Just a follow up of Form follows Fuction…at what stage does beauty come in? does it mean that beauty is solely a fuction of FUNCTION?
No. For example, art has no practical function, but is often beautiful.
Was that really it? Maybe you could clarify what you mean to ask? Is beauty a function of function, with respect to what? Anything? Art? People? Architecture?
If you are speaking of architecture (which is where the phrase “form follows function” comes from) it was coined by Louis Sullivan, who was Frank Lloyd Wright’s mentor. So for an in-depth understanding of what it means, they would be a good place to start. Louis Sullivan’s book, “Kindergarten Chats” deals a lot with it. Also, the term “prarie-style” or “mission-style” is the term that specifically refers to “form follows function”.
From, the wikipedia I linked:
This credo, which placed the demands of practical use above aesthetics, would later be taken by influential designers to imply that decorative elements, which architects call “ornament,” were superfluous in modern buildings.
Hope that gives you some direction 