ARCHITECTURE: Sculpture Connection?

- - The original note follows - -

Newsgroups: alt.architecture
Path:
psuvm!atlantis.psu.edu!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!convex!egsner!adaptex
!sdf!amn
From: amn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Andrew Noble)
Subject: Re: architecture, not sculpture
Message-ID: <C2tx3L.2DL@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: SDF - Public Access Unix - Dallas, Tx..
References: <churayj-190293220344@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 1993 02:47:45 GMT
Lines: 24


I believe that you are classifying (or that the arguement that you posted is)
Architecture and Sculpture a little too much, IMO. It is very difficult to
discern between Architecture AND Sculpture: Where does one begin and the
other end?

I don't subscribe to the notion that Arch is seperated from sculpture by the
drawing process. Not being a sculptor (well not sure of that now..heh), I
know that sculpture -as a three-dimensional creation- can originate from
plan, section, and elevational sketches just as architecture does. One
could imagine Architecture being generated from many three-deminsional
sketches, providing just as much information as the plans do -admittedly
highly unlikely though.

I believe that a seperation between these two (and that means that I admit
that there is, but just can't define it), begins with the function of shelter.
Architecture MUST provide shelter.

amn
--
_ Andrew Noble
| |__ Dallas, Texas
_| * | amn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
\ _/ Compuserve: 71165,412
Partial thread listing: