Interior architecture and design can easily be confused with interior design, but they are different. Interior architecture and design, just like interior design, focus on the interior space of construction. However, the focus is on the functionality of the interior space rather than the aesthetics of the same space as would interior design (Archareer, 2019). The emergence of the concept can be traced to the nineteenth century through one of Charles Rice, provocative and ambitious title The Emergence of the Interior: Architecture, Modernity, Domesticity where he alludes to Walter Benjamin’s Arcades Project, which states that it was in the late 19th century when the birth of modernity happened that realized the formation of interior architecture and design. However, Benjamin takes scholars back to when the concept was coined in the 1860s when the interior was viewed in double (Keeble, 2008). Interior architecture is an idea now represented in the drawing, photo, or rendered construct and the second side as interior architecture in three-dimensional space. The characteristics of interior architecture working with space made it confusing for the differentiation between interior architecture and interior design. A dolt of the fundamentals behind the interior architectural design was based on structure, functionality, and aesthetics of the space, but when modernity struck in the late 1900s, interior design was carved out of interior architecture to progress as a single discipline concentrating purely on the aesthetics of a space. Other disciplines may have also evolved closely besides interior architecture; including architecture as its discipline and construction, but there evolves another argument as to where should interior architecture fit in in the other major disciplines. Given the scope of the new discipline and its origin, interior architecture and design must fit as a counterpart of the architecture discipline.
The relationship between interior architecture and design and interior design pits interior architecture close to the discipline of art, where it fits comfortably with fine art and visual arts as the definition of space in its interior. Therefore, more of its principles are based more on the visual element of aesthetics rather than the structural and functional ambiguity of the space. Other critics would peg the discipline to be part of the main architecture discipline and should be pursued as a program unit. The argument assumes that although the architecture is focused on the exterior form and space, automatically, the focus caters to the interior space. The consideration for interior architecture and design under the discipline of construction is based on the analogy of the activity involved in achieving interior architecture and design ideology into reality. Its consideration under interior design is based on the viewpoint of aesthetics to organize interior space (Königk, 2011). The emergence of interior architecture and design as a new discipline is likely to pose some challenges but does not warrant it to be shelved in an existing discipline to avoid the groundwork in developing a new discipline. It would rather be developed as an independent discipline that overlaps with other necessary disciplines like interior design, architecture, civil engineering, construction, and landscaped design (Kim, 2014). If the origins of interior architecture can be traced back in history and its existence defined in the duality of space and ideology qualifies the practice as its discipline in modern time. The exploration of the discipline in ancient times proves its individuality as an aspect that can be explored in its singularity. Therefore, there is not any credible reason that interior architecture and design should belong with the other renowned disciplines.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Interior architecture and design is a development of traditional interior architecture practices in the 1800s. The fact that there are feasible points to independently talk about interior architecture states that there is a difference from other disciplines that qualifies it to be an independent area of study. The literature on interior architecture is limited, and the literature available on the subject produces vague information about the discipline making the liquidation of the discipline into other disciplines a logical approach to include it somewhere. However, this assumption does not muffle the fact that interior architecture is discipline-based independently. Just like Benjamin described interior architecture as a double entity in the form of theory and actuality in the same way that modernity should view it. The theory is the part of ideology where a concept comes to fruition when represented on paper or virtuosity. The representation has different concepts that apply to it. These include the rendering drawing, the calculative theorems to come up with a final plan before the actual construction begins. The second part is the space in three dimensions, where the concept or plan achieves its existence in the interior space. This space has different aspects that can be coined as height, width, and length. Other attributes are along the lines of value, line, shape, pattern, tone, and color. The combination of all these attributes is what amalgamates interior architecture. Therefore, the existence of all these concepts in the discipline qualifies it as an independent subject of study. If the same argument can be presented to relevant authorities and bodies, then the conversation on carving a discipline in interior architecture and design can be made a reality.
Interior architecture and design should be a discipline independently considered as an area of study and profession. A challenge in the process is the accreditation of such a discipline to the relevant bodies, like whether the discipline can receive accreditation from Accrediting Commission of Career Schools and Colleges (ACCSC) and other relevant institutions. The discipline’s ability to receive notice and development should be tackled from a scholarly viewpoint where proposals on the making of the discipline independent are invited and involve the stakeholders. From there, all institutions beginning from the teaching institutions, accreditation bodies, relevant groups, and authorities, take part in the development of a comprehensive curriculum that can overlap with other disciplines like pure architecture, construction, art, and interior design. The aspects should also be extended to the professional world so that the discipline can also be considered as a career choice.
References
Archareer. (2019, July 4). Interior Architect Vs Interior Designer // Archareer . Archareer. https://archareer.com/interior-architecture-vs-interior-designer/#:~:text=Interior%20architectural%20and%20design%20concepts
Keeble, T. (2008). The Emergence of the Interior. Architecture, Modernity, Domesticity. Journal of Design History , 21 (1), 112–113. https://doi.org/10.1093/jdh/epn004
Königk, R. (2011). The Embarrassment Over Decoration. Arguing Against Title Change-The Case of “Interior Design”: “Interior Architecture.” 2011 IDA Congress Education Conference .
Kim, M. (2014). The Fusion of Interior/Architecture/Landscape Architecture/Urbanism - Focused on the Conception of Urban Interior -. Korean Institute of Interior Design Journal , 23 (5), 67–75. https://doi.org/10.14774/jkiid.2014.23.5.067
