The question of whether architectural creativity is more of an artistic or engineering nature
is one with a long history but also one with no conclusive answer. The art camp would argue
that technology should be treated as a means towards and end, and that technology alone cannot
give meaning to our lives. The engineering camp on the other hand would argue that good
problem-solving results in better ways of living our everyday lives, and that this in turn brings
about a beauty of its own which is beyond that offered by conventional aesthetics of beautiful
objects. This dichotomy, among other things, epitomises the inconsistent relationship between
architectural design value systems and those of other arts for although they share certain concepts
about beauty and the role of each discipline’s creative products in enhancing their audiences’ and
users’ lives, the influence of other ‘outside’ disciplines on architecture and other more applied arts
can have an effect on diverting their value systems. Put differently, architectural value systems do
not consistently parallel those of other arts.
This paper looks at some key moments in modern architectural history to show the degree
to which architectural value systems share—or otherwise—the values of the other arts and then
extend the survey to the present-day emergence of environmental ethics in architecture. It argues
that the factual, non-ideological sound of environmental ethics may be promising, but it also
signals the arrival of another period of drifting architectural and artistic value systems: one in
which, perhaps not for the first time, the ethical is not invested in any kind of semantics and
aesthetics of the product itself, but in the processes of its formation and, importantly, in the lifeenhancing
possibilities of the work.