went to the San Franicisco MOMA's exhibit of Archigram's work.
some real fine drawings, watercolored and airbrushed of both
amorphous play forms and more orthagonal plans. the drawings
seemed to show a timeline of evolution, from soft sculptural
pod inflatable forms, to a grid based system of plastic pods,
to the razorsharp, deconstructed forms of Cook's skyscrapers.
each of these three varients were represented by a theme.....
1 the soft forms and bucky-like inflatable sculpture-housing was
found in model-form, with toy trucks and action figures showing
what could be housing for mars. clear multisectioned domed rooms
inflated by trucks with air compressor systems. these pods, it
seems, could be made into a temporary city, referenced by the
title "circus" on one of the models.
clearly work of the 60s, there seemed to be an odd sense of a
future timelessness to these models of plastic and foam. there
were some nice ideas embedded in the designs. such as a 'city'
of temporary shelters, seemingly made of plastics and metals,
around the freeway/highway structure- making it an inhabitted
and cultural zone for living and what seemed like partying.
the tensile tents of the 60s were present in some structures,
as was an ingenious idea of creating a floating platform via
four balloons and a large suspended plane, with stairs to the
ground. also, the advertising 'billboard' was celebrated as a
bringer of culture, and the Television billboard was prototyped
as an architectural speculation which seems to have arrived.
2 of Toffler's temporary; Archigram's most impressive work for
me was seeing the "Plug-in City", in which a system of both
construction and habitation/culture were outlined and drawn.
the plan-elevation-section consisted of a sequential method
of building a city, one pod at a time, with a basic structure
and a modular, adaptable habitat. for example, a basic pod
would be constructed vertically by raising a series of rings
and then securing them to a larger superstructure, floor by
floor. these would become living/dorm space. then, the next
pod would be raised and would constitute a collective space,
for housing. then, if the function become viable, these would
become learning spaces of the university system of education,
and this dorm space would transform into a centralized.edu
while more dorm pods sprouted around this nodal intersection.
this "node" then, would be linked via a communications, energy,
and transportation, or, "information corridor", which, in sum
would be a network of these nodes and subsequent decentralized
pods (today, read: the Internet and networked computers).
of particular interest was the rehabbing of a Buckingham or
another palace. i forget. but imagine a beautiful ink and mylar
drawing of a centuries old Palace with this temporary city of
pods crawling all over it, and tensile tents wrapping around
roofs and down over walls. their aesthetic was a match, and
i wish that such a thing would happen. i think it would be
a revolutionary act; that is, the acceptance of a modernism
in HRH's realm of traditional ideas.
3 the decon drawings of 1986+ by Peter Cook, well, they were
nice, and some even had, say, a corkscrew spiral of warped
and ricketed planes and geometries bending and purging their
way 800 feet in the air, with a rotating band of wildlife,
that is, trees and shrubs and whatnot, climbing up and around
the building to its peak. i was impressed at the idea of
integrating nature in our monumental artificial mountains.
somehow it appears to me to be a more humane type of building
than i experience in the concrete jungle, where pigeons think
they are hanging out with cliff dwellers, not knowing they are
living in a surreality - or, with some of those red-eyed ones,
i am not so sure.. they may know more than i think.
all in all, i'd say, see the show if it shows up in your town.
the cliche is there, as the entrance consisted of having to go
through a room full of televisions flashing dated Archigram
propoganda in a pitch black room with two beanbags on the
floor, of which mostly went unused, until someone decided to
flop into one on my way out. i wish i was there to see them
try to get up out of the thing, but i had had enough of this
aesthetic, as, it still is caught in time, not timelessness,
but there is something about popular culture and what has been
called 'the glorification of technology' that makes me feel
that i don't think i want some newager telling me about his
'New Spirit in Architecture', because i think of snake oil
in the capitalistic sense. this architecture is selling
something, maybe even selling it's soul to be in the gallery.
that is the flip-side.. that there is equally the smell of
death in this exhibit. of fame, a few goods ideas, and the
machinery of architectural media success.. it was good, it
was technically okay, but it wasn't great. and that is a
big difference if "excellence" is really what is expected.
ps
my camera brought me to the construction site of Eisenman's
Jewish Museum, and i was trespassing to go talk with some
construction workers to ask if i could take photos, having
to walk by the sur-realtor/underwriter, bank-man, client
huddle, and they pointed me to foreman, and i said - 'i'm
with an Internet architectural group and i wondered if i
could take some construction photos of Eisenman's museum..'
foreman said: 'sorry, this is a hardhat zone, you need a
hardhat to be in here'
me: 'uh, do you have one i can borrow?' [stupid, stupid me]
foreman, while walking towards the exit: 'No.'
me: 'so how's the museum going?'
foreman; "we'll be working for 3 years"
me: "3 Years! for that little Museum??? it's only 1 story!!"
foreman: "what museum-- we're building 46 stories."
me: "uh-oh. thanks!" as i leave, i am faced with the sad fate
of the naive architectural journalist who went around the
back of the Jewish Museum, virtually untouched from the
front, no sign of construction, and to an alleyway that
is cordoned off, and thought that, because they had dug
behind the museum [and due to what i've read about the
building bringing traffic from Market Street to Mission
Street] that it was Eisenman's job. sadly it wasn't.
bc
some real fine drawings, watercolored and airbrushed of both
amorphous play forms and more orthagonal plans. the drawings
seemed to show a timeline of evolution, from soft sculptural
pod inflatable forms, to a grid based system of plastic pods,
to the razorsharp, deconstructed forms of Cook's skyscrapers.
each of these three varients were represented by a theme.....
