- - The original note follows - -
From: marcus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Studio Audiovisuelle Modellsimulation)
Subject: Re: the need for architects
Date: 27 Aug 1994 08:25:24 GMT
In article <1994Aug26.194321.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, jfp7400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
>
> right you are ! And even more so I would say that especially for a very simple
house
the class of an architect shows. See Corbu's minimal housing or Gropius
workers
houses or also F.L. Wrights economical houses. I call those masterworks,
too.
Designing your own house is equally important than designing anyones house.
If you
don't believe that you should not build.
Architects are trained to build your environment, things you have to look
at everyday,
if you leave this to a mediocre katalog company, houses will get cheapish.
And this
not only fot the the looks. Architecture is more than an art, it is also a
lot of function,
a lot of brain put into the way things work or don't work.
The big dilemma we are in is on the other hand that most architects and
even architect
schools put emphasis on the arts, even if the schools are called technical
it is still
the arts. Technology in building got lost in the 20's and only a few of us
really master it.
I have an old Corbu book from the 20's and it is still striking to see one
of these old
cars in front of this, in any aspect, modern villa. Then you go into a
contemporary
American settlement of cardboard-plastic-rustic-catalog-2x4-platform houses
and
you park a modern Japanese car in front of it. You will see that times have
reversed.
There is less tech in a modern family home than in my sons game boy.
And to come back to the point, no wonder we are asked what architects are
needed for.
Our profession goes along with modern technology, but we don't. If we loose
pace, one
day we will be out. Already we do not master most of the structural
problems of a
larger building, will we be just producers of nice sketches in the future?
One out of ten architecture students at my university know barely how to
use a computer,
even fewer how to really efficiently work with it.
Comes back to what I always say , if you only study Palladio it is not
going to be much more
modern what comes out.
olaf, Studio fuer Audiovisuelle Modellsimulation TU Berlin
From: marcus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Studio Audiovisuelle Modellsimulation)
Subject: Re: the need for architects
Date: 27 Aug 1994 08:25:24 GMT
In article <1994Aug26.194321.1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, jfp7400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:
>
> right you are ! And even more so I would say that especially for a very simple
house
the class of an architect shows. See Corbu's minimal housing or Gropius
workers
houses or also F.L. Wrights economical houses. I call those masterworks,
too.
Designing your own house is equally important than designing anyones house.
If you
don't believe that you should not build.
Architects are trained to build your environment, things you have to look
at everyday,
if you leave this to a mediocre katalog company, houses will get cheapish.
And this
not only fot the the looks. Architecture is more than an art, it is also a
lot of function,
a lot of brain put into the way things work or don't work.
The big dilemma we are in is on the other hand that most architects and
even architect
schools put emphasis on the arts, even if the schools are called technical
it is still
the arts. Technology in building got lost in the 20's and only a few of us
really master it.
I have an old Corbu book from the 20's and it is still striking to see one
of these old
cars in front of this, in any aspect, modern villa. Then you go into a
contemporary
American settlement of cardboard-plastic-rustic-catalog-2x4-platform houses
and
you park a modern Japanese car in front of it. You will see that times have
reversed.
There is less tech in a modern family home than in my sons game boy.
And to come back to the point, no wonder we are asked what architects are
needed for.
Our profession goes along with modern technology, but we don't. If we loose
pace, one
day we will be out. Already we do not master most of the structural
problems of a
larger building, will we be just producers of nice sketches in the future?
One out of ten architecture students at my university know barely how to
use a computer,
even fewer how to really efficiently work with it.
Comes back to what I always say , if you only study Palladio it is not
going to be much more
modern what comes out.
olaf, Studio fuer Audiovisuelle Modellsimulation TU Berlin