Architecture and the Conversational Principle

In every aspect of life, there are two ways of meeting:

1.?????Conversation

2.?????Confrontation

I always wondered as to why Architecture resonates through the soul. There is good Architecture that makes conversation, is responsive and full of life with the people living in it, and there exists Architecture that is the least responsive. For me, the former type of Architecture, the one that resonates with the housed souls is what true Architecture should be like.

The building should sit in nature and not overpower it. There is a breathing rhythm to all life on the planet. The rhythm in time, space, place, a crowded street, an empty street, and a plaza, almost every populous and deserted space has some rhythm attached to itself. During all these activities taking place at different locations, with different people, conversations blossoms or wither down.

Every building or structure converses with human beings differently. Some buildings are choked with artificial energy while being completely neutral. Some spaces are so warm and naturally ventilated that the level of active stimulus in humans is far more than any artificially run structure. During such comparisons, we notice how nature plays a vital role in inhibiting people in said space. There has to be fresh air coming inside, there has to be sunlight playing in the corners, there has to be certain transparency between the earth and the envelope we create.

Rigidity and its conversation with people often leave no scope for development. Boxed Rectangular and squared enclosures with their strict lines dictate a certain path that a person is to take. The flow is in a particular direction and has boundaries. On the other hand, if we built organically, there is no firm path to travel and the mind is free from adhering to sternness. This gives rise to the imagination, bidding goodbye to the monotony and lifelessness.

The type of flow and touch of various elements against the human body determines the impact they can have on a person. The feel of concrete under the feet feels more hot and displeasing than a walk in the garden with lush green grass. The walk on the grass is calming and even psychologically proven to have enhanced stimulus. The walk-on warm soil on the beach is equally desirable. Here, the conversations become easier and free-flowing.

The confrontation part in Architecture however is when the Architecture distinctively aligns with the needs of the people. When Architecture confronts the users, it must convey comfort and easement. The solace one finds in a space of his own is something incomparable to the rest of the pleasures of life.

If Architecture exists in these two regards of having accomplished conversations and confrontations, then I believe this would be the beginning of an unending story of life and death, of light and shadows, of transitions and transformations, of spaces whispering blessings, and people growing in abundance.?

-Sakina Josh