Conclusion

In response to my hypothesis, I have been able to make a clear distinction between sculpture and architecture. Through the further investigation of my aims and objectives, it became clear that to really understand the answers to questions posed I would need to better understand on the aspects of urban planning and the cooperation between building and its surrounding.

The consistent patterns that have occurred throughout my findings are;

Sculptures do influence and inspire the architecture design, especially in shape area.
Architecture is not merely a subject about art, and not blind originality. It blends usability, beauty and economy, which is the result of the delicate balance between art and science.
An architecture need to be designed to take care of user's needs, interests, sentiments and values.

The architecture design should respond to the varied contextual relationships and dynamic conditions of their surroundings.

In conclusion,, sculpture is a property that much architecture possesses, but that does not mean it is the essential aim of the design process (Sewing, 2004, p.6). It is worthless to explore form and do formal experiments as architecture without being aware of human's perception and experience. Architecture is no a pure art, but a multidimensional, comprehensive discipline; the construction of architecture needs to consider the users, the unique local character and the forms inherent in that geographic region.