>what is first, [DUALITY in EXTREME]
(dichotomy?) -- duality in extreme and dichotomy are not necessarily the
same thing, therefore it is prudent not to too quickly confuse the issue but
rather concentrate specifically on what duality in extreme means, e.g.,
concentrate on the notion that two polar (extreme) opposites (must) coexist
and thereby generate a synthesis -- this is how architecture "firsted"
itself.
>what are first principles of architecture..? [the outside has to be
>different than the inside]
(is there still an outside-inside?) -- certainly there is still an inside
and and outside! our perception of the dictinction between the two may be
changing (as it probably has been doing since the beginning), but being at a
different vantage point doesn't necessarily change the basic reality. for
example, so far three individuals are "inside" this poem - brian, steve, and
betty -- while the rest of design-l observes, yet from the "outside".
>does architecture have any first (universal) principles.. [refrain]
(economy-efficiency-delight to...)
>what kind of architecture does.. [the great pyramid is an, if not the,
prime
>example...there's not all that much architecture that is older except
>perhaps the ever evaporating igloo]
(extreme architecture - international space-station..?) -- you "raise" here
the international space-station and at the same time question whether there
is still an outside-inside??? come on, let's not waste time disputing the
obvious and move one to a clearer, deeper understanding of outside vs.
inside in order to create a better architecture.
(dichotomy?) -- duality in extreme and dichotomy are not necessarily the
same thing, therefore it is prudent not to too quickly confuse the issue but
rather concentrate specifically on what duality in extreme means, e.g.,
concentrate on the notion that two polar (extreme) opposites (must) coexist
and thereby generate a synthesis -- this is how architecture "firsted"
itself.
>what are first principles of architecture..? [the outside has to be
>different than the inside]
(is there still an outside-inside?) -- certainly there is still an inside
and and outside! our perception of the dictinction between the two may be
changing (as it probably has been doing since the beginning), but being at a
different vantage point doesn't necessarily change the basic reality. for
example, so far three individuals are "inside" this poem - brian, steve, and
betty -- while the rest of design-l observes, yet from the "outside".
>does architecture have any first (universal) principles.. [refrain]
(economy-efficiency-delight to...)
>what kind of architecture does.. [the great pyramid is an, if not the,
prime
>example...there's not all that much architecture that is older except
>perhaps the ever evaporating igloo]
(extreme architecture - international space-station..?) -- you "raise" here
the international space-station and at the same time question whether there
is still an outside-inside??? come on, let's not waste time disputing the
obvious and move one to a clearer, deeper understanding of outside vs.
inside in order to create a better architecture.