this is a model diagram of a paradox of observation,
previously presented, of how words/meaning can be
inverted in a continuum, through a not-only-digital or
binary (black&white) view of things, or worldview, yet
this uses a venn diagram techique of starting from the
point of view of an empty universe, in which relations
between ideas can be seen, spatially, hierarchically,
other ways, depending on what one is considering...
the diagram below seeks to show that, by ways of a
paradox in language (open to interpretation, of the
definitions, meaning, relevance, context, structure, etc)
that there is an ability like with double- or triple-meaning
(triple entendre) to see a spectrum of an idea in word-
concepts. in a shared universe, it is possible to perceive
the same event in different ways, from different vantages.
this bias may be natural, chosen, or can be neutralized
so that all the options are on the table, undecided, or not.
when someone says a 'design' idea falls within one side
of the continuum, such as in the 'political' universe below,
it would be in a context of the 'design of politics' - which is
probably more suited to political science or some other
type of list, as suggested. though, equally possible is that
'the way of design' operates in a political manner, and it
may be relevant to the set of issues that fall within 'design'
ideas, even if it inhabits a political universe- designers do
carry their politics within their decision making, which does
affect/effect design outcomes, basic and applied, and is an
issue during things such as accreditation, teacher reviews,
competitions, and other realms. These aspects may find a
place within the rightmost diagram, at the center in 'politics'
in a 'design universe', that is, as a subset not superset of
the design idea. that is, design is bigger than the politics,
not the other way around, where the politics trump design
though they may be design-politics at their core, though
when represented as ideas they are of a political design,
of an interaction where politics is larger than the design--
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
it is proposed that when constitutional rights and freedom
of speech and freedom of mind (creativity, imagination,
truth) are bounded by individuals who are teachers, who
are students, who are workers or employers, that this is an
event in the left venn diagram, and rightly remains within a
fair review of 'what design is' when in freely interpreted in a
scope larger than that which denies any politics in anything
design- not that it need be primary, though when it is, should
it be censored, and in the name of design (art & architecture?)
as 'out-of-bounds' of more private definitions one can choose?
it can be shown that this is not an issue of choosing one side
or another, it may or may not apply at times, yet in this case
it is clearly within the boundary of architecture, and the facts
of why-so have yet to be explicitly stated, (such as: A Civilian
Occupation) -- as it is absurd to argue that choosing to 'build'
against international law is neither architectural nor political.
a proposal which would have fully described and detailed an
approach to addressing the above diagram, (the architecture
of reality, architectural philosophy built of ideas not ideologies)
in A-UN: http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/aun/purpose.pdf
to argue that 'politics' is not within design, or architecture if
more specifically, the epitome of cultural conceit of why the
reigning architectural ideology is clueless to today's culture;
one would need to delete the political from the cultural, and
its relation to economic and social relations, which is absurd.
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
this is a very basic model of architecture as an idea, which
is open source and can be modified to provide alternative
vantages of what might be. the purpose of the above venn
diagram is to try to encapsulate the ideas handed down in
the literature/history of architecture, of the promise of the
building of ideas in environments (natural, artificial, virtual)
and the components that are taken into consideration or
that may act as a major context in which architecture exists.
it is modeled such that architecture is the largest idea, in
which it can be in many different cultures, and each may
vary in their economic, social, political (or other realms),
that is if it is to have a cultural dimension. if it is to have
a social dimension (fundamental in developing culture),
which currently it does not have with the modernist view
which espouses everything from blobs to classicism in
the same ideological framework, pre-paradigm-shift of
'reality' beyond the lifespan of inherited cultural elites,
like father like son, genealogy becomes all important
and 'traditional' trumps innovation as status-quo ideas
become corrupted institutions of insider-trades/dealing.
to ignore the political, the social, leaves only economic
(and political-economic, at that!) for architecture to be
representative of, in terms of culture, and is a reason
why the ills of 'globalism' are easy seen in 'modernism'
and its worldwide, world-class church building scheme.
this ideology is what bin Laden and Atta and others see.
the worst manifestations of an idea, turned into a truth
of goodness and rightness and a manufacturing of true-
believers to continue such idiocy, unchecked, powered
by the godless or god-hungry power-trippers who need
to control the world in their image, not letting people be
who they are-- demanding conformance to an arbitrary
cultural rule, or law of cultural conceit, non-universal in
its design, except in the warped minds of its creators--
that is, gods, that is, architects, and their Architecture.
a more hideous manifestation can not be found than in
ideologies used to justify the building of war machines.
if change is life, in the realm ideas that change:
ideologies are dead; their architects, morticians.
this may be why 9/11 memorializes a necropolis.
what fatal lack of vision to see beyond the scrims.
if the absolute explicit connection of change=life,
it may help to notify Webster's and the OED soon,
as universal definitions are quite hard to come by.
though, the book may be Architectural Talibanned...
(definitions of architectural education and practice
are required for the codex of acceptable words, and
their use on the list, is it a good time for apprentices?)
