48
GERALD L. YOUNG
will depend heavily on the orientation and training of architectsbeginning today. Necessarily dropping by the wayside will be past
tendencies to build for the rich or to build mammoth ego-satisfying
monuments that stand in splendid isolation with little or no relationship
to scale, surroundings, or nearby buildings. For this transition to be
successful, for architects and others really to be able to design integrated
environments that will be successfully adaptable to the variety of
demands made on them, for this really to happen, it must be preceded
by a number of changes in the training and outlook of architects.
These needed changes can be summarized by stating that what must
be incorporated into the architectural curriculum are background and
tool courses in ecology and in the behavioral sciences. These cannot be
satisfied by in-house training, the students must be required to venture
into other departments for adequate exposure in these areas. Alternatively, departments of architecture must bring on to their faculties,
authorities trained in these areas. Most architects presently on such
faculties simply are not capable of providing adequate training in these
critical areas, no matter how course titles and even outlines are manipulated. This transition means that architects will shape environments
to be occupied by (human) organisms, environments which will in turn
help to shape the behavior of those organisms (cf. Chermayeff and
Alexander, 1963). To attempt to do this without background in understanding the environment, the organism, or the interactions between the
two is nothing short of foolhardy.
Gottlieb’s ( 1965) book “Environment and Design in Housing”
illustrates what is hopefully a transitional phase between architecture
with little environmental concern and architecture blessed by successful
adoption of ecological principles. Gottlieb’s book is a good example of
quick utilization of fad words without backing them with substance. Her
first paragraph defines environment:
The word “environment” is dehed not only as one’s surroundings, but
as all conditions affecting life and human behavior. This book deals with
our physical environment, and its purpose is to show that this environment we each create for ourselves and our families does affect every part
of our lives.
Her definition is acceptable for the word environment (though not for
“physical” environment) but that paragraph, and a few immediately
after it, effectively ends her concern with the environment. The book is
mostly concerned with the “direct way in which the artist may express
himself most clearly”. Only ten pages are given to the city, subtitled
“the total environment”, and that presents only a cursory note on
population growth and urban ((problems”. The bulk of the book is
GERALD L. YOUNG
will depend heavily on the orientation and training of architectsbeginning today. Necessarily dropping by the wayside will be past
tendencies to build for the rich or to build mammoth ego-satisfying
monuments that stand in splendid isolation with little or no relationship
to scale, surroundings, or nearby buildings. For this transition to be
successful, for architects and others really to be able to design integrated
environments that will be successfully adaptable to the variety of
demands made on them, for this really to happen, it must be preceded
by a number of changes in the training and outlook of architects.
These needed changes can be summarized by stating that what must
be incorporated into the architectural curriculum are background and
tool courses in ecology and in the behavioral sciences. These cannot be
satisfied by in-house training, the students must be required to venture
into other departments for adequate exposure in these areas. Alternatively, departments of architecture must bring on to their faculties,
authorities trained in these areas. Most architects presently on such
faculties simply are not capable of providing adequate training in these
critical areas, no matter how course titles and even outlines are manipulated. This transition means that architects will shape environments
to be occupied by (human) organisms, environments which will in turn
help to shape the behavior of those organisms (cf. Chermayeff and
Alexander, 1963). To attempt to do this without background in understanding the environment, the organism, or the interactions between the
two is nothing short of foolhardy.
Gottlieb’s ( 1965) book “Environment and Design in Housing”
illustrates what is hopefully a transitional phase between architecture
with little environmental concern and architecture blessed by successful
adoption of ecological principles. Gottlieb’s book is a good example of
quick utilization of fad words without backing them with substance. Her
first paragraph defines environment:
The word “environment” is dehed not only as one’s surroundings, but
as all conditions affecting life and human behavior. This book deals with
our physical environment, and its purpose is to show that this environment we each create for ourselves and our families does affect every part
of our lives.
Her definition is acceptable for the word environment (though not for
“physical” environment) but that paragraph, and a few immediately
after it, effectively ends her concern with the environment. The book is
mostly concerned with the “direct way in which the artist may express
himself most clearly”. Only ten pages are given to the city, subtitled
“the total environment”, and that presents only a cursory note on
population growth and urban ((problems”. The bulk of the book is