An architect's inspiration or duty, there is a difference. The overlooked designed influencer: Money.
The architect has a vision but the owner has the money. The owner's money comes from various sources that generally fall under two categories: general operations (and its profits) and donations. The owner's general operations define their purpose and the donors tend to identify key stakeholders that are in one way related to the function and impact of a particular owner. I know it sounds a bit convoluted, and if it were portrayed in a diagram it would be one of those circular ones that show the arrows pointing in both directions. In a way the donors are almost like the president's cabinet, they have an immeasurable influence to the general public; only those in certain inner circles can decipher an idea of their true influence and what may end up on the street.
Even though the building will be in the public eye, the public does not have much say into what it will look like, because even if tax dollars are helping pay for it, the public is not the client, nor is it a big $$$ influencer. In the case of donations and their impact the differences between quality and quantity are very blurred.
So the big question is: How much does money and who is providing the money influence the design of a particular building structure?
