Thanks for the explanation, Brian. The managerial duties are definitely something I would be willing to do if you ever want to stop doing it yourself (and if no one else wants to do it).
great Steve. how about this-- we both manage the list
for a while, so you can see how the list management
interface is, and i can assist in any issues and if
you think it would work, then i could work on other
things and yet be backup and just see how it goes...
Can you tell us how many subscribers design-l.v2 now has?
today it is 142 members.
Is design-l like an EcoSphere?
not sure though that was interesting. i am still waiting
for biosphere II commentary, and consideration of homes/
dwellings as space pods/camps, with the air quality, UV,
pollution/radiation and other stuff like going out in a
space vehicle with space-suit on, to get back to base.
Is design-l a potential ruling class with original content?
not sure about design-l, though architecture is aristocratic
as ever as exemplified by Brad Pitt as Gehry's apprentice now.
one thing about architecture- it is not that simple, nor is
there any one symbol or kind of architecture or architect that
can monopolize the field- and such attempts at symbolizing of
class/taste/status are laughable as the sure-thing that is
modernism being high-style for a culture of meaninglessness.
i have been wondering if modernism (or GloMo /global modernism)
now finds itself in the predicament of classicism and also neo-
classicism where its symbolism (empty or abstract) and its form
no longer relate to the era and its consciousness- and thus is
outside of the 'new' and its ability to engage the present in
terms of certain dimensions of architecture that operate beyond
stated rules of engagement for the ideology as it is espoused.
this is not to argue based on style by ideology, and classicism
or any style may not be the issue except in the context where
it is considered to be 'ruling' [feudal/futile] [class/caste].
what if GloMo/modernism has been transcended and now it cannot
generate meaning beyond its own limited view of things, and
as time passes, more things pass it by. for instance, while
it is worthless to comment on the WTC (instead of a bridge for
sale: anyone wanna an entire skyscraper of empty office space
in lower manhattan?) -- the snonetta (sp?) 'cultural' building
exemplifies the meaningless of the modern ideological approach
to the absolutely unique event of that space, its context, and
instead the views of that building and inside that building are
just another building, they could be any of an infinite variety
penned by students of the 1960s/1970s rendered in watercolors,
colored pencils, and markers. there is no meaning to buildings
themselves or the site beyond another node in the global grid
of abstraction that is modern organization: space, time, place.
to look out is to look out into any landscape of the last half-
century, to see any modern plaza with trees, anywhere in the
world, with people and the universal (now computer) figures of
the standing reserves (cue: 'anonymous modern people', in this
case viewers who participate in viewing theatre of the macabre).
the actual meaning, there is none, the symbols have been erased,
the charred cathedral-like curtain wall is buried in a esoteric
crypt -- it is too dangerous to see the ruins- they are hidden.
instead, these artifacts of reality are subsumed to abstraction,
the modern delight of tabula rosa, just like political science
and the skewing of hypotheses (and why science remains political)
by leaving data out of the observation-- it does not exist in its
own interpretation but only in a highly controlled, particularized
context in which it can be harnessed, mediated by the architects
which serves other interpretive purposes-- it is less important
than the new, the newly generate symbols which are just simulcra,
if believed to be 'real architecture' of 'real genius' and 'real
planning' (when there is none of the above, especially planning).
look at the site and one would think that Walmart owned the plot.
its a variation on the empty city block, yet with the big box/
skyscraper hybrid, and parking lots/holes in corporate gardens.
it is anti-architecture, if architecture is about meaning that
is based in history, in ideas, in truth, in emotion, in beauty.
yet the language has been stuck from the first days in a cabal
of self-interested foolery whereby none can speak against the
crimes against architecture because architecture, today, means
absolutely nothing beyond what it is being exploited for today.
that is, to those in the loop who are participating, where is
the language that banishes the banality and rises to the great
challenges to question the base assumptions of a hundred years
and this site, its context, its meaning, its truth- it is non-
existent, as it is outside the language of those who could say,
it is not on the tongues of the young impressionables who are
repeating their masters instructions so they can rise only to
repeat the same ideology without questioning basic assumptions
of the modern ideology-- there must be a few hundred thousand
people in the world that could level this project down to a
few bulletpoints of the absurd extension of past notions which
now are comical and hollow and without merit for their place.
yet the profession, the boon and the bane of aristocrat's is
wont to continue, yet architecture itself is a beast that is
not easily denied its truth-- and the vacancy of spirit, of
soul, of truth cannot be hidden. the emptiness of knowledge,
insight, beauty, emotion can not be faked. the consciousness
or lack thereof cannot be denied by propaganda when people
detest the insult that they feel in their bodies when going
to meet their bodies in an utmost personal place. instead,
they could be at the city zoo, for all the architecture is,
they could be inside the maze of a stadium, they could be
at an art gallery, or another anonymous monument-- but to
the scale of events, the scale of questions-- those were
always ignored, and today remain absent when instead they
should be central- and the architects take center stage
instead of this special moment for architectural ideas,
for a coming-into-being of a new questioning, strategy,
something called forth from the epic powers that is the
true historical domain of architecture, to grapple with,
to shape, harness, and learn from-- instead this dragon
will seethe throughout the city until it finds its home.
the architects are nothing compared to this architecture.
how are they architects if theirs is not architecture?
restassured, I'm curious about the "insulation" that you say quality exchange is based on.
(I don't really read any blogs either.)
that was interesting to consider, gwp. makes a
lot of sense. wonder what you think about other
things with such keen perception/observations.
I think the whole Internet ethos has changes/evolved. It's definitely very much there and more a part of everyday work lives, but the playful subversiveness seems gone (unfortunately replace by malicious subversiveness it seems).
Who knows?
i think brad says it like it is. i too find great
frustration as today things do not work well at all,
imo. it is difficult to create content using tools
as they are, and instead of making things better,
things move on to the next thing (blogs) which,
for worse if better, is making me consider this
as the only way to webpublish as it is just too
inefficient to write and HTML everything, and has
effectively stopped my workflow as it is tedious
if reinventing the wheel or trying to fix the damn
thing or at least make it hobble along awhile more.
the creativity, imagination, playfulness, challenges,
seem to be serving media culture, a lot of people
get exposure by doing one thing, often small things,
trivial, and communities reformed along old lines
and bureaucracies and either you fit or you don't,
and the ones that do not fit i tend to relate to,
the ones that do fit i tend to consider them part
of the establishment no matter how counter culture
they are. maybe everything is part of established
ways of doing things/going about things, and yet
the sameness is deadening. an e-bay sandwich gets
more airtime than real ideas. people glorify their
childhoods by reenacting it and keeping it alive,
and this is the stuff of content. not ideas, stuff.
that meanness, it is like a passive-agressiveness
of the culture that is dying and yet many who are
succeeding are replicating the dead systems as a
type of idolatry, sons becoming their fathers and
the endtimes of patriarchy subsuming psychologies
everywhere so the illusions can extend generations
further, yet the detachment between the real and
the fictional ideal, controlled by media/tv/news/
commercials, is low-fidelity to all the bullshit.