|
83. “We shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us.”
Explain what you think this statement means and discuss the extent to which you do or do not agree with it. Support your views with reasons and/or specific examples from your experience, observations, or reading.
Recently there is a debate over whether we shape our buildings and afterwards our buildings shape us.Some people assert that we do shape our buildings and then our buildings shape us while some people hold the opposite opinion.As a matter of fact,the issue of whether we shape our buildings afterwards our buildings shape us is a complex and contraversial one.Different people hold different views due to their distinct backgrounds.Therefore,there is not a univeral answer to this question ,and whether one choice takes precedence over the other may quite depend on the specific situation.The decision, nevertheless,is not an easy one to make.Actually,the final judgment should rely on a case-by-case analysis.As far as I am concerned,however,I agree that we shape our buildings and our buildings shape us afterwards.My view can be substantiated by the following discussions.
The first argument that can be presented to develop my position is that we do shape our buildings.A good example may be found in the case that Notre-Dame is now viewed as one of the key defining examples of the style which was to become known as Ile -de-France Gothie,by the early nineteenth century few Parisians valued their medieval past very highly.Interest in the medieval building was largely rehindled by vitor
Hugo's novel Notre-Dames Paris.For 20 years,Violet-let-Duc worked at Nortre-Dame,adding the spire ,concolidating the fabric and replacing missing or defaced sculptures.Under this circumstance,it is obvious that we do shape our buildings.
In addition,there is another reason for me to choose this statement .The reason is not far seek that sometimes the buildings do not necessarily shape us.To illustrate,let us consider that there are always some people who have very different views with other people.They always have much new inspires and thus shape new buildings in the world.For example,Richard Neutra of Los Angeles represents a different tendency in architecture .Pioneer and preeminent experimentalist with modern sythetic buildings materials and rationalized building tecnique ,he is an important figure in American architecture.Hence,another equally imprtant important aspect is that the buildings may not shape us in return.
Admittedly,it may be true that sometimes our buildings shape us in some conditions.However,this alone does not constitute a sufficient support to claim that our buildings shape us.Actually ,these cases are rare and therefore are too specific and too weak to strengthen the view that our buildings shape us.Therefore,the most striking conclusion is obvious that we do shape our buildings but our buildings do not necessarily shape us.
To sum up ,due to above mentioned reasons,which sometimes correlate with each other to generate an integrate whole and thus become more convincing than any single one of them,we may be comforatable to say that we do shape our buildings but our buildings may not necessarily shape us in return,becaue sometimes some people have novel ideas that are completely distuiguishable from the styles of the current buildings. | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-9-14 22:34:00
楼主
