Now that both of the people that have read my previous post have had time to think about Dr. Seuss and those crazy buildings he used to draw, I’d like to ask you: Do you think those buildings would be practical and functional in this world? Probably not.
I was talking about the current state of the Republican Party in this country with a buddy of mine and he asked me a question that I haven’t been able to stop thinking about; “What comes first – Function or Form?”
Instinctively, my answer was that function should precede form (thinking in terms of my industry – engineering/design). After all, what good is a beautiful building or piece of equipment if the design that it originated from failed to consider the necessary function?
Still confused, I asked my friend to tell me where he was coming from with regards to the question.
He began by talking about the embarrassment Republicans were recently subjected to during the elections (both on the Federal and State levels). We talked about candidates that we thought should have received nominations during the primaries. It was agreed that there seemed to be true "Republican" candidates in contention for their party’s nomination during the primaries, but failed to receive the nod. Why were they beaten out by opponents with a less "Republican" record? Why were they beaten out by opponents that may have just seemed more “appealing” on a superficial level?
He made the case that in today’s political atmosphere, it seems more important to look “cool” instead of having the experience and ability to perform any necessary function while in office.
Is that where we have found ourselves currently? Has the “Reality Show” mentality overcome our sense of responsibility? Are we more worried about an outward appearance over ability to function? Are we living in a Dr. Seuss book?!
I’m going to leave this open for any discussion/comments for the time being. Do you agree? I don’t think that there is much debate over the function and form issue. I think the question comes in as it pertains to today’s political atmosphere.
AL
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This is all very true. We live in an age of utter narcissim, style over substance, and status updates. Not to mention attempts at instant stardom via youtube.
ReplyDelete"If tv had existed FDR doesn't get elected." is a famous quote. Image is everything. We have a populace that is more concerned with what color underwear a celebrity wore to the Oscars than we are at character and substance. Its 50 years of TV blasting us with 30 second clips of perfect whatever...
ReplyDeleteIt is also why the "leaders" in many cases irrespective of party affiliation act and lie and cheat and operate with impunity and without accountability. You used the likeness of engineering AL and to use that, it would seem that should the from be outside the code and outside that which the function can support or was meant for great danger arises. When building and engineering there are plans and functions drawn, and as it goes along inspections. In your line of work, if on an inspection, something is found to be outside of the function, what is done?
ReplyDeleteAL, your point is well made. The analogy to Dr. Seuss’s architecture is colorful.
ReplyDeleteI would comment that the ‘form v. function’ argument is not a dichotomy. Both are important in defining value. While function is rationally apparent, form is subjective and might fit a number of favorable or unfavorable characterizations. You will admit that your confidence in a presidential candidate might wane should he not appear as professional as the office might require, regardless of his functional success. The argument should be made that we allow form to be defined by the mainstream media and popular culture. For example, where once, Romney’s form; tall, handsome, educated, wealthy, successful, Christian, might have been the favorable difference in conservative circles in a close campaign (afterall, these are values we should all aspire to), now characterize him as greedy, slick, manipulative, and radically religious (aspiring to these values now is not politically correct). We all know that this definition of his 'form' is untrue, but the media has made skeptics of even the strongest conservatives. Functionality will always be a positive characteristic, but what will define success in the conservative movement will be an ability to rebut pop culture’s negative characterizations. We’ll need someone who can take the pleasure from pop culture to define their form, or render form irrelevant.
Maurice,
ReplyDeleteI agree with your comments. I should have been clearer in my posting that I’m not arguing a dichotomy of form and function, but rather their appropriate order. It seems that things are done backwards these days. Form is necessary but only on a foundation built on proper function; not the other way around. Don’t see too many houses standing upside down in our neighborhood do we?!
The comments in response to this topic have all been very insightful and are much appreciated. Keep ‘em coming!
John,
ReplyDeleteIn response to your question/comment; it is true that in the construction/design industry in general, there are codes that dictate what can and can’t be built. There are also standards published which describe how to actually build what has been designed. Before designing or “forming” plans for a building (or anything else for that matter) a desired “function” needs to exist. That function must be kept in mind throughout the design process; otherwise you will have a functionless product and a very unhappy client. Great point.
AL
So then riddle me this... I have a slab of concrete in my back yard. I would love a nice big shed on it. When deciding on the size of the shed, I learned that the "code" of my municipality says in order to have the size I want, I should have poured footings. In this scenario, what dangers do I potentially risk by ignoring the "code". And how does "code" fit in with the function and form?
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Mo's comments above, it would appear that much like people like different "forms" of houses, the function would suit the basic needs of all for shelter, regardless of the form. So form is rather subjective as it would appear. Function however is less ambiguous. And so I pose, gonvernmentally speaking, what is the function, what is the form, and what is the code?