Architecture was initially designed to create space. Still, after the basic spatial functions are created, architecture often impacts a variety of other aspects, ranging from society, environment, transportation, to humanities. Having spent several years in architectural study, I was increasingly bothered by a crucial question: what makes an excellent architectural design? Architecture is an extension of human society, and design is an extension of architects. Good architecture should be based on one rationale, whether it is entirely rational or highly sensual.

I was interested in many architectures even before my undergraduate architectural education. In 2012, when I read the news about the completion of the Beijing CCTV Headquarter, I was astonished that architecture could have such a refined shape and sharp design. The geometric folding, the shape, and the structure all impressed me. Throughout my undergraduate education, I felt that the CCTV headquarters was not a failure but rather an amazing breakthrough and achievement. However, the public saw it so ugly that they gave it the name “Big Pants” because of its design like a pair of standing pants, which lasts until today. It was even listed among the top ten ugliest buildings of the year. It was a needle in my feet that people argued that it was irresponsible to design this building, which led me to reflect upon the judgement of architecture. I believe that it is hard to judge whether it is good or bad, but it is possible to examine whether a design is responsible.

The essence of architecture is to provide suitable and necessary space for human activities. Architecture is a comprehensive profession, and self-consistent architecture is well worth the compliment. However, architecture has become a commodity in today’s era, especially public architecture. Its value is reflected well beyond the fundamental demands but in its ability to price the land, city, and users. But such a logic of thinking has largely departed from its essence. Architecture is the impact of reason and sensibility, the collision of function and non-function, where rationality represents responsibility, and sensibility represents irresponsibility. The space of architecture influences people’s physical perception, while the design is further in affecting minds and experience.

Architecture has a critical responsibility as the embodiment and carrier of human behaviors. A “responsible architecture” should consider its impacts on the surrounding community, the shaping of the urban environment, the investigation on sustainable design, the constraints on human behavior. After meeting the basic requirements, responsible architecture pursues a deeper sense of rationality and social responsibility. Architecture is the product and extension of human society, and responsible architecture should also meet the needs of society.

In contrast, there are “irresponsible architectures,” which also have an irreplaceable role in society. Emotions and personalities would dominate their design. Architecture is not merely a human construction; it also promotes an emerging atmosphere. An irresponsible architecture may be questioned for its practical applications, but architecture’s artistic and sensual nature is unleashed in these buildings. These buildings take a different depth in spatial understanding, perception, and aesthetics, which provoke social thinking and thoughts flushing. It is also necessary for society.

The debates around the “Big Pants” and judgment of architecture made me believe that no matter what kind of architecture we see, be it responsible or irresponsible, it is the choice of the architect and the expression of the design. Architecture serves humankind, and in the architect’s perspective, the point of creating an excellent architecture is to smoothly and successfully carry out the interpretation method. Rationality and sensibility may not seem compatible, but as long as one of these qualities shines, the architecture is excellent enough.