... hard to deliver.

... different for the layperson than it is for us.

... something most users don't understand.

... worthwhile.

... something most users aren't willing to pay for.

Good architecture is...like hemroids: you feel that it exists, you just can't find it without some searching, dedication, and a mirror..

good architecture is ... something we better learn how to describe in a positive, persuasive way if we ever want the chance to build some.

But actually -

Good architecture is the feeling that you're in a cathedral, viewing something timeless, innovative, and inspiring.

better

Good architecture is what God would have made on the seventh day. Instead, he took a snooze, and those knuckleheads built a faulty tower to see him.

mm ... ok, now you're veering off into wierdsville again !

your 7:19 post was actually pretty good

Good architecture is also the realization that you could leave your spouse and carry on a love affair simply with the sight of it [good architecture].

Hmmm, how to say...

Good architecture has never been designed by engineers or home builders?

good architecture is limited to a select few people

mm ... i seem to recall that both Calatrava and Nervi are (were) engineers and they both produced what a lot of people consider to be "good architecture" ... you might want to be cautious about absolutes.

architechnophilia --- ah, an elitist has joined the discussion

good architecture is equal parts factual realities (this building works) and emotional/spiritual response ("I feel good here")

If you are able to communicate in words and know what I mean, please clean that up for me.

fro9k ... how about "good architecture feeds the soul while serving the body" ?

...icky

Good architecture is an anagram for "a crutch ride to ego."

Or, a choice otter drug.

puddles ... on a re-read, i agree ... but, why don't you try your hand at this problem ?

It's not a problem, it's a stupid question. Can you define what is a good definition of good architecture? How about a good definition of what a good definition is? Let's be as pedantic as possible, shall we?

Good architecture smells apocalyptic.

"firmness, commodity, and delight"

... what?

Good architecture is not great architecture... get back to work!

ACfA- yeah, that's it !!

architecture is white noise

good architecture is music

i guess anatomical gift's got it all figured out ...

i just love how the inarticulate get pissed because they don't understand the question and then decide the best way to respond is by being a know-it-all arrogant ass

pe·dan·tic: narrowly, stodgily, and often ostentatiously learned

Whoa there buddy. Check yourself.

pe·dan·tic: Characterized by a narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules: a pedantic attention to details.

By using the word pedantic, I was implying that good architecture isn't defined by the semantically challenged definitions presented by halfwitted archinectors like yourself. But instead, by the very real and material condition of building - seperate from the language that we ascribe to it.

Don't get your ignorance confused with my subtlety.

well, good architecture is environmentally sensitive for one
slows down sprawl
stops terrorism and meets building codes

good architecture provides mixed uses and affordable housing for all,
opposes social isolation and provides welcoming streets for pedestrians
while also providing a return on investment for developers

good architecture has to encourage a return traditional aesthetic values

most importantly, good architecture has to promote general social concern and less materialism in young architects

ag may not like my question, but it's still my question

while i can accept that architecture is "defined by the very real and material condition of building - seperate from the language that we ascribe to it" that really doesn't address my point

in the real world, we must communicate with clients and users primarily with words ... especially before the building is finished ... most clients don't "get it" and seem to struggle with the concepts we espouse ... this seem especially true the more theoretical we become ...

i'm trying to have a dialogue here about simple, but powerful, ways to express in words those things we're trying to do with our architecture ... can we do that ?

good architecture can cost $600/sqft, but better architecture can put a roof over the world's homeless.

well, that depends on what the meaning of "good" is.

indeed.

Yes, but please use a good definition of good.

Good architecture stimulates the sences ........an orgasm

good: what i think is worthy.

please define 'i'

please define 'please'

is more than you can afford. so may i offer you this piece of crap.

funcional
smart
complex
innovative
relevant

that's it, 5 is enough for now, 25 would be way too many...

by the way, i know we are not supposed to criticize other people's posts, but puddles:

good Architecture stops terrorism?
good Architecture has to encourage a return to traditional aesthetic values?

uh?

how is it supposed to do that? what are traditional aesthetic values? is a doric tank good Architecture?

good architecture dfies definition

Good is a word like nice, that has almost no specific meaning, except that is is blandly positive.

Therefore most architecture that is built can be described as good- blandly positive.

Incredible architecture is rare, interesting and generally expensive. It costs more to think more, and so it rarely happens, generally making incredible architecture elitist by default, unless a government decides to throw money around towards a specific cause.

i think what's absurd about this topic is that Blue wants a compact definition for something so subjective as What is Good Architecture?

Even without a word limit it is still a loaded question. perhaps the better place to start is to figure out 'What is Architecture?" then it may be possible to start talking about what good architecture is or isnt.

agift and e i think both of you were previously hired by the Clinton Administration to get Bill out of a little bit of trouble with ken star

this post got me thinking, i need to start producing good Architecture myself.
i've been slacking the past week, so i'm gonna cut the posting for a while!


laters!

my god, i'm depressed ... collectively or individually, we seem to have no idea how to express simply what we're trying to do as a profession ... to summarize what we're trying to deliver ... no wonder we have so little credibility with the people who buy and use the facilities we design ...

well that's a bullshit statement.

bluegoose, the problem is that all architecture is an attempt to answer 'what is good architecture?'

you can't summarise the entire history of inquiry into what good architecture is in a 25-word soundbite, as much as you'ld like to. The problem is not with us, it's with your question. (Although you're perfectly entitled to ask).

the only use for soundbites is for sales pitches, wich is a different question. What you're really asking is 'how can we easily sell our services to non-architects?'

one man's good architecture is another man's crime.
-Schimon Zeplenski

"good architecture is"......only relevant to the bourgoise, whose vanity convinces them of their own vacuous self importance. i wish we could delete the now misnomers 'architecture' and 'architect' from our vocabulary, and start talking in different, relevant terminology.

livable