Psychology and Art History

As a student of Art History, I am inclined to write about sustainability and the ‘green’ architecture movement in terms of style, materials and influence. As a student of Psychology, I am of the mind to discuss the human psychological impact of a healthier environment. Still, the extent of my interest in ‘green’ architecture does not end here, as I am also interested in many other facets, which make this blog quite ambitious in scope.

The Art Historian part of me says: Within this green shift, there are multiple approaches possible for cities, and these find their visual manifestation in different ways, aesthetically. First is the Traditional model of sustainability, which has been employed in ancient sites, and the modern reclaimed version upholds the old vernacular knowledge and local material usage. There is no singular Traditional form because it, by definition, uses local materials and specialized aesthetic solutions. Next, the International and Modern styles represent the divorce of nature and architecture; they are antithetical to the concerns of the Traditional mode. Finally, the Eco-Tech, Biomimicry and Biophilic approaches are contemporary movements that aim to keep the focus on technology and form like the Modern/International aesthetic while taking these a step further by giving sustainability a place in cities. Eco-Tech is usually made use of in commercial buildings, and the aesthetic is seen in skyscrapers, especially.

The Psychologist was unavailable for comment, and only able to quote:

"A 2007 survey by the Robert Charles Lesser & Co asked buyers about their attitudes toward green building and their motivations and willingness to pay for green homes (RCLC, 2007). Forty-one percent of respondents reported that they cared about and were willing to pay for the health and wellness components of a green building, even if the costs were not recoverable. This is compared with 18% for energy savings and 24% for the environment." (link)