Architecture have evolved dramatically over the last century. Yet, some might argue that historic architecture styles posses a unique appearance that had been demolished and ruined by skyscrapers and economical buildings. Plenty of building-construction companies consider the intended use of the building is much more significant over the appearance of it. Although, opinion is strongly divided over this topic, yet, personally, I believe that both matters should be handled equally. In this essay, I’ll lay out the reasons behind my point of view.
For the past millennia, the art of buildings construction always have had a fair portion of attention. From the ancient Egyptians and their Pyramids to Roman theaters to Hindu temples and European churches, all of which have served a great impact on culture and legacy besides the intended use. History have proven to us the great economical value buildings with impressive lay-out brings to its country. Those structures, aside from serving according to a specific use, have benefited tourism industry, consequently, benefiting the country’s economic status. Therefor, the designation value brought to the world by architectures is essential in many levels.
Those who might disagree, argue whether the significance of the design is worth the cost. Commonly, interesting designs are considered for government buildings, companies, and official institutions. At these occasions, it is fair to admit that the design is a vital element of the building construction. In addition, planning a landscape lay out for housing area is also of a great essence to those willing to live there. The well-built lay out attracts potential buyers, therefore, compensating the cost of it.
In conclusion, there is a lot of debate over this topic. Yet, it is undeniable to consider a building design and lay out as an intrinsic component to consider.