Week 9: Reading 01 - Function Follows Form

The Week 9 reading discusses the general process of how architecture is created. The following techniques were mentioned:

• Function maps (bubble diagrams, etc.)
• Envelope (The form)
• Structural elements

It emphasises that function is adaptable so, as mentioned in the title of the article, it has the ability to follow form. One strong aspect that stood out to me was the discussion of the unpredictable outcomes of architecture. The article noted that the people involved in determining what the form should be and what function should be carried out in the form can never determine the outcome as architecture is “ever-changing”.

Cities are also mentioned briefly towards the end of the article in relation to its opposite characteristics to buildings, in that it does not have one function, it is mixed use. Cities were also seen as formless, their organisation being determined by the behaviour of the occupants. In this case, townscape and behaviour were defined as mutually adaptable.

I found this reading to be very interesting as the notion that “form follows function” has been taught to us from the very start the course. Previous assignments had been based entirely around the theory. I’d imagine creating architecture with the notion that “function follows form” could lead to extreme and radical concepts which may be poorly justified with that single theory.

My first impression from reading the title was an article on a new method of architecture that endorses egoism with no reigns. However, the author delves into the adaptable nature of behaviour which shines a new light on the older theory. I agree with the notion that behaviour is adaptable as can be seen in the example of the congregation of people in the foyer area of the Hong Kong Shanghai Bank, given by Yasu in the Week 4 lecture. Yasu mentioned that the architecture, Norman Foster, would not have been able to predict this sort of function and behaviour to occur in this space.

The hall was created for one purpose and now caters to another purpose with the behaviour of the unforseen users adapting to the space. It would be interesting to compare two different types of architecture, one based on “form follows function” and the other based on “function follows form”, in order to gauge each ones degree of success.