===
"if you meet a theorist on the road, talk in numbers"
bc
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
previously presented, of how words/meaning can be
inverted in a continuum, through a not-only-digital or
binary (black&white) view of things, or worldview, yet
this uses a venn diagram techique of starting from the
point of view of an empty universe, in which relations
between ideas can be seen, spatially, hierarchically,
other ways, depending on what one is considering...
the diagram below seeks to show that, by ways of a
paradox in language (open to interpretation, of the
definitions, meaning, relevance, context, structure, etc)
that there is an ability like with double- or triple-meaning
(triple entendre) to see a spectrum of an idea in word-
concepts. in a shared universe, it is possible to perceive
the same event in different ways, from different vantages.
this bias may be natural, chosen, or can be neutralized
so that all the options are on the table, undecided, or not.
when someone says a 'design' idea falls within one side
of the continuum, such as in the 'political' universe below,
it would be in a context of the 'design of politics' - which is
probably more suited to political science or some other
type of list, as suggested. though, equally possible is that
'the way of design' operates in a political manner, and it
may be relevant to the set of issues that fall within 'design'
ideas, even if it inhabits a political universe- designers do
carry their politics within their decision making, which does
affect/effect design outcomes, basic and applied, and is an
issue during things such as accreditation, teacher reviews,
competitions, and other realms. These aspects may find a
place within the rightmost diagram, at the center in 'politics'
in a 'design universe', that is, as a subset not superset of
the design idea. that is, design is bigger than the politics,
not the other way around, where the politics trump design
though they may be design-politics at their core, though
when represented as ideas they are of a political design,
of an interaction where politics is larger than the design--
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
it is proposed that when constitutional rights and freedom
of speech and freedom of mind (creativity, imagination,
truth) are bounded by individuals who are teachers, who
are students, who are workers or employers, that this is an
event in the left venn diagram, and rightly remains within a
fair review of 'what design is' when in freely interpreted in a
scope larger than that which denies any politics in anything
design- not that it need be primary, though when it is, should
it be censored, and in the name of design (art & architecture?)
as 'out-of-bounds' of more private definitions one can choose?
it can be shown that this is not an issue of choosing one side
or another, it may or may not apply at times, yet in this case
it is clearly within the boundary of architecture, and the facts
of why-so have yet to be explicitly stated, (such as: A Civilian
Occupation) -- as it is absurd to argue that choosing to 'build'
against international law is neither architectural nor political.
a proposal which would have fully described and detailed an
approach to addressing the above diagram, (the architecture
of reality, architectural philosophy built of ideas not ideologies)
in A-UN: http://www.electronetwork.org/bc/aun/purpose.pdf
to argue that 'politics' is not within design, or architecture if
more specifically, the epitome of cultural conceit of why the
reigning architectural ideology is clueless to today's culture;
one would need to delete the political from the cultural, and
its relation to economic and social relations, which is absurd.
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html
this is a very basic model of architecture as an idea, which
is open source and can be modified to provide alternative
vantages of what might be. the purpose of the above venn
diagram is to try to encapsulate the ideas handed down in
the literature/history of architecture, of the promise of the
building of ideas in environments (natural, artificial, virtual)
and the components that are taken into consideration or
that may act as a major context in which architecture exists.
it is modeled such that architecture is the largest idea, in
which it can be in many different cultures, and each may
vary in their economic, social, political (or other realms),
that is if it is to have a cultural dimension. if it is to have
a social dimension (fundamental in developing culture),
which currently it does not have with the modernist view
which espouses everything from blobs to classicism in
the same ideological framework, pre-paradigm-shift of
'reality' beyond the lifespan of inherited cultural elites,
like father like son, genealogy becomes all important
and 'traditional' trumps innovation as status-quo ideas
become corrupted institutions of insider-trades/dealing.
to ignore the political, the social, leaves only economic
(and political-economic, at that!) for architecture to be
representative of, in terms of culture, and is a reason
why the ills of 'globalism' are easy seen in 'modernism'
and its worldwide, world-class church building scheme.
this ideology is what bin Laden and Atta and others see.
the worst manifestations of an idea, turned into a truth
of goodness and rightness and a manufacturing of true-
believers to continue such idiocy, unchecked, powered
by the godless or god-hungry power-trippers who need
to control the world in their image, not letting people be
who they are-- demanding conformance to an arbitrary
cultural rule, or law of cultural conceit, non-universal in
its design, except in the warped minds of its creators--
that is, gods, that is, architects, and their Architecture.
a more hideous manifestation can not be found than in
ideologies used to justify the building of war machines.
Change IS Life.
if change is life, in the realm ideas that change:
ideologies are dead; their architects, morticians.
this may be why 9/11 memorializes a necropolis.
what fatal lack of vision to see beyond the scrims.
if the absolute explicit connection of change=life,
it may help to notify Webster's and the OED soon,
as universal definitions are quite hard to come by.
though, the book may be Architectural Talibanned...
(definitions of architectural education and practice
are required for the codex of acceptable words, and
their use on the list, is it a good time for apprentices?)
===
"if you meet a theorist on the road, talk in numbers"
bc
--
The Design-L list for art and architecture, since 1992...
To subscribe, send mailto:design-l-subscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To signoff, send mailto:design-l-unsubscribe-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx.
Visit archives: http://lists.psu.edu/archives/design-l.html