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

With a building's construction, some people opine that its function should be considered more important than its exterior. Individually, I firmly believe that high rises ought to be attractive in addition to meeting the prime purpose functionality. And this essay will address the reasons for my views as follow. To begin with, a large number of advocates are inclined towards the fact that residential towers’ should be constructed on the principle of utilitarianism. This is because each building has its own practical use, so architects have to design it to satisfy the requirements of the building’s users. For example, a theatre is supposed to have a well-designed sound system and a scientifically-arranged hall so that everyone in the audience can conveniently enjoy movies. Moreover, every construction needs to be safe and comfortable, so that it has to possess a wide walkway, a good lighting system, and adequate emergency exits. On top of that, it is factual that a magnificent outer space can bring about many prestigious commercial values. Specifically, buildings that came up with modern art and unique ideas not only stimulates visitors but also regarded as an effective advertising tool that brings considerable revenues for their owners. As a prime example, State of the art architectural designs in New York City, such as the Empire State Building, are attracting millions of customers every year. Besides, some buildings symbolizing the history of the city they are located in also need to be beautiful from the outside. For instance, Notre Dame Cathedral has long been considered a Vietnamese cultural site, so maintaining its attractive exterior is undoubtedly an essential mission. In conclusion, buildings would benefit in multiple ways if the proper function-based design goes hand in hand with its gorgeous appearance.