Para uma arquitectura adequada ao Homem, ao Lugar e ao Tempo

Abstract

The difficulty on defining 'good architecture' or quality architecture is inherent to a process that involves a unique and personal opinion on the subject because it stems from the difficulty and complexity of description of an architectural work, a challenge notwithstanding to the existence of abundant theory and criticism produced since Renaissance, with identical goal. The definition's difficulty comes from the fact that architectural work is simultaneously art, technique and science. There are a multiplicity of approaches whose diversity arises from the fact that some contents are based on predominantly stable areas (such as technical and economical regulations) and other contents are based on a wider concept of architecture, city, aesthetics, ethics, and even building sciences. Any absolute rule to make architecture would run the risk of impoverishing the work since its spacial composition would become predictable, answering primarily to particular epochal circumstances, without considering the global reality that supports each context. However it was always the mankind itself demanding and making the approach to a definition of quality in architecture. A conducting line by means of which one could regulate, not only through mandatory rules but also through methods and assumptions which sustain and support the options of the architect. Architecture as an artifact and intrinsic to the human nature and condition seeks to answer the needs of psycho-physiological and social questions respecting the place where culture and memories are integrated. It's in the search for the answers to the previous questions concerning an Architecture for mankind, in a Place and in a Time that this reflection is developed. It's believed that with this uptake, architects demonstrating greater or lesser commitment to the Vitruvian three premises, seek to lead the function, structure and aesthetics to create a way for a more real and time-less architecture.