The recent jury of third year architecture has been very ridiculously dwelling on mannerist mode where idea of built form is pre-determined. The any variation from pre-determined form is succumb to severe criticism. I personally believe that we are jumping directly to the manifestation & not through the filter of inquiry. The manifestation can be anything, slight skewed geometry is not necessarlly mean quality architecture, or exotic materialism that percolates through recent architecture also does not mean quality architecture. Here, my argument in first paragraph of fashion design being less dense a artform due to its weak representational commitment is seem to merge with architecture beyond any recognition. The publication & media attention that architecture gets is detrimental to the discipline. The recent visit to BAS also confirms my notion that good institute refrain itself from any such deviation. We need much stronger critical theory to bring architecture where it belongs to, or i fear, if thats the course of future than media determines what is good architecture. In such case than media would flourish, architects would flourish, & collective mediocrity would flourish.
ARCHITECTURE & FASHION DESIGN
All design disciplines are art form & have few things in common. However there is a difference between architecture & other design discipline is that it has stronger representational demand than rest. As one move away from architecture, art, literature, the representation becomes less dense or may not exist.