Over the past few decades, architecture as an idea and practice has increasingly limited its definition of itself. In the foreseeable future, the instrumentality of architecture in effecting actual change ― that is, change that challenges the dominance of commercial institutions, their aims, and values ― will diminish. While the present day seems to be a time of unparalleled innovation and freedom of choice, the reality is that architectural styles and forms are often the attractive packaging and repackaging of the same proven, marketable concepts. The speed with which “radical” designs by celebrity architects achieve acceptance and popularity demonstrates that formal innovation has itself become an important commodity. However, beneath the cloak of radicalism, the conventions of existing building typologies and programs, with all their comforting familiarity, still rule ― and sell. What is needed desperately today are approaches to architecture that can free its potential to transform our ways of thinking and acting.

* cloak: 망토 ** typology: 유형학

Seemingly innovative, architecture has actually become  (A)  in its own convention and commercialized environment, so efforts should be made to  (B)  its power to change us.