Responding to msg by acolmena@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Abner Colmenares
UCV) on
>Is there anybody interested in discussing current
>approaches to the teaching of architectural theories
>at the US schools of architecture?
>
>I would like to know what types of discourses are
>being used to inform the teaching of architectural
>theories courses both at the undergraduate and
>graduate levels.
>
>I am very concern with the strong emphasis in
>post-structuralist thought. It is noticeable the
>impact of the critical theory approach in late
>architectural discourses. Take for example recent
>published books, such as Perez-Gomez`s Polyphilo or
>the Dark Forest Revisited. An Erotic Epiphany of
>Architecture or Eisenman`s Anyone. Some specialize
>magazines, such as Assemblage and JAE, also abound in
>the subject. As a consequence, late architectural
>discourses reflect a hermetic, cryptographic, and
>difficult to understand discourse. Contributing to
>entangled the problems of architectural design and its
> process of construction.
>
>Is there any direct relationship between what is being
>taught at the theoretical courses and the studios?
>
>What had happened with other current theoretical and/or
>philosophical concerns such as sustainability,
>tectonics and regionalism?
>
>I attended the ACSA 1994`s Teacher Seminar at Cranbrook
>and nobody dared to talk about deconstruction,
>post-structuralism or the-likes. However, the
>majority of the attendees were from the central, south
>east, south west and north west schools of
>architecture. Nobody came from the Ivy-league nor the
>avant-garde's schools. Is this a clue to the
>understanding of what is being taught at different
>schools?
>
>One way to develop a critical view on this topic will
>be reviewing the programs and content of what is being
>taught at the theories of architecture courses. For
>this purpose, I would like to receive current course
>descriptions, syllabus or outlines, and bibliographies
>on the subject.
>
>Thank you very much for your attention.
>
>
>Abner J. Colmenares
>By the way, I teach architectural design and theories
>of architecture at the Central University of
>Venezuela, School of Architecture at Caracas.
Thank you for contributing a stimulating post.
My experience with "Ivy League and avant-garde" (!) schools is
that they have more diverse content than may get reported in
the media. Indeed, there is considerable controversy and
tumult in them rather than the sometimes overly-unified
approach found at more tightly controlled and or regulated
schools in other parts of the US that I have visited.
The infighting is sometimes fierce on philosophical, economic,
gender and political grounds. Itinerant visitors from the US
and abroad add to this melee with artful and sometimes devious
attempts to make a permanent place, or momentary reputation in
the media, for themselves.
And, you will recall Eisenman's hotbed at The Institute for
Architecture and urban Studies where reputation building was
the name of the game, with Philip Johnson's and other medic
patrons support. This has been exported by its graduates and
groupies to several "avant-garde" schools.
But it is worth noting that while this image-building approach
was flowering there were also other movements underway -- those
you cite, sustainibility, techtonic and regionalis -- and they
all still live and compete.
When you see the school publications you asked for, you will
see a potpourii of offerings as the schools compete for
attention and paying customers -- whether students, patrons or
mother-institutions looking to cut budgets (like many Ivy
League schools).
Similarly, here at the Urban Center Bookstore, there is a
capacious variety of books, journals, magazines, manifestoes,
pamphlets, lecture leaflets, course offerings by little-known
organizations, and even school catalogues and newsletters,
spilling out of the shelves, literally, all seeking attention
of diffident architectural shoppers and tourists.
Your suggestion to add to this, to me, wonderful diverse,
cacophonous debate on Design-L is just right. I think the
post-structuralists like to play the provocateurs and will
welcome any attacks rather than be ignored. They seek to
challenge the lessons taught by the advertising moguls of
Johnson, Eisenman and groupies -- remember that the world-wide
center of advertising and publishing and banking and law and
crooks of all bent is home to these warring gangs.
This new band of outlaws are right, I think, to courageously
take on the paternalistic media beast and try to bend it to
other purposes while being exploited by it. And, we might all
benefit from their daring taunt, if we can open our minds to
it, by questioning our own complacent search for the
"avant-garde" or "most workable" or "techtonic" or "most
sustainable" or "most beloved landmark" or "regionalist"
solution -- the product-language heavily flogged by the Free
Press and Dedicated-to-Truth Academia.
All tried-and-true design approaches should have to battle,
endlessly, for a place at the table and not hustle the public
with the unctuous solicitude promoted by professional
revivalism and institutional survivalism.
Behold, this virtuous, undefiled, virtual list, a superior
uncontaminated domain to test untested sweet theories and
practices, IM not so HO, far better than Dream Palaces
force-feeding students to learn force-feeding of consumers
while in turn being force-fed by jaded-dream patrons.