1 the soft forms and bucky-like inflatable sculpture-housing was
found in model-form, with toy trucks and action figures showing
what could be housing for mars. clear multisectioned domed rooms
inflated by trucks with air compressor systems. these pods, it
seems, could be made into a temporary city, referenced by the
title "circus" on one of the models.
clearly work of the 60s, there seemed to be an odd sense of a
future timelessness to these models of plastic and foam. there
were some nice ideas embedded in the designs. such as a 'city'
of temporary shelters, seemingly made of plastics and metals,
around the freeway/highway structure- making it an inhabitted
and cultural zone for living and what seemed like partying.
the tensile tents of the 60s were present in some structures,
as was an ingenious idea of creating a floating platform via
four balloons and a large suspended plane, with stairs to the
ground. also, the advertising 'billboard' was celebrated as a
bringer of culture, and the Television billboard was prototyped
as an architectural speculation which seems to have arrived.
2 of Toffler's temporary; Archigram's most impressive work for
me was seeing the "Plug-in City", in which a system of both
construction and habitation/culture were outlined and drawn.
the plan-elevation-section consisted of a sequential method
of building a city, one pod at a time, with a basic structure
and a modular, adaptable habitat. for example, a basic pod
would be constructed vertically by raising a series of rings
and then securing them to a larger superstructure, floor by
floor. these would become living/dorm space. then, the next
pod would be raised and would constitute a collective space,
for housing. then, if the function become viable, these would
become learning spaces of the university system of education,
and this dorm space would transform into a centralized.edu
while more dorm pods sprouted around this nodal intersection.
this "node" then, would be linked via a communications, energy,
and transportation, or, "information corridor", which, in sum
would be a network of these nodes and subsequent decentralized
pods (today, read: the Internet and networked computers).
of particular interest was the rehabbing of a Buckingham or
another palace. i forget. but imagine a beautiful ink and mylar
drawing of a centuries old Palace with this temporary city of
pods crawling all over it, and tensile tents wrapping around
roofs and down over walls. their aesthetic was a match, and
i wish that such a thing would happen. i think it would be
a revolutionary act; that is, the acceptance of a modernism
in HRH's realm of traditional ideas.
3 the decon drawings of 1986+ by Peter Cook, well, they were
nice, and some even had, say, a corkscrew spiral of warped
and ricketed planes and geometries bending and purging their
way 800 feet in the air, with a rotating band of wildlife,
that is, trees and shrubs and whatnot, climbing up and around
the building to its peak. i was impressed at the idea of
integrating nature in our monumental artificial mountains.
somehow it appears to me to be a more humane type of building
than i experience in the concrete jungle, where pigeons think
they are hanging out with cliff dwellers, not knowing they are
living in a surreality - or, with some of those red-eyed ones,
i am not so sure.. they may know more than i think.
all in all, i'd say, see the show if it shows up in your town.
the cliche is there, as the entrance consisted of having to go
through a room full of televisions flashing dated Archigram
propoganda in a pitch black room with two beanbags on the
floor, of which mostly went unused, until someone decided to
flop into one on my way out. i wish i was there to see them
try to get up out of the thing, but i had had enough of this
aesthetic, as, it still is caught in time, not timelessness,
but there is something about popular culture and what has been
called 'the glorification of technology' that makes me feel
that i don't think i want some newager telling me about his
'New Spirit in Architecture', because i think of snake oil
in the capitalistic sense. this architecture is selling
something, maybe even selling it's soul to be in the gallery.
that is the flip-side.. that there is equally the smell of
death in this exhibit. of fame, a few goods ideas, and the
machinery of architectural media success.. it was good, it
was technically okay, but it wasn't great. and that is a
big difference if "excellence" is really what is expected.
ps
my camera brought me to the construction site of Eisenman's
Jewish Museum, and i was trespassing to go talk with some
construction workers to ask if i could take photos, having
to walk by the sur-realtor/underwriter, bank-man, client
huddle, and they pointed me to foreman, and i said - 'i'm
with an Internet architectural group and i wondered if i
could take some construction photos of Eisenman's museum..'
foreman said: 'sorry, this is a hardhat zone, you need a
hardhat to be in here'
me: 'uh, do you have one i can borrow?' [stupid, stupid me]
foreman, while walking towards the exit: 'No.'
me: 'so how's the museum going?'
foreman; "we'll be working for 3 years"
me: "3 Years! for that little Museum??? it's only 1 story!!"
foreman: "what museum-- we're building 46 stories."
me: "uh-oh. thanks!" as i leave, i am faced with the sad fate
of the naive architectural journalist who went around the
back of the Jewish Museum, virtually untouched from the
front, no sign of construction, and to an alleyway that
is cordoned off, and thought that, because they had dug
behind the museum [and due to what i've read about the
building bringing traffic from Market Street to Mission
Street] that it was Eisenman's job. sadly it wasn't.
bc