Sacred and Profane

This lecture class are about Sacred and Profane. They seem very hard to understand and explain. I think I understand the word "Sacred" but I don't understand the word "Profane".

First, I will talk about the word "Sacred". I think about temple and something that people use for worship when I hear the word sacred. It gives us sense of holy. I mean something that very higher value than human. In fact, the sacred is from human beliefs. Mostly the sacred is for the god and and human who used to make a lot of profit to people such as every king in the past. Because of that value, the sacred should not be disparaged.

Next is about "Profane". The meaning of profane is difference form sacred. I think profane is equal with disparage [profane=disparage]. But how do we know what action is the profane.

Such as the Mandarin Racha Devi hotel at Chiang Mai. They use the temple appearance to be hotel so, this are profane and disparage the holy sense of the temple? In my opinion, It's not profane. They just want to use the aesthetic of the sacred for people. At this point, those people are not god and kings who made profit for other people so, this action is not suit for hotel. I think it depend on purpose and intention of people that can tell us what is sacred and what is profane but there are factors that are polite and respect to consider so, this topic very difficult and make me very confusing.

EMPTY FORM

The first time I heard about empty form, I did not think about the space that form is fixed but function could be change to anything. I think about "no form = form".

I have no idea that my understanding is right or wrong. The empty is nothing so, I think the word "empty" has relationship with "Everything is nothing" space itself should not be fixed. It should have the possibility to transform itself to serve or support the function and program that change in the next 20-40 years. In fact, this idea might be only imagination because how can we build the space that can transform itself into other form.

As I said, I don't think that fixed form where the program and function can change depend on user need is the empty form because if empty form has that character, every space can be the empty form? I can change my bedroom into library in the next ten years. My high-school's canteen already changed into teacher room without changing the form so, This is empty form? Now, I'm not sure about what the empty form is. We can make empty form by changing only the furniture? This is very hard topic to understand in this time for me.

other things are about "And architecture / Or architecture" This is hard to know what is one architecture be. It will be and-architecture if the existing function [architecture itself] still remain and new function occur? And if existing function [architecture itself still remain] gone and new function come, this will be or-architecture?