HUH?
John
UCV) on
>Is there anybody interested in discussing current
>approaches to the teaching of architectural theories
>at the US schools of architecture?
>
>I would like to know what types of discourses are
>being used to inform the teaching of architectural
>theories courses both at the undergraduate and
>graduate levels.
>
>I am very concern with the strong emphasis in
>post-structuralist thought. It is noticeable the
>impact of the critical theory approach in late
>architectural discourses. Take for example recent
>published books, such as Perez-Gomez`s Polyphilo or
>the Dark Forest Revisited. An Erotic Epiphany of
>Architecture or Eisenman`s Anyone. Some specialize
>magazines, such as Assemblage and JAE, also abound in
>the subject. As a consequence, late architectural
>discourses reflect a hermetic, cryptographic, and
>difficult to understand discourse. Contributing to
>entangled the problems of architectural design and its
> process of construction.
>
>Is there any direct relationship between what is being
>taught at the theoretical courses and the studios?
>
>What had happened with other current theoretical and/or
>philosophical concerns such as sustainability,
>tectonics and regionalism?
>
>I attended the ACSA 1994`s Teacher Seminar at Cranbrook
>and nobody dared to talk about deconstruction,
>post-structuralism or the-likes. However, the
>majority of the attendees were from the central, south
>east, south west and north west schools of
>architecture. Nobody came from the Ivy-league nor the
>avant-garde's schools. Is this a clue to the
>understanding of what is being taught at different
>schools?
>
>One way to develop a critical view on this topic will
>be reviewing the programs and content of what is being
>taught at the theories of architecture courses. For
>this purpose, I would like to receive current course
>descriptions, syllabus or outlines, and bibliographies
>on the subject.
>
>Thank you very much for your attention.
>
>
>Abner J. Colmenares
>By the way, I teach architectural design and theories
>of architecture at the Central University of
>Venezuela, School of Architecture at Caracas.
Thank you for contributing a stimulating post.
My experience with "Ivy League and avant-garde" (!) schools is
that they have more diverse content than may get reported in
the media. Indeed, there is considerable controversy and
tumult in them rather than the sometimes overly-unified
approach found at more tightly controlled and or regulated
schools in other parts of the US that I have visited.
The infighting is sometimes fierce on philosophical, economic,
gender and political grounds. Itinerant visitors from the US
and abroad add to this melee with artful and sometimes devious
attempts to make a permanent place, or momentary reputation in
the media, for themselves.
And, you will recall Eisenman's hotbed at The Institute for
Architecture and urban Studies where reputation building was
the name of the game, with Philip Johnson's and other medic
patrons support. This has been exported by its graduates and
groupies to several "avant-garde" schools.
But it is worth noting that while this image-building approach
was flowering there were also other movements underway -- those
you cite, sustainibility, techtonic and regionalis -- and they
all still live and compete.
When you see the school publications you asked for, you will
see a potpourii of offerings as the schools compete for
attention and paying customers -- whether students, patrons or
mother-institutions looking to cut budgets (like many Ivy
League schools).
Similarly, here at the Urban Center Bookstore, there is a
capacious variety of books, journals, magazines, manifestoes,
pamphlets, lecture leaflets, course offerings by little-known
organizations, and even school catalogues and newsletters,
spilling out of the shelves, literally, all seeking attention
of diffident architectural shoppers and tourists.
Your suggestion to add to this, to me, wonderful diverse,
cacophonous debate on Design-L is just right. I think the
post-structuralists like to play the provocateurs and will
welcome any attacks rather than be ignored. They seek to
challenge the lessons taught by the advertising moguls of
Johnson, Eisenman and groupies -- remember that the world-wide
center of advertising and publishing and banking and law and
crooks of all bent is home to these warring gangs.
This new band of outlaws are right, I think, to courageously
take on the paternalistic media beast and try to bend it to
other purposes while being exploited by it. And, we might all
benefit from their daring taunt, if we can open our minds to
it, by questioning our own complacent search for the
"avant-garde" or "most workable" or "techtonic" or "most
sustainable" or "most beloved landmark" or "regionalist"
solution -- the product-language heavily flogged by the Free
Press and Dedicated-to-Truth Academia.
All tried-and-true design approaches should have to battle,
endlessly, for a place at the table and not hustle the public
with the unctuous solicitude promoted by professional
revivalism and institutional survivalism.
Behold, this virtuous, undefiled, virtual list, a superior
uncontaminated domain to test untested sweet theories and
practices, IM not so HO, far better than Dream Palaces
force-feeding students to learn force-feeding of consumers
while in turn being force-fed by jaded-dream patrons.
HUH?
John