During reading materials about architecture, I found that every successful architect has their polar understanding and ideas of how to design and build architecture. One the critical points is architectures should be pure structural or artistic? A famous believes that just a structural building can only be treated as a building but not an architecture. An architecture must be artistic. When people see an architecture, they must be touched by its beauty. The building must make its audience feel pleasant. However, some architects’ ideal creation could just be present on papers. I think the structure is the essential considerations of architectures. Beside, pure structural ideas do not equal forgetting about artistic ideas. Sometimes, only the structure of a building or system would impress people. Sometimes, when we watch pure clean wall without mosaics, or columns without patterns, we feel boring. However, in MOMA, a paint which is just a white paper are exhibited as a masterpiece. Even more, when we watch a architecture, we are not only watching a wall or columns, but we also watching the combination of them. The complexity of those combinations are arts of structures—architectures. Architectures are complex. And sometimes complex, abstract, and things that are hard to understand are regard as works of art. In the other side, decorations and artistic elements adding also try to make architectures looks complex and abstract. Anyway, no matter what polar that architects choose, what style they prefer, or what materials they use, the architectures must be consistent. Last, I have something to say about Eclecticism in Architecture. Eclectic architects are mostly copying from historical architectures by parts, and then combine those parts to present a seemingly new architecture. However, I do not like this kind of designing. These architectures have no unique understand, position, or theory to support must be bound to disappear in culture.