The following is purely reflect my own and personal point of view on the brilliant architect Izosaka Arata

and this written without any thought of further discussion.

I believe you already have a pretty fair share of what is great about Izosaka, that why I'll share what I do
not like about Izosaka's architecture.

The most manigficent and perhaps one of the most important notes about Izosaka is how his works defy
any categoriztion, and how he defies label, refusing to apply any form of signature in pursue of context
and site optimization. Though deeply respect that philosophy, it is also where I disagree. Categorization
is a mean to pass down the collective knowledge for the next generation, which the next further
developed and perfected than the last. Izosaka's works are so personal, so localizated, that they couldn't
be belong to any schools. When you see a building you haven't see before, you may think: well this looks
like something Tadao Ando would do, or this feels like Zaha Hadid's work,...but it'd be pretty hard to
know if a building designed by Izosaka if you haven't known that already. This in turn, gives his next
generation a hard time carry on his legacy, there is simply no formula, only philosophy.

Let's have a look back on general cultural of passing down knowledge from East to West. Asian people
generally leave the knowledge in songs, poems and riddles, only people who designated to understand
can understand, it is the hierarchical inheritance at work. While Western country use formulas,
categories, and written in a way for popular accessibily. And so they sailed the sea and dominated the
sky while we, with our strong and proud culture, start to read their books.

Architecture should be categoried, and should be easy to understand, fast to reproduce and simple to
develope. We saw the seas and great tribes formed nations to conquered the vast oceans. We saw the
moon so mankind reached the stars but the comos await. Modulazation and globallization are what
modern architecture should be heading.

We have air-conditioning devices to standardized our living and working enviroment. We developed
international regulation and adopted codes so that the spaces we design can now be comfortably inhabit
by, not specific to any races, nor any genders, but all humankind. All that would grant the architects
more freedom to practice their creative works without to much worries of solving site specific problems?

AI reword:

The subsequent statements are a reflection of my own personal views and opinions on the renowned
architect Izosaka Arata. I will convey my criticisms without any deliberations. While I presume you
already have an adequate understanding of what makes Izosaka's works exceptional, I will share my
apprehensions regarding his architectural style.

One of the most remarkable aspects of Izosaka's designs is their resistance to being categorized, as well
as his reluctance to sign and label his work. Although I deeply admire his philosophy, I disagree with it.
Categorization is a means of passing down collective knowledge from one generation to the next. Each
successive generation advances and perfects this knowledge beyond that of its predecessors. Izosaka's
designs are so personal and localized that they are almost impossible to categorize within any recognized
school of architecture. When one sees a building for the first time, it may resemble the work of Tadao
Ando or Zaha Hadid, but it would be quite challenging to determine if it was designed by Izosaka. This
makes it difficult for future generations to carry on his legacy. There is no formula, only a philosophy.

A glance back at the prevailing cultural practice of passing down knowledge from East to West reveals
that Asians frequently impart knowledge through songs, poems, and riddles. Only those designated to
understand can comprehend this hierarchical inheritance. Conversely, Western countries employ
formulas, categories, and language that are easily accessible to the general populace. Thus, they were
able to sail the seas and conquer the skies, while our powerful and proud culture still struggles to
comprehend their literature.

Architecture should be categorized, comprehensible, easily reproducible, and straightforward to

develop. We have witnessed the seas, and great tribes have formed nations to conquer the vast oceans.
We have observed the moon, and humankind has reached the stars, but the cosmos remains elusive.
Modern architecture should be moving towards standardization and globalisation. We have standardized
our living and working environments with air-conditioning devices. International regulations and codes
have been established, allowing spaces to be designed that can be comfortably inhabited by all
humankind, irrespective of race or gender. This would grant architects greater creative freedom without
the burden of solving site-specific issues?