There is always an edge in architecture; somewhere that we have not fully explored that offers further variety towards design and intent. There are many attempts but the issue is to maintain continuity in what initially appears to be avant garde; dicing with the interpretation of tradition. An analysis in the economy of architecture has suggested that ‘area’ has both a cultural and political standpoint to address both issues of design and the priority of function such that architecture can serve as an instrument in the making of the future. The ubiquity of space that qualifies as habitation has suggested that any intellectual advancement in the acknowledgement of the new is fraught with controversy, but conditioning architecture by area suggests that tradition has the ability to evolve its own critique on our ability to establish a harmonious equality in our economy. Perhaps the fulfilment of capitalism or a metaphorical reading of the classical orders of architecture, the subject of area can encapsulate a forward thinking response in deference to the current approach proffered competitively by the corporate global framework. Economics is essentially the key to architecture, area is the concept of its measure, while the space of architecture is unfathomable.