On Sun, 27 Mar 1994, Raymond Lauzzana wrote:
> Without dialogue, engagement, etc, analysis does not exist.
Sounds like you want ME to do YOUR work.
Some time ago, YOU stated that DeCon was a wonderful tool of analysis and
that to see its power one had to apply to it to specific building(s). My
response was "great, let 's hear it." I never asked for or volunteered any
'dialogue.' Simply, I was giving YOU a chance to show that DeCon was
meaningful.
So the ball is in YOUR court, If DeCon has anything to add to the
understanding of the world --which as you delay the analysis I'm now really
starting to doubt :-) -- then go ahead.
Analyze or deconstruct or do whatever you do with all the
big abstract words and cryptic sentences. :-)
On Sun, 27 Mar 1994, Raymond Lauzzana wrote:
>Perhaps, there is some confusion, indeed. I don't think you understand
>the issues involved in dialogue. Why don't you read GLas while you are
>on vacation. The whole point of this exercise is your education.
Please Ray, condescenion is unbecoming to you;
And it makes it obvious that you are avoiding the task: analyzing a
building using deconstructivist theory. Your hesitation to engage the
analysis makes me wonder if with decon 'there is any there, there.'
David
> Without dialogue, engagement, etc, analysis does not exist.
Sounds like you want ME to do YOUR work.
Some time ago, YOU stated that DeCon was a wonderful tool of analysis and
that to see its power one had to apply to it to specific building(s). My
response was "great, let 's hear it." I never asked for or volunteered any
'dialogue.' Simply, I was giving YOU a chance to show that DeCon was
meaningful.
So the ball is in YOUR court, If DeCon has anything to add to the
understanding of the world --which as you delay the analysis I'm now really
starting to doubt :-) -- then go ahead.
Analyze or deconstruct or do whatever you do with all the
big abstract words and cryptic sentences. :-)
On Sun, 27 Mar 1994, Raymond Lauzzana wrote:
>Perhaps, there is some confusion, indeed. I don't think you understand
>the issues involved in dialogue. Why don't you read GLas while you are
>on vacation. The whole point of this exercise is your education.
Please Ray, condescenion is unbecoming to you;
And it makes it obvious that you are avoiding the task: analyzing a
building using deconstructivist theory. Your hesitation to engage the
analysis makes me wonder if with decon 'there is any there, there.'
David