The Aesthetic Experience of the Architectural Work

The question I discuss here is, What is the structure and content of the aesthetic experience of the architectural work? My aim is to focus critical attention on what it means for a building to be a work of architecture. Under what theoretical and perceptual conditions is it possible to experience, appreciate, and evaluate a building as an architectural integrity, in its own terms, without appealing to, or relying on, an external or implied philosophical, ideological, political, or social agenda?1 Again, given an architectural work that sits in a certain place, what this work architecture? I am in search of that aspect, element, or stratum in a building that makes it architecture or that transforms the physical structure of this building into a work of architecture, that is, art. I assume that an adequate analysis of the experience of architecture is the safest road to a reasonable understanding of (a) the nature of architecture, (b) the basis of criticism and evaluation in architecture, and (c) the principles of aesthetic education in architecture.2 For how can we determine whether a building is architecture if we do not know what it means for something to be architecture and if this knowledge is not derived from a serious encounter with architectural works? More