Every operative decision in architecture carries within itself a historic judgement and has its value in architectural practice. Every object built, even the smallest house is big enough to hide itself from the views of public and to exclude from the overall life environment. Architecture springs from an entire culture. So let`s help that in every segment of our lives, at least a small progress is made that will leave a trail on architecture and on our environment and our lives.


We cannot separate the present from the past and consider it self –sufficient, nor should one blindly follow the traditions and by that lose inventiveness and progression. Architecture is not a work of one man but of a series of circumstances and demands of time. The principle of values varies in time, even the permanence of some principles wonders among architects and comes back as new and undiscovered.

``To make our way into the future, we must know where we come from, use all that past centuries, so operational in architecture, left us…`` ( Viole Le Dik).

The comments of architecture that follow her in one time always belong to an historical context that partly also define her. So will an author of presented works define himself  to his deeds.

Is theory of architecture only a story of architecture or is it maybe more than just a story? The theory of architecture includes every written system of architecture, in whole or just partial, based on aesthetic categories. Every theoretic system needs to be judged by its views, firstly by asking what it`s goal is?, and then: to whom is it intended? A very interesting view was given by Emil Kaufman and it is that: theory of art by itself is nothing more but an expression of spirit of an age, and its significance is not in the fact that it marks the direction on its time, but that it serves to future generations as a monument of past ideas.

Only in mutual dialogue can flourish both the theory of architecture and architecture itself. Many great architects perceived that, and alongside their architecture, left some comprehensive works, Palladio and Frank Llojd Wright for example.

Etymologically, the word architecture probably derives from a greek compound architecton, the art of building, builder, the way of building, that signifies ancient skill.

Architecture: art and technique, technique and art, both constantly one ahead and behind each other. According to Walter Gropius, art is an enhanced form of  craftsmanship.


Lets not miss and a comment from another angle. For the crisis of architectonic practice, not only their architects are to blame and their theorists, since their freedom is not something that exists by itself, but is dependant of general social movements. Architects can do what society allows them to.


Architecture can be defined as an artistic articulation of human needs for space and elements of space in which creation, the society, the architect and the end user participate. This trinity, their bonds and interaction are vividly depicted by Predrag Milosevic. The freedoms of all three sides in architectonic creation mutually touch and restrain one another (for example: the fruit of chestnut, in its bark contains of three fruits, sometimes equal, sometimes more or less different: if one is bigger, than the other two are somewhat smaller). The optimum for architecture is that freedoms of three sides be equal. If the level of technical and economic development is higher, then the higher are architects freedoms, and of investors and of society in whole, higher are and the possibilities of architecture (the bigger the chestnut, the bigger are the fruits inside it; that is, the bigger freedom of one factor will decrease the possibilities of other two).