- - The original note follows - -
Newsgroups: alt.architecture
Path: psuvm!atlantis.psu.edu!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!
wupost!bigboy.sbc.com!news.mtholyoke.edu!nic.umass.edu!noc.near.net!viewlog.vie
wlogic.com!brad
From: brad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bradford Kellogg)
Subject: Re: This Arch.+sculpture thing
Message-ID: <1993Mar3.220916.9943@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Originator: brad@buck
Sender: brad@buck (Bradford Kellogg)
Nntp-Posting-Host: buck
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
References: <IfYFS9m00iUx82Hnlq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:09:16 GMT
Lines: 34
In article <IfYFS9m00iUx82Hnlq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew James Bordick
<ab3l+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
|>
[stuff deleted]
|> The definition of Architecture should be left to those who can't do
|> or understand it. I hate to coin an overly used phrase but it applies.
|> . . . .
|>
|> Don't talk. . . . Build. -------Mies
|>
There is no harm in talking about things. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Much can be learned this way. All books about architecture talk about it
in one way or another, even if only in pictures, and they all have a hand
in defining it. All architecture education programs involve talk and
definition. I don't see how talking about it, describing it, or defining
it indicates an inability to understand or do it.
Certainly, placing narrow definitions on it, particularly those based on
personal predjudices springing from insularity and arrogance, is a silly
and pointless exercise. An exact and stringent definition of architecture
is a totalitarian dictatorship in the face of creative expression. But is
anyone doing that here? It seems to me the streams of conciousness that
appear in this forum are representative of the interchange between people
that must happen for architecture to have any purpose at all.
I agree that it is important to build, but these days, talk is all many
architects are allowed to do. Faced with a bleak landscape, perhaps
definition has taken on a new imperative. Maybe many definitions of
architecture need to be re-defined to cope with a changing world.
Build if you can, but don't stop talking.
- BK
Newsgroups: alt.architecture
Path: psuvm!atlantis.psu.edu!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!
wupost!bigboy.sbc.com!news.mtholyoke.edu!nic.umass.edu!noc.near.net!viewlog.vie
wlogic.com!brad
From: brad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Bradford Kellogg)
Subject: Re: This Arch.+sculpture thing
Message-ID: <1993Mar3.220916.9943@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Originator: brad@buck
Sender: brad@buck (Bradford Kellogg)
Nntp-Posting-Host: buck
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
References: <IfYFS9m00iUx82Hnlq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1993 22:09:16 GMT
Lines: 34
In article <IfYFS9m00iUx82Hnlq@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Andrew James Bordick
<ab3l+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
|>
[stuff deleted]
|> The definition of Architecture should be left to those who can't do
|> or understand it. I hate to coin an overly used phrase but it applies.
|> . . . .
|>
|> Don't talk. . . . Build. -------Mies
|>
There is no harm in talking about things. Quite the opposite, in fact.
Much can be learned this way. All books about architecture talk about it
in one way or another, even if only in pictures, and they all have a hand
in defining it. All architecture education programs involve talk and
definition. I don't see how talking about it, describing it, or defining
it indicates an inability to understand or do it.
Certainly, placing narrow definitions on it, particularly those based on
personal predjudices springing from insularity and arrogance, is a silly
and pointless exercise. An exact and stringent definition of architecture
is a totalitarian dictatorship in the face of creative expression. But is
anyone doing that here? It seems to me the streams of conciousness that
appear in this forum are representative of the interchange between people
that must happen for architecture to have any purpose at all.
I agree that it is important to build, but these days, talk is all many
architects are allowed to do. Faced with a bleak landscape, perhaps
definition has taken on a new imperative. Maybe many definitions of
architecture need to be re-defined to cope with a changing world.
Build if you can, but don't stop talking.
- BK