thought entry #03

A --> B

"The only thing getting in the way between point A and B, are buildings."

A notion of unimportance, unless of course you are an architect. Much like a thing I realized a few years ago: the best places I like in Toronto aren't actually designed by interior designers (e.g.- Sydney's, The Hoof/The Hoof Cafe, etc.)

The quote itself carries relation to a discussion I was having with an architect last weekend at a friend's party. I've noticed that many partners at architecture firms don't actually have an architecture background, but rather a landscape architecture and/or urban architecture degree/masters... Thus, my point was that it is possible that the understanding of the negative space (i.e.- landscape and urban) is more important than the positive (architecture) itself. Architecture is after all, simply sculpture. Moreover, landscape and urban design seems much more difficult because of a (more-or-less) two dimensional limitation, not to mention extremely drastic differences in programming.

To relate back to the quote itself, is it A or B that is more important or more memorable than the path itself? OR is it vise versa? It would seem both are equally important. But as sculpture, I believe, is something which is an inherent ability and understanding of form and proportions, a study in landscape and urban design would seem to be more necessary than the latter.


That night, I finished my point and silence floated between us. The architect stood there without reaction or expression, seemingly stunned...
whether because of the point itself, or the fact that it was coming from an interior design student, I am not sure.