Modern arkitektur i kulturhistorisk miljö

The thesis uses hermeneutical analysis as well as reception and content analysis to interpret a current architectural debate. Within the architectural profession, there is a dogmatic style standard. Since the 1930s, modernism (also known as functionalism) has been the predominating style in architecture. This has led to an open resistance to architectural modernism brought before the public and to some extent the architects that there is no tolerance to other styles or visual expression. The thesis aims to explain what is behind Modernism as a style standard and what the public believes is good architecture. My line of a questioning is as follows: What is the difference between the architects and public’s perception regarding urban regeneration? The debate currently takes place in social media, trade magazines, radio, etc. and describes different views on architectural education and construction, the local councils and the public's thoughts on good architecture. As a foundation for the public's aesthetic preference, I use a doctoral thesis from 2007 by architect Catharina Sternudd. The thesis presents the results of surveys on public opinion about the aesthetic valuation of architecture. My empirical data consists of two current design proposals in the same context, created partly by one of Sweden's top architectural firms FOJAB architects and partly by an architect who is a member of and therefore represents "Arkitekturupproret", an architectural uprising group consisting of the general public who voice their opinions via a website. The proposals relate to the same street building at a demolition site in the center of Lund. Both of the architects were interviewed. I want to compare the public's aesthetic preference to the architectural professions when it comes to new construction in a valuable historical urban environment. The results show that there are differences between the common man and the architects aesthetic evaluation of the urban environment and how buildings are designed and perceived. I want to highlight the problem and create a platform for discussion since I believe that there should be opportunities for more than one dogmatic style in architectur