Organisation and structure of good taste

Flash Interview with (IT) Architect Jorge Valério Sousa

C — If we built houses or buildings at Celfocus, how would they be?

JVS — I think that the work we do at Celfocus, in what concerns solution architecture is pretty much complete and thorough. Our concern with the details, the final goal and the usability or functionality of something is very clear to us. So I think that the same rigour and concern would be translated into those construction works and at least houses or buildings would be functional, practical and would solve the most relevant problems as would its infrastructures be easy to access and use... I’m also sure they wouldn’t collapse!

C — Architects are often accused of forgetting that houses are for people to live in. How could a similar problem affect IT?

JVS — Those accusations happen when the functional objective of what is being requested is not considered. In my opinion, IT solution architecture needs a strong and practical knowledge on what the problem is and how it should be resolved with a certain solution and system. If key-points are not well interpreted and designed, then the usability of the solution will neither be practical nor intuitive. Thus, failing the final goal… consequently, the door may not open because it is hitting the stairs…

C — What do you find of good or bad taste in Information Technologies?

JVS — Lack of organization and structure. For me, good taste is connected to the simplicity of a solution to solve a complex problem. When we look at what we are doing and we acknowledge that solutions are simple, practical and make sense, then I find that this solution is organized and has “good taste”. If it’s too complex, confusing and hard to understand, giving a sense disorganisation, then I think that this is a “bad taste” solution…

C — A lot of originality – Is it needed in each new project? What should be expected from the Architect?

JVS — Yes. Each project is unique and has a very specific context deriving from many dimensions such as cultural, physical, metaphysical restraints or even specific needs. Although it is important to have foundations and essential values well established for each problem we intend to solve, there is always room for creativity, room to adapt to each reality and to each problem that needs to be solved.

C — What will be the future of architecture, when facing technologic evolution?

JVS — Challenging. Technology never stops. Some of the principles that currently support architecture paradigm will remain the same, but others need to be adapted or even completely replaced in order to be able to solve new problems that rise from that same evolution. Architects need to keep up with technologic trends, to learn and acknowledge those new problems so they can design the solutions that best fit and solve problems in a constant and active way.

C — Who is the Architect, whose work mostly inspires your work at Celfocus? Why?

JVS — The Work that inspires me most is the Roman Colosseum. It inspires me because of its timeless feature. It impresses and inspires me for the vision and timeless solution, and its solid, simple and logic foundations. It’s impressive to acknowledge the problem that was solved by the Colosseum, which was to create a leisure space for thousands of people, promoting the ambience and visibility over the events that happen in the arena, was designed near year 0 (it is therefore a construction Work with over 2000 years). Still, today, it serves as a blueprint for the resolution of other problems in current contexts, such as the Euro 2016 football games. However, as far as I know, the Architect is not known… for me it’s just The Architect.