Like Archinect on Facebook.
Sign up to our mailing list.
...of the Human Body?
Looks like he's there following Taylor Swift, which makes sense because word is that Draper left advertising and now works undercover for the Fashion Police: Special Victims Unit. "It's very subliminal," said Draper. "We're all here pretending to be interested in the big.dk exhibit."
He's also a floating ghost who has no shadow.
If I didn't have a shadow I'd be feeling very subliminal too.
someone must be reading Archinect.
And here I thought everyone came here just to look at the pictures. Go figure.
it appears "Draper is no longer motivated to pitch tag lines in the morning and seduce a newbie by noon"
where are the wall sconces in this space?
the girl does appear aloof and a slight bit ruffled with her empty wine glass and another empty wine glass...Drapers? She's a little heavy on the make-up...
Quondam what does this all mean?
The new Museum will explore the human body from an artistic, scientific and societal approach through cultural activities, interactive exhibitions, performances and workshops.The 7,800 m² (ca. 84,000 sqf) museum is conceived as a confluence of the park and the city – nature and architecture – bookending the Charpak Park along with the Montpellier city hall.The building’s program consists of eight major spaces on one level, organically shaped and lifted to form an underlying continuous space.Multiple interfaces between all functions create views to the park, access to daylight, and optimizing internal connections.The museum’s roof functions as an ergonomic garden – a dynamic landscape of vegetal and mineral surfaces that allow the park’s visitors to explore and express their bodies in various ways – from contemplation to the performance – from relaxing to exercising – from the soothing to the challenging.The façades of the Museum of the Human Body are transparent, maximizing the visual and physical connection to the surroundings.On the sinuous façade that oscillates between facing North and South, East and West, the optimum louver orientation varies constantly, protecting sunlight, while also resembling the patterns of a human fingerprint – both unique and universal in nature.The jury, headed by the City’s Mayor Ms Hélène Mandroux, chose BIG over 5 other shortlisted international teams and praised BIG’s design for combining innovative, environmental and functional qualities.The new Museum will contribute to Montpellier’s rich scientific and cultural heritage, attracting tourists, families, as well as school classes, academics and art lovers. Construction is scheduled to start in 2016, and the building will open its doors to the public in 2018.BIG + A+Architecture + Egis + Base + L'Echo + Celsius Environnement + CCVHPartners in Charge: Bjarke Ingels, Andreas Klok PedersenProject Leader: Gabrielle NadeauProject Manager:Jakob SandTeam: Birk Daugaard, Chris Falla, Alexandra Lukianova, Oscar Abrahamsson, Katerina Joannides, Aleksander Wadas, Marie Lançon, Danae Charatsi, Alexander Ejsing.Client: Ville de Montpellier
Draper's presence at the museum is obviously symbolic of big manly things.
"So what then is architecture? Is it a hard, 'simple', 'natural' protective shell that engenders the continuation of life? Or is it a soft formlessness forever (re-)designing an applied shell it doesn't naturally have?"
Remember 20 November 2013?
It turns out there is something fishy about all this. The same image from big.dk does not feature Donald Draper.
Yet the same image featured today at afasiaarq does feature Donald Draper.
The woman in the white dress in both images still appears to be Taylor Swift however,
Are we talking about tacos?
I like the Draper one more, it makes sense now. Taylor swift walked by, Draper gawked, the newbie intern noticed and got mad, he got up to chase swift.
Where is the Jack Terrier peeing on the guys pant leg? oh that was the good old days when you did renderings by hand and with water colors.....you really had time to be creative and put some humor into drawings.
2000.04.06 12:22ironically, I never mentioned skinAfter I wrote:"Is not the 'architecture' of the human body an envelope rammed full of 'attributes' that DO NOT show their 'implementation' on the outside? For example, breasts with nipples hardly reflect either the lungs or the pumping heart inside, likewise the one-piece torso offers little 'superficial' indication of two cavities inside. And further, isn't the sublime singularity of the navel very much like the exact opposite of the twisting, turning, asymmetrical intestines just inside? [And just think how literally close the activities within barber shops and beauty parlors come to the activities inside the brain, yet who would dare say that these two activities share the same "function"?]"John Young and Van Varga both replied with immediate references to corporal skin. This epidermal connection is appropriate because our skin is indeed our corporal envelope, however, I wish to stress that the examples I used (breasts, nipples, torso, navel, head of hair) where not about skin, but rather corporal design features specific to the body's surface -- yes skin is involved as the predominant material application of these features, but skin is not what predominates the design; our skin is what adapts to the design.Van also mentioned the sense of touch integral to skin, and this undeniable connection has truly provocative architectural design implications, i.e., envelopes that feel and or respond to contact (or, as inspired by John Young, building surfaces that (visually) indicate how they are "feeling"). About five years ago, while I was heavily doing research regarding (the theory of) chronosomatics, I came to the conclusion that touch is the first sense to have come into being, and that touch/contact was/is indeed the medium by which "life" itself began. Not only did touch exist before tasting, smelling, hearing or seeing, but, most of all, it was the contact of two otherwise lifeless entities that 'spawned' animate life. Moreover, it can well be argued that tasting, smelling, hearing, and seeing are really only very specialized touch/contact senses. Note also that the sense of touch is not just an attribute of the body's external skin, but a sense indigenous to all parts of the body inside and out.So what were these two lifeless entities that spawned life through contact with each other? Of course, my answer is that I reasonably assume the true answer may at this late point never re-appear, and that even a reenactment would fall far, far short of the original event. Nonetheless, I believe there is a very significant clue as to the 'scenario' of that first contact right on our own bodies, specifically at the body's extreme external tips, i.e., the tips of our toes and the tips our fingers. It is there that last vestiges of humanity's physical hard external shell still exists, namely our nails, and right underneath our nails are those cross-sections of our body's that are largely just skin. I theoretically propose that this soft entity under a hard entity represents the same conditions that first spawned life. Essentially, it was something soft and vulnerable that found "security and protection" under something hard and more permanent. Animate life began when the contact between the soft and the hard actually became a bond, and thus too the sense of touch came into being.Now skipping millions of years on the evolutionary scale, I see this soft/hard duality as the beginning of two sexes as well. Contrary to common perceptions, it is the female that is hard and the male that is soft. In simple undeniable terms it is woman that enables embryonic development within her own body -- woman's bodies themselves are hard protective shells (only women corporeally possess and facilitates the human egg that in turn allows fetal development). Men, on the other hand, very much do not have that "built-in" protectiveness, hence men make great displays about forever being on the defensive, and indeed it is almost exclusively men that have continually created our planet's foremost industry, if only to create that protective shell that their sex was not born with -- the age old military apparatus (shields, armor, war ships, submarines, tanks, stealth bomber, etc. are all "man"-made protective shells).So what then is architecture? Is it a hard, 'simple', 'natural' protective shell that engenders the continuation of life? Or is it a soft formlessness forever (re-)designing an applied shell it doesn't naturally have?
