Re: What's wrong with Architecture!

- - The original note follows - -

From: gsd94hp1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Howard Park)
Subject: Re: What's wrong with Architecture!
Date: 3 Mar 1994 03:00:44 GMT

This is not a flame. I am sympathetic to some of Mr. Grant's complaints
about architecture. In fact, I am often seen by my classmates as an
embodiment of these opinions. It was with mixed feelings, therefore, that
I read the naked, hostile words in which they were expressed. Architecture,
I (and many theoreticians) agree, is obsolete; engineers do make the world
go 'round. The conclusions I draw from these statements differ considerably
from Mr. Grant's, however.

To me, the lack of "demand" for architecture is precisely what allows it to
be interesting. Nothing in the modern world can escape the influence of
land, labor, and capital, but rejection of these forces as _values_ allows
architecture to retain some measure of integrity and autonomy. Engineering,
like writing advertisement jingles, is nothing more than a slavish appendage
to industrial capitalism. This is why Mr. Grant feels no anxiety when he
writes that "[l]ooking nice is one thing, but FUNCTIONING is another," why
he can call Le Corbusier's projects "totally inap[p]ropriate" because
"[t]hey cost too much [to] build," and why he undoubtedly favors the
eradication of all amusement parks, symphonies, desserts, football stadiums,
novels, movie theaters, alcoholic beverages, beaches, lacy underwear, public
parks, rock concerts, racetracks, carnivals, and everything else with no
bearing on "math and logical thinking." The reason for this is that Mr.
Grant worships money. To him and to millions of other economic casualties
around the globe, there is only one commandment: to make the world "more
and more mechanized and efficient."

When "The World of the Engineer" succeeds in reducing our sorry civilization
to utter banality, "abstract concepts . . . that generate ideas" really will
be "stupid." When everyone is as ill-educated as Mr. Grant, it will be true
that "[architects'] designs are not understood by anyone but themselves."
And when total ignorance ceases to be an impediment, everyone will call
everything "masturbation" or "idiocy" without bothering to learn anything
about it.

What the hell was Le Corbusier thinking? I can say with certainty that Mr.
Grant will never know.

(Well, perhaps this is a flame after all.)
Partial thread listing: