The article points to a questioning of what we are doing as current architecture in the country and not only that produced by architects but by other professionals or not, since the reality is that only a minuscule percentage of what is built in Peru It is the product of architects.However, we want to encourage the discussion of the approaches presented or those that have not been included (which are many) in order to provide the theoretical concepts of a reaffirmation of values more in line with the times and the reality of the country, taking an interest in that large mass of inhabitants to whom thearchitecture. Likewise, it is not desired that having referred to the main aspects of architecture on a theoretical level, that is, function-form-structure, this means that they are separate factors. Nothing more wrong.We reaffirm that they are interrelated factors with an undeniable interaction, only that for greater clarity they are discussed separately, but that undoubtedly each one is a consequence of the other and vice versa. It will be enough for the author to feel that he or she has contributed at the end of reading.modestly to its objective, that is, to questioning. To talk about contemporary architecture in Peru and logically in Lima, mainly, we must first consider what we mean by architecture and then with the addition of contemporary.
The paper briefly outlines the nature of contemporary Architecture Education in India and its present challenges with theoretically feasible solutions. It explores in detail the arduous position of architecture education owing to, privatization of higher education institutes in India, every changing demand of the technology driven industry and discipline, along with regional and cultural resources that should be explored academically for the enrichment of graduates. With the government's education policy of supporting privatization, a comprehensive role for the regulating body of Architecture Education becomes imperative. The paper provides key insights through empirical research into the nature of these roles and the areas which need attention in light of the problems. With the aid of critically acclaimed education model like Design Build, contextual retrofits for Indian institutes can be stressed for inclusion in the curriculum. The pairing of a private institute and public industry/research body and vice versa can lead to pro-economic and pro-social research environment. These reforms if stressed by an autonomous nationwide regulating body rather than the state will lead to uniformity and flexibility of curriculum which promotes the creation of fresh graduates who are adaptable to the changing needs.
The article considers the architectural works designed and realized in contemporary Serbian architectural practice in the context of questions and thinking about local-global but also of visible tendencies and dilemmas, that the architects deal with in smaller local environments like in Serbia, from the position of architectural historians, theoreticians and critics. The multi-layered, often vague double meaning and nuanced ties and interpretations of the mentioned relationships will be traced in the works of such important Serbian architects as I. Antić, M. Jovanović, B. Petrović, D. and M. Marušić, S. Krunić, I. Marić, B. Mitrović, I. Rašković, who were chosen in order to trace the line of developmentof the relationship between the local and global during 1950 ‒ 2000, theperiod which was also marked by turbulent social and political changes.
The focus of this article is on the role of the transnational capitalist class (TCC) in and around architecture in the production and marketing of iconic buildings and spaces, in global or world cities. The TCC is conceptualized in terms of four fractions: (1) Those who own and/or and control the major transnational corporations and their local affiliates (corporate fraction). In architecture these are the major architectural, architecture‐engineering and architecture‐developer‐real estate firms. In comparison with the major global consumer goods, energy and financial corporations the revenues of the biggest firms in the architecture industry are quite small. However, their importance for the built environment and their cultural importance, especially in cities, far outweighs their relative lack of financial and corporate muscle. (2) Globalizing politicians and bureaucrats (state fraction). These are the politicians and bureaucrats at all levels of administrative power and responsibility who actually decide what gets built where, and how changes to the built environment are regulated. (3) Globalizing professionals (technical fraction). The members of this fraction range from the leading technicians centrally involved in the structural features of new building to those responsible for the education of students and the public in architecture. (4) Merchants and media (consumerist fraction). These are the people who are responsible for the marketing of architecture in all its manifestations. (There is obviously some overlap between the membership of these fractions.). My conclusion is that many global and aspiring global cities have looked to iconic architecture as a prime strategy of urban intervention, often in the context of rehabilitation of depressed areas. The attempt to identify the agents most responsible for this transformation, namely the TCC, and to explain how they operate, suggests that deliberately iconic architecture is becoming a global phenomenon, specifically a central urban manifestation of the culture‐ideology of consumerism.L'article porte sur la classe capitaliste transnationale (TCC) au sein et à la périphérie de l'architecture, et sur son rôle dans la production et la commercialisation de constructions et espaces iconiques dans les villes mondiales ou planétaires. Cette classe se conceptualise en quatre fractions: (1) Ceux qui détiennent et/ou contrôlent les principaux groupes transnationaux et leurs sociétés affiliées locales (fraction économique): En architecture, il existe de grands cabinets d'architecture, d'ingénierie en architecture et d'architectes promoteurs immobiliers. Par rapport aux grosses sociétés multinationales de la finance, de l'énergie ou des biens de consommation, les recettes des plus importants cabinets sont assez faibles; pourtant, leur place dans l'environnement construit et la culture, notamment en milieu urbain, compensent largement leur impact relativement mince sur le plan financier et économique. (2) Les acteurs politiques et bureaucratiques de la mondialisation (fraction étatique): Il s'agit des politicients et bureaucrates à tous les niveaux de responsabilié et de pouvoir administratifs qui décident effectivement de ce qui est construit et où, ainsi que de la régulation des changements apportés à l'environnement construit. (3) Les acteurs professionnels de la mondialisation (fraction technique): Leur diversité va des techniciens de renom, surtout impliqués dans les caractéristiques structurelles des nouveaux bâtiments, à ceux qui sont chargés d'enseigner l'architecture aux étudiants et d'éduquer le public. (4) Marchands et médias (fraction consumériste): Ce sont les personnes responsables de la commercialisation de l'architecture dans toutes ses manifestations. Ces quatre fractions présentent bien sûr des intersections. On peut déduire que bon nombre de villes planétaires — ou aspirant à le devenir — ont opté pour une architecture iconique comme première stratégie d'intervention urbaine, souvent dans un contexte de réhabilitation de zones en déclin. Identifier les principaux agents responsables de cette transformation (la TCC) et expliquer leur mode de fonctionnement conduit à suggérer qu'une architecture délibérément iconique devient un phénomène mondial, plus précisément une manifestation urbaine essentielle de l'idéologie‐culture du consumérisme.
