The question is, is it alright for a designer to have preferences or principles or is it better for him or her to be open to everything. For example, I was watching a program on a Lifestyle channel that called for custom made design of a work-satchel for a celebrity. And one segment was selecting the choice of leathers. Now I got thinking. I am against the use of leather for I believe buying and selling of leather leads to illegal poaching thus endangering wildlife and our fragile ecosystem. Sometimes the latest trend in fashion is the use of animal prints or animal leather. The fashion is often for the elite and the affluent who can by all means pay for the extravagance but do we as designers need to take a stand against such design elements? Sometimes a channel that presents a show on saving our wildlife also has a different show, on say, publicizing the latest trend like animal leather, which is contrary to the original program and feature. Is it misleading or hypocritical? Or is it just catering to different audiences? So you watch what you want, what you can relate to and if the program is not to your liking, then switch over.
AS architects, can we be more sensitive to environment? May be convince the client to retain the existing trees and build his establishment around them? AS an architect who also is in to landscaping, I try and retain the trees in a site and design my landscape around it. I can encourage the client to plant more trees in the garden. I have seen huge residence being built covering most of the land available as per FSI and these colossal houses with multi bedrooms serves its purpose only for a short while , like a wedding of an offspring and then lies unused. Demolishing, rebuilding seems like a waste of time, money and resources. Of course, architects involved can’t complain for it means work for us and in turn, profit. But as architects, aren’t we also responsible to our environment and resources? Is it all about making hay while the sun shines? The habit of thinking short term, of current profits and convenience, and sweeping the long term damages under the rug is not the healthiest of approaches, The architect is increasingly assuming the role of a businessman. His responsibility to the society and environment is slowly getting eroded.
AS architects, can we be more sensitive to environment? May be convince the client to retain the existing trees and build his establishment around them? AS an architect who also is in to landscaping, I try and retain the trees in a site and design my landscape around it. I can encourage the client to plant more trees in the garden. I have seen huge residence being built covering most of the land available as per FSI and these colossal houses with multi bedrooms serves its purpose only for a short while , like a wedding of an offspring and then lies unused. Demolishing, rebuilding seems like a waste of time, money and resources. Of course, architects involved can’t complain for it means work for us and in turn, profit. But as architects, aren’t we also responsible to our environment and resources? Is it all about making hay while the sun shines? The habit of thinking short term, of current profits and convenience, and sweeping the long term damages under the rug is not the healthiest of approaches, The architect is increasingly assuming the role of a businessman. His responsibility to the society and environment is slowly getting eroded.
