to our extensive and valuable built heritage. 

Topic to be continued ...

This part of the blog will explore multiple aspects including comparing human anatomy to architectural elements (anatomical architecture), experiencing architecture (driving an experience in architecture), human-centric design, the completion of a building (future life of a building), new social dynamics in post-pandemic architecture and what does architecture need to consider for the future. 

Anatomy, commonly regarded as the study of the human body, can also be viewed as an inquiry into the structures and internal workings of something. It is the combination of these definitions that this blog is formed upon; the discourse between our built environment (anatomically) and human anatomy. Human behaviour is continuously changing, evolving and adapting; so, accordingly, our built environment will follow a similar dynamic pattern. Our behaviour and the 

adaptations of a building can be compared almost directly; that is because they are similarly convoluted and complex. 

Arguably given the above definition of anatomy, buildings can be viewed in an anatomical way. The theory of ‘living buildings’ is an emerging theme within architecture, although often referring to nature living within or upon a building for the purpose of this blog ‘living buildings’ will refer to how the dynamism and internal workings of buildings can be interpreted as similar to that of human anatomy. Not only do we experience architecture but buildings also have their own stories to tell. 

Architectural Ruin admiration is not just limited to that of buildings of historical value but also to buildings of more modern eras such as from the industrial age, although these are more commonly displayed in photography and videos by Urban Explorers (Urbexers) who now litter the listings on youtube. Urbex, it seems, has no limits, any buildings that stood with purpose that stand closed, unused, unwanted even and neglected will be explored, admired and documented. Whilst some portray important architectural movements or features others seem more mundane, regular and perhaps arguably uninteresting. However, many believe it is important for all buildings withholding any history should be documented, explored and showcased; their inhabitants long gone but their story told through the construction or arrangement of the buildings themselves. 

Due to the extensive range within this topic it seems wise to split it into separate chapters; different building types or purposes for each section of this topic. Firstly, a personal favourite in urbex are abandoned theme parks. Places in which our dreams and greatest wishes are supposed to come true fallen into disrepair, the dreams long gone and the happiness penetrated by a growing dystopian world in which our greatest fears can be realised. Characters created fir entertainment and enjoyment now stand with piercing eyes and peeling paint leaving eyes ‘bleeding’ and their bright clothes hanging in rags over their robotic bodies. 

Abandoned theme parks are a totally different universe to when they were created with such joy and happiness envisaged. Now expanses of dystopian worlds far apart from what they once were. Despite this, the memories they once gave never die, stories told from generation to generation; especially the local small scale theme parks that were the anchors within small communities. Regardless of whether the downfall was gradual or rapid the impact remains the same, a dystopian world left behind until the day it is demolished; although the terrifying story of their dystopian abandonment is not to be forgotten; immortilised through film and photography. 

A building is never truly complete until it is demolished - a point of demolition is to define the end of a building’s life. Interestingly then if one uses this concept what is the story for a collection of ruins? This supports the theory that a building is not a static element, and that it is one that is dynamic and continually changing, evolving and growing. So, this then begs the question about architectural ruins, where do they lie within this concept. Around the world there are 100s of ruins, both ancient and modern ruins; both nationally and internationally recognised, but lets not forget about those at the local level. All equally telling a historical story, of construction, habitation and especially previous human behavior. Examining various ruins around the UK, there are many churches and other like religious establishments that have been forgotten in time, so does their purpose. 

Looking at ruins in the UK there are many churches and buildings of religious importance that have sadly been left behind although their beauty remains and so does their purpose. Their purpose now pertains to telling their story (happiness in architecture book reference), many ruins are sites of interest for exploring and photography and whilst not every visitor may appreciate them for their historical architecture, it is all there to be seen and admired. Their story can be told through the remaining architectural fabric. 

English Heritage along with other organizations exist to maintain both functional buildings of historical significance. This is what has driven the need for grade listings for buildings of historical significance; to preserve buildings of exemplary standard of a certain design or feature. This is critical in the teaching of architecture, now and for future generations as architectural styles and technologies get left behind for new. It is important that these are not forgotten and that architecture students and professors as a culture learn from these and encourage these designs in the future. 

