In response to John Pohorylo:
John, I willingly admit to a good share of ignorance, but I've also
read that the practitioners of Decon themselves have a hard time
categorizing themselves---you see, it's that language thing:
THEY GOT HUNG BY THEIR OWN CONSTRUCTS!
Your definition of Deconstructivism itself is merely a construct---doesn't
its meaning depend on the paradigm I apply in interpreting it?
Actually, I think Decon definitely has a positive value: it makes a good
mirror in which to view our standard notions of architecture---it can
reveal new solutions to old (and new) problems. But that's really the
limit of its usefulness, as I don't think much Decon meets my Vitruvian
Test, which (as a construct I find useful) requires that architecture
must meet the demands of ...well, you know.
I can't honestly believe you might be upset about the Beavis and Butthead
crack---hell, I even take swipes at Wright, and we all know he was god!
I can compare and contrast anything, even apples and oranges---it's only
WORDS. I might find common ground, I might not.
mark
John, I willingly admit to a good share of ignorance, but I've also
read that the practitioners of Decon themselves have a hard time
categorizing themselves---you see, it's that language thing:
THEY GOT HUNG BY THEIR OWN CONSTRUCTS!
Your definition of Deconstructivism itself is merely a construct---doesn't
its meaning depend on the paradigm I apply in interpreting it?
Actually, I think Decon definitely has a positive value: it makes a good
mirror in which to view our standard notions of architecture---it can
reveal new solutions to old (and new) problems. But that's really the
limit of its usefulness, as I don't think much Decon meets my Vitruvian
Test, which (as a construct I find useful) requires that architecture
must meet the demands of ...well, you know.
I can't honestly believe you might be upset about the Beavis and Butthead
crack---hell, I even take swipes at Wright, and we all know he was god!
I can compare and contrast anything, even apples and oranges---it's only
WORDS. I might find common ground, I might not.
mark