what the hell is an 'architecture art work', is not architecture enough?
i would judge by the building, not architect, and a universal belief
in the goodness of a designer (architect/god/world-class celebrity)
is a bogus position for fair evaluation due the complexity of buildings.
they are doing a building in town, located the entrance in a place that,
in the winter, with cars and trucks turning on ice, could send a semi-
or SUV into the lobby of a museum. really bad decision, i wrote to
officials (possibly the architects, i forget) to make this most _basic
observation of the local context, and as far as i know it remains the
same. i am not big on brand-name architects, nor architecture, and
find much more of value in construction, anonymous buildings, and
the assemblage of buildings, also archaeology, then infrastructural
architectures, aesthetics, and integrating larger systems, buildings,
technologies, databases, automation, robotics, energy efficiency,
media, diagnostics, security, then into detailing, lighting systems,
restructuring of domestic construction around new EM structures
and infrastructures (matter, energy, information. the role of future
dwellings in protecting from space weather (radiation), how to
heat sidewalks with concrete in public/private zoned areas with
infrastructure and distributed power in homes, internet delivery
in housing, alternatives for department stores/agglomeration of
material goods reproduced when FedEX/UPS changed context
for such building types, lots more on typologies, some aesthetics
as information, not about beauty as much as about truth and of
questioning, rather than passively accepting, not creating works.
microcontrollers in architectural education, the installation and
stage-craft design, improved full-life cycle from mining to the
dumping of materials, architecture is the most wasteful industry
in the world, most energy intensive, etc. etc. to address these
issues in terms of the cost of materials (why the 'zero-energy'
homes are conceptually unhelpful, breaking the laws of physics
as they create more new energy than they use, perpetual motion
machines, eh). role of the computer server in home computing
environments, and new wiring systems and also standardized
outlets without the need for wallwarts/ac-dc trasnformers. the
use of trim for electrical wiring and running this away from the
biological lifeforms to keep safer distances they nearby heads
when longer exposures. cataloging new building types, such
as tanning salons and the cellphone stores, in comparison to
views of architectural as sculptural forms- mapping the critical
infrastructure in relation to architecture, offering complex views
of total and subsystems and n-dimensions of analysis in data-
bases for architecture as an idea, though this would be open-
source, collaborative. it is surely not this architecture art work,
it is just another many architectures of many architectures, of
an architecture (of reality, not 'the' as i mistyped) which is an
idea, many ideas, open for debate, exchange, conversation.
please define: the architecture art work, i don't know what it is,
and do not know what falls within this definition, if it is okay to
even use such a term or if it is trademarked already, or if it is
political, i would like to know in advance, for it is, well, if it is
the work of related to the architects you mention: it is political.
can we discuss this, Howard? how is it not political, if not so?
(this is not to say it is bad, politically, just that it has a political
dimension that is relevant to this list and fair to discuss, yes?)
On Wednesday, August 25, 2004, at 02:37 PM, Howard Ray Lawrence wrote:
--
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
i would judge by the building, not architect, and a universal belief
in the goodness of a designer (architect/god/world-class celebrity)
is a bogus position for fair evaluation due the complexity of buildings.
they are doing a building in town, located the entrance in a place that,
in the winter, with cars and trucks turning on ice, could send a semi-
or SUV into the lobby of a museum. really bad decision, i wrote to
officials (possibly the architects, i forget) to make this most _basic
observation of the local context, and as far as i know it remains the
same. i am not big on brand-name architects, nor architecture, and
find much more of value in construction, anonymous buildings, and
the assemblage of buildings, also archaeology, then infrastructural
architectures, aesthetics, and integrating larger systems, buildings,
technologies, databases, automation, robotics, energy efficiency,
media, diagnostics, security, then into detailing, lighting systems,
restructuring of domestic construction around new EM structures
and infrastructures (matter, energy, information. the role of future
dwellings in protecting from space weather (radiation), how to
heat sidewalks with concrete in public/private zoned areas with
infrastructure and distributed power in homes, internet delivery
in housing, alternatives for department stores/agglomeration of
material goods reproduced when FedEX/UPS changed context
for such building types, lots more on typologies, some aesthetics
as information, not about beauty as much as about truth and of
questioning, rather than passively accepting, not creating works.
microcontrollers in architectural education, the installation and
stage-craft design, improved full-life cycle from mining to the
dumping of materials, architecture is the most wasteful industry
in the world, most energy intensive, etc. etc. to address these
issues in terms of the cost of materials (why the 'zero-energy'
homes are conceptually unhelpful, breaking the laws of physics
as they create more new energy than they use, perpetual motion
machines, eh). role of the computer server in home computing
environments, and new wiring systems and also standardized
outlets without the need for wallwarts/ac-dc trasnformers. the
use of trim for electrical wiring and running this away from the
biological lifeforms to keep safer distances they nearby heads
when longer exposures. cataloging new building types, such
as tanning salons and the cellphone stores, in comparison to
views of architectural as sculptural forms- mapping the critical
infrastructure in relation to architecture, offering complex views
of total and subsystems and n-dimensions of analysis in data-
bases for architecture as an idea, though this would be open-
source, collaborative. it is surely not this architecture art work,
it is just another many architectures of many architectures, of
an architecture (of reality, not 'the' as i mistyped) which is an
idea, many ideas, open for debate, exchange, conversation.
please define: the architecture art work, i don't know what it is,
and do not know what falls within this definition, if it is okay to
even use such a term or if it is trademarked already, or if it is
political, i would like to know in advance, for it is, well, if it is
the work of related to the architects you mention: it is political.
can we discuss this, Howard? how is it not political, if not so?
(this is not to say it is bad, politically, just that it has a political
dimension that is relevant to this list and fair to discuss, yes?)
On Wednesday, August 25, 2004, at 02:37 PM, Howard Ray Lawrence wrote:
Do you hate, for example, the architecture art work of Hertzog and de
Meuron?
--
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