>From: IN%"[email protected]" "Basic and applied design (Art and Architect
ure)" 5-MAR-1994 10:18:00.27
>To: IN%"[email protected]" "Multiple recipients of list DESIGN-L"
>CC:
>Subj: RE: What's wrong with Architecture!
>
>Return-path: <@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-design-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (MAILER@UBVM) by splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu
> (PMDF #3312 ) id <01H9LYB6KS2O92AHI9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat,
> 5 Mar 1994 10:17:06 EST
>Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UBVM) by
> UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3124; Sat,
> 5 Mar 1994 10:14:36 -0500
>Date: 05 Mar 1994 10:16:00 -0500 (EST)
>From: Howard Ray Lawrence 814 238 9535 <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: What's wrong with Architecture!
>Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
> <[email protected]>
>To: Multiple recipients of list DESIGN-L <[email protected]>
>Reply-to: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
> <[email protected]>
>Message-id: <01H9LYB6KS2Q92AHI9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>X-Envelope-to: REIC8741
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>X-To: DESIGN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - - The original note follows - -
>
>From: brownlee@xxxxxxxxxx (Donald Brownlee)
>Subject: Re: What's wrong with Architecture!
>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 1994 14:57:56 GMT
>
>In article <1994Feb28.174459.1@clstac> cvacsgrg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>>I truly think that Architecture is obsolete. The world, every day, becomes
>>more and more mechanized and efficient. Engineering is what is in demand. No
>>one wants these architectural artists around to draw up pretty pictures that
>>only serve to masturbate the architects egos. Their designs are not understoo
d
>>by anyone but themselves. Engineers make the world go around. It's all about
>>math and logical thinking and not stupid abstract concepts about how light
>>hitting a dixie cup or some other stupid thing that generates ideas. Look at
>>idiots like Le Corbusier. What the hell was he thinking. His designs are
>>totally inapropriate. They cost too much too build and ended up failing.
>>Looking nice is one thing, but FUNCTIONING is another. You architects better
>>wake up and look at the world around you, The World of the Engineer.
>>
>>F. Grant
>>Engineer extraordinaire
>
>How light strikes a dixie cup affects the way people perceive the cup.
>Inappropriate, expensive, failed designs can be very informative.
>
>D. Brownlee
>Not an Architect
>I would just like to say that your response is refreshing! The future
world can not (and will not) solely be "The World of the Engineer"!!
Engineering and technological advances may be wonderful, but can not make
the world go round. Take for example the architects of the Bau Haus, they
were architects who realized that art had a place in the world of
architecture!! Which is something that the engineer fails to see! You can
think of all ways you want for a building to FUNCTION, but if it has no
tasteful design, what good is it?
S. Reich
ure)" 5-MAR-1994 10:18:00.27
>To: IN%"[email protected]" "Multiple recipients of list DESIGN-L"
>CC:
>Subj: RE: What's wrong with Architecture!
>
>Return-path: <@UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU:owner-design-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (MAILER@UBVM) by splava.cc.plattsburgh.edu
> (PMDF #3312 ) id <01H9LYB6KS2O92AHI9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat,
> 5 Mar 1994 10:17:06 EST
>Received: from UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@UBVM) by
> UBVM.CC.BUFFALO.EDU (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 3124; Sat,
> 5 Mar 1994 10:14:36 -0500
>Date: 05 Mar 1994 10:16:00 -0500 (EST)
>From: Howard Ray Lawrence 814 238 9535 <HRL@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: What's wrong with Architecture!
>Sender: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
> <[email protected]>
>To: Multiple recipients of list DESIGN-L <[email protected]>
>Reply-to: "Basic and applied design (Art and Architecture)"
> <[email protected]>
>Message-id: <01H9LYB6KS2Q92AHI9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>X-Envelope-to: REIC8741
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>X-To: DESIGN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - - The original note follows - -
>
>From: brownlee@xxxxxxxxxx (Donald Brownlee)
>Subject: Re: What's wrong with Architecture!
>Date: Tue, 1 Mar 1994 14:57:56 GMT
>
>In article <1994Feb28.174459.1@clstac> cvacsgrg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>>I truly think that Architecture is obsolete. The world, every day, becomes
>>more and more mechanized and efficient. Engineering is what is in demand. No
>>one wants these architectural artists around to draw up pretty pictures that
>>only serve to masturbate the architects egos. Their designs are not understoo
d
>>by anyone but themselves. Engineers make the world go around. It's all about
>>math and logical thinking and not stupid abstract concepts about how light
>>hitting a dixie cup or some other stupid thing that generates ideas. Look at
>>idiots like Le Corbusier. What the hell was he thinking. His designs are
>>totally inapropriate. They cost too much too build and ended up failing.
>>Looking nice is one thing, but FUNCTIONING is another. You architects better
>>wake up and look at the world around you, The World of the Engineer.
>>
>>F. Grant
>>Engineer extraordinaire
>
>How light strikes a dixie cup affects the way people perceive the cup.
>Inappropriate, expensive, failed designs can be very informative.
>
>D. Brownlee
>Not an Architect
>I would just like to say that your response is refreshing! The future
world can not (and will not) solely be "The World of the Engineer"!!
Engineering and technological advances may be wonderful, but can not make
the world go round. Take for example the architects of the Bau Haus, they
were architects who realized that art had a place in the world of
architecture!! Which is something that the engineer fails to see! You can
think of all ways you want for a building to FUNCTION, but if it has no
tasteful design, what good is it?
S. Reich