Frances to William and others...
The philosopher Paul Weiss in 1961 published a pair of small
books entitled "The World of Art" and "Nine Basic Arts" which may
deserve some consideration in regard to theorizing about
architecture. In his sorting of these fine arts he lists
architecture to be only an art and the first art in line, which
is intriguing. He also holds that architecture is the sole art
that all other art gravitates toward, for which it is a bounded
or enclosed arena; and that it is the one art that cannot be
ignored. He further holds architecture to be the natural
construct of intelligent human action, and cultural yet social,
but in the least tribal or familial, yet not necessarily
institutional or industrial. The variables mentioned by him that
affect modern architectural design are mathematical, formal,
spatial, material, technical, tactical, mechanical, territorial,
environmental, structural, organizational, functional, financial,
contractual, legal, and national. It is assumed by me that these
variables in a greater totality would tend to impact on the
aesthetic qualities or artistic properties of the projected
architectural object, by perhaps diminishing say its continuity
and beauty and purity and unity. The design of the project must
therefore be divided by the variables. Among other observations
he makes in his book about architecture, he strongly suggests
that the field urgently needs laboratories with instruments where
scholars and students can engage in empirical experiments with
those aspects and entities and variables that impact mostly on
the profession. According to him, learned persons should
furthermore be engaged in such curiosity and inquiry and
discovery for its own sake solely alone, without any other
ulterior reason like deity or polity, thus expecting nothing in
return for the effort. This thesis today seems at first to be an
ideal fantasy and perhaps rather naive, but upon reflection it
does have some merit and worth, especially when considering the
narrow university curricula now prevalent in architecture. My
point here is that this kind of philosophy, if still held in some
regard, is merely one source of information to probe in tackling
the thorn of assaying and assessing and essaying architectural
theory.