the below is undisciplined, anyway...
""Is not the 'architecture' of the human body an envelope rammed full of 'attributes' that DO NOT show their 'implementation' on the outside?"
yes, but how about if we factor in time (whether biologic or anthropological) ? does this not, then, relate outside to inside, the process of digestion, blood flow and oxygen replenishment, the past of the human body to its present, do we not discover the reason for nipples on men, the loss of hair on some parts of the body and its preservation on others? if separated from time, yes, spaces may be discrete. but..
isn't a work of architecture, like a body, a contingent exemplification of its own history and what is physically "outside" (like the inside) becomes conceptually circumscribed by a history of functional reasons ? Yes, these functional reasons might cease to be functional at one point-superseded- and become formal and symbolic , carrying along a second degree, an integrated valour, that is more about palimpsests ,memory and reference (religious, ideological, type-centric...).
Also, from within a gothic church, is there much of a difference in viewing the architectural envelope and structure from within or from outside? How about the architectural spaces? Does the mind dwell within the creative absence between the architectural structure as it does around it?
on the other hand, a glass tower with a central concrete core (housing services and vertical transportation). Is this really endoskeletal while the gothic church is to be considered exoskeletal? hard outside and soft inside, soft inside and hard inside?
I don't know. can we suggest that a mind can dwell on moulded visibility and circumscribe it, soften it, whereas, glass - although rendering the inner kernel visible and revealed- is hard, reflects back thought and memory, repels them and , from inside, what was the soft kernel dwelling in shadows, turns hard, de-demosticized.
I think that it also depends to what degree the outside or the inside are mused upon, made to bear the residue of history, its patina. A historic city, a mineral city, is viewed very much as an animal being explored from within, although all its buildings might be of stone or mud. the symbiotic growth of architecture, synchronizations (spatial, proportional...) render the neighbouring architectural works as inter-dependent (and a neighbourhood can be built even within the imagination, as, Quondam, you brought up the Canaletto painting before). so what was hard turns "soft" when the imagination dwells on it. Again, the internalization and domestication of architecture (when you hang your laundry spanning one building to the other, when a vine creeper unites two buildings and when architecture is the subliminal spine of the city's environmental psyche).
Whereas from within a city like Dubai, especially around the vicinity -and in the neighbourhood- of towers, one feels outside the city if one is not in its buildings rather than amongst its buildings. what is soft, the feeling of inwardness and intimacy, becomes what is hard, when one finds that the "best of Dubai" is when it intrudes upon itself, a panoramic of itself penetrates within the glass towers. this is when the city (or indeed, any other grand idea, great branding) becomes the subliminal spine of the architecture's psyche, an externalization of the interior perhaps?
Unlike the human body, you can devour and digest a taco's exoskeleton and internal workings in one bite. The hard taco shell like glass shatters into many pieces when crunched and the internal workings go all over the place. With a soft taco its manageable, there is some cushion for transfer. While you two carry on about the human body and architecture I am going to grab a bottle of wine and fill up the two wine glasses on that table and cheer that girl up, her make-up is starting to run....
t a m m u z, thanks.
I completely forgot that I wrote this app that would alert me whenever Don Draper again showed up in an architectural rendering published online. I'm surprised it even works! So, there's Donald Draper, this time in one of the newly released renderings of OMA's RPJ Mixed Use Building São Paulo.I like how the furniture is floating, and how everything except Don Draper is reflected in the shiny floor. You don't think Don Draper's now a vampire, do you? Actually, that would make a pretty good TV Show, wouldn't it.
And speaking of "at the Museum..."
2005.08.24 18:55Staged Photographs? I asked the French tourist to scratch his ass while looking at Duchamp's The Bride Stripped Bare By Her Bachelor's, Even, and he said, "Sure, my ass is itchy anyway."
Now I'm gonna write an app that will alert me whenever this ass-scratcher shows up in an architectural rendering published online.
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?