Some of the internationally recognised buildings … or indeed ruins are arguably still holding a purpose although it is far from their original purpose, their built purpose shall we say. The completion of a building not only refers to the completion of its use but more so the completion of its life. A building’s life only reaches completion at the point of a demolition; ruins of a building can stand under careful protection and conservation for many years to come. 

Whilst many ruins, or restored ruins such as castles are tourist hot spots, which are a positive for the national economy but it is important not to forget ruins within the local context. For example, buildings that lay within rural towns/villages that are valued by many of the local community often as a hiking/walking location. The Cotswolds for example, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) has numerous ruins that lay within the rich countryside which are enjoyed by local communities, for example Minster Lovell Hall and Dovecote and the Roman Villa located in the small village of North Leigh. Having grown up in the Cotswold area both of these sites were of regular visitation by myself, friends and family. Their history is told by information boards at the site whilst the remaining architectural fabric tells its own story, you can see where stairs used to be located, fireplaces and of course openings for windows. The story of the buildings and the communities that built and used them can still be explored, the historical importance of these buildings/sites in general has often shaped the growth of the surrounding area. 

In particular, when one is looking at ancient buildings one can learn a lot about historical communities that once resided there. At a time where transport was far more limited, the construction and growth of villages relied heavily upon the resources available locally. This includes but is not limited to availability of water sources and availability of materials. Architecture of that time was made up of the land, that is Vernacular Architecture. 

Whilst the rest of the ship has been converted to a hotel and continues to serve guests staying at the hotel as well as providing tours the first-class pool has become a ruin of its former self. The pool construction was unique (expand here) - therefore its conservation is inevitably convoluted. Arguably the restoration of this magnificent piece of architecture is challenging but predominantly the challenge relates to the costs regarding the restoration to bring it back to its former beauty. In terms of architectural challenge it has been argued as a straight forward project, however as it exists now, can it be considered a ruin even though the architecture that surrounds it is restored and fully functioning although as a new purpose. 

Beauty in ruin, architectural ruins, remains and evidence of past architecture establishment is almost always visible in art. Art often includes elements of architecture as a display of historical elegance. Architectural design is often admired for its creativity and unique elements of elegance, this should not be forgotten upon a building falling into neglect, moreover sometimes the elegance of a building grows as it is reclaimed by nature; this sort of beauty and atmospheres are captured by numerous Urban Explorers (Urbexers) who now litter the listings on youtube. 

However, firstly to admire the beauty emanating from Tintern Abbey in Carl Gustav Carus’ painting. In this painting nature is reclaiming the ornate stonework founded in 1131, built in 1269, although it wasn’t until later that the lavish cloisters were added. However, by 1535 King Henry VIII’s English Reformation was well underway and a year later, Tintern surrendered in the first round of the dissolution of the monasteries and the great abbey fell victim to neglect and became a majestic ruin. Tintern Abbey, although in ruin still remains a highly regarded and well known national icon, therefore arguably proving that architecture is never complete until the point of demolition. The abbey is now maintained in its’ ruined state and admired by thousands of visitors every single year, although its preservation is to maintain it in its’ current state it remains a considerable admirable beauty and will do so for many years to come. 

Carl Gustav Carus’ painting displays the inherent and majestic beauty of the abbey, the light falling through the open windows and archways; thus creating incredible formations of shadows surrounding the historic stone that once provided a building for many generations. Whilst the roof may be long gone and the continual rate of decay challenging the preservation of the abbey the beauty of this marvelous piece of architecture is undeniable evident. 

Tintern Abbey is depicted in endless pieces of artwork, each with their own style but showing the delicate way in which nature is gradually reclaiming this beautiful abbey. All show a relatively similar portrayal of light and shadow surrounding the remaining delicate stonework covered in crawling vegetation. There are endless buildings like this which are enjoyed in a similar way and similarly depicted in artwork, demonstrating our sheer fascination and almost obsession with historical architectural ruin.