It is more important for a building to serve a purpose than to look beautiful. Architects shouldn’t worry about producing building as a work of art. Do you agree or disagree?

In

this

day and age, whether constructing

buildings

to cater for the basic needs or the aesthetic needs of people has sparked a heated debate. I am of the opinion that it had better strike a happy medium between the workability and

beauty

of the constructions. Compelling arguments can be proposed that there are myriad merits to the notion that accommodations should afford the fundamental requirements of their settlers. In the

first

place, Considering the need for shelter according to the pyramid needs of humans, houses have to offer the highest level of safety. Essentially, whatever your house is beautiful if you suffer from the lack of safety it would be good-for-noting. In the

second

place, more gorgeous structures have more cost of maintenance. ,

Consequently

excessively attaching emphasis on having more handsome

buildings

people's affordability can be lowered.

Finally

Add a comma

,Finally

show examples

yet importantly, the main and foremost purpose of purchasing a house is nothing but relief, convenience, and security that just can be provided by indoor facilities rather than the glamorous facade of the building. In fact, the most glamorous facade would be a merely significant contribution to the

beauty

of the neighbourhood and the city serving no purpose regarding the peace, convenience, and comfort of the residents.

On the other hand

, improving the cityscapes is directly contingent on how much time architectures expend on beautifying the

buildings

.

Although

some purposes like safety, security, and convenient amenities should be received the top precedence, it is undeniable that the beautiful surface of the building or architectural interior design can make people feel refreshed, and rejuvenated.

For example

, exercising different architectural designs or some periodical renovation in the construction are highly required to take settlers' minds off the monotonous interior and exterior design;

Therefore

, discounting the significance of architecture to the

beauty

of the

buildings

and pursuing lifelong accommodation in an awful house comes about with nothing other than depression, contrary to the sustainability that would be guaranteed by attaching rational remark to architecture artworks in every place of houses. In conclusion, having considered the above-mentioned arguments, I am convinced that having houses well-balanced in terms of captivating

beauty

and amenities makes life more sustainable.