if i was verb i would publish this thread in it is entirety when is no longer possible to post on it and put it in a zarf which also means envelope in turkish but it is basically a hot cup holder, but i am just a noun, yeah call it a zarf issue.
ahahah, analyse this. people think i speak german in fact i only studied for 6 years without speaking a word i think verb is a most fucked-with grammatic object of art in any language.
What the F is the motivation for publishing VERB ? Why go through all the trouble to publish something that seems inane to the general public ? Why is it good to do something for the sake of "doing" it ? After flipping through VERB at the bookstore, I think I would like a call to arms for architects to start rethinking their priorities, we each have only 24 hours a day; what exactly are worth investigating, and what are worth making pretty graphics about!
can't believe no one has posted the 'verb!' theme song yet:
i get my thing in action (verb!)
to be, to see, to feel, to live (verb!)
that's what's happenin'
i put my heart in action (verb!)
to run, to go, to get, to give (verb!)
(you're what's happenin')
that's where i find satisfaction, yeah! (yeah!)
to search, to find, to have, to hold.
(verb! to be bold)
when i use my imagination (verb!)
i think, i plot, i plan, i dream
turning in towards creation (verb!)
i make, i write, i dance, i sing
when i'm feeling really active (verb!)
i run, i ride, i swim, i fly!
other times when life is easy
(oh!) i rest, i sleep, i sit, i lie.
(verb! that's what happenin')
i can take a noun and bend it,
give me a noun -
(bat, boat, rake, and plow)
make it a verb and really send it!
(show me how)
oh, i don't know my own power. (verb!)
i get my thing in action (verb!)
in being, (verb!) in doing, (verb!)
in saying
a verb expresses action, being, or state of being.
a verb makes a statement.
yeah, a verb tells it like it is!
(verb! that's what's happenin'.)
i can tell you when it's happenin',
(past, present, future tense)
oh! tell you more about what's happenin',
(say it so it makes some sense)
i can yell you who is happenin'!
(verb, you're so intense)
every sentence has a subject.
(noun, person, place, or thing)
find that subject: where's the action?
verb can make a subject sing.)
take the subject: what is it? (what!)
what's done to it? (what!)
what does it say?
(verb, you're what's happenin')
i can question, like: what is it?
(verb, you're so demanding.)
i can order like: go get it!
(verb, you're so commanding.)
when i hit i need an object
(verb, hit! hit the ball!)
when i see, i see the object
(verb, hit! hit the ball!)
when i see, i see the object
(do you see that furthest wall?)
if you can see it there, put that ball over the fence, man!
go ahead. yeah, all right.
what?! he hit it. it's going, it's going, it's gone!
(what?!)
i get my thing in action.
(verb, that's what happenin')
to work, (verb!)
to play, (verb!)
to live, (verb!)
to love... (verb!...)
i've been thinking about verb, volume, and some of the other more recent publications and it occurred to me that their formative attitude itself may be what undermines their value for me. the 'zine' attitude, the revolution, the agitation, whatever, all basically is a questioning of any recognition of academic - um - for lack of a better word - authority.
when i read october, assemblage, any, and the oppositions publications i could know that the writers were speaking from positions of experience, accomplishment, and that their comments had been rigorously vetted - both by them and by others.
these publications seem more casual. 'if i think it, it's worth putting out there.' - sorta thing. or 'it seems interesting. let's see if it's more interesting if we put it next to this.' this sort of anti-academic, anti-author(ity) position IS interesting, but only for a short time. it doesn't have the legs, the longevity, that the more complete explorations of the past had. it's like what we do here on archinect which, sorry, is not likely to be worth publishing in hard copy.
i'm not arguing that we foster some sort of a star author culture among architectural critics. we kind of still have that, to a point. but just that there is something missing in these publications. a historic thread, a reference back to past thinking in a rigorous way (not just twee quotation and image reference).
i miss colomina, sennett, evans, rowe, and all the other folks who really challenged me to think harder, not just to drift along the surface of things.
Yes, we should all think harder. What this society needs are writers who can PRODUCE. Their texts should as rigorous as a doctorate thesis, the denser and least accessible the better.
I've found that the least accessible and lengthy, drawn out writings garner the most respect, especially if their critical nature borders on extreme passion.
Palladio is the foundation of our modern architecture, let's start at the beginning.
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a color Booooogazine ?
My friends all read trendy magazines, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So Lord, won’t you buy me a new Booogazine ?
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a new Volume?
Dialing For Dollars is trying to find me.
I wait for delivery each day until three,
So oh Lord, won’t you buy me a new Volume?
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a night on the stool ?
I’m counting on you, Lord, please don’t let me un-cool.
Prove that you love me and buy the next issue,
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a night on the stool ?
Everybody!
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a color Booooogazine ?
My friends all read trendy magazines, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So Lord, won’t you buy me a new Booogazine ?
thanks for the nod abra. you're cd is in the mail. anyway, perhaps these self published journals are the equivalent of vanity presses. if i publish my own novel is it as legit as if i am picked up by a press etc. if it is good, well yes. if it is not good. well, no. but in this day and age people can self publish art, music, film etc. and that is perfectly fine. we all find little gems that the established media outlets miss. however, is criticism the same? does a critic/observer of culture need street cred? i don't know the answer. i know that my exgirlfriend/future wife at cambridge(the real one) cannot just self publish her writings on beckett, the sublime and postcolonialism and have them greeted with any legitimacy. In her case the writing must be vetted by "the experts".
Jul 25, 07 12:40 pm ·
·
Perhaps all "the experts" really want is to maintain their control of what is "legitimate".
"Official art culture is much more effective in its control of history than Republican strategists, for it knows that the best way to treat contradictory material is not to rail against it, but simply to pretend it didn't happen."
"The Establishment" has a long history of ignoring material that eminates from outside their control, and, more times than not, the establishment ultimately has to accept what it first chose to ignore (or deem illegitimate).
There is a direct relationship between ignoring and ignorance.
everyone who has control wants to maintain that control. and why would you bother learning/studying/writing about something unless you want to be allowed into whatever little pantheon it is that you're looking to be admitted to. most people don't do it as a hobby. that's what macrame is for.
"this sort of anti-academic, anti-author(ity) position IS interesting, but only for a short time."
" the 'zine' attitude, the revolution, the agitation, whatever, all basically is a questioning of any recognition of academic - um - for lack of a better word - authority" stephen ward
i disagree. firstly, i can't see where there is agitation or revolution. the tone, language and choice of content utilize recognizable tics of previous subversions but there is hardly any dissent, in fact there is little originality and much frivolity. i think u're being unecessarily, and maybe knowingly so, empathetic. secondly, academia, in its youthful strata, has well incorporated the 'questioning of authority' and has consequently established itself as an authority on 'questioning authority'. the ideas, or more symptomatically the style, pervading those apres the avant garde zines will not be alien to young arch. professors in barcelona, n.y and london. therefor, i doubt it is a matter of 'questioning the authority' anymore but in fact a reification of authority that is as tied down to class (middle class to well off, a certain calibre of education, resonant (within that same class) concerns and possessing of a certain 'knowing' language (peppered with foucault, de landa, deleuze, cnc milling know-how and dog training techniques)) and prejudice as much as before.
this is my question to myself and others: is this frivolty of flirting with dissent (stylistically) a subliminal result of the architect's realization of how powerless s/he in ...and goes hand-in-hand with the sombreness of complacency shown lately in going with the flow and against dissent actual?
Jul 25, 07 2:58 pm ·
·
I learn/study/write about something precisely because it isn't a bother; it seems to happen naturally.
you're right that i was accepting that 'agitation' was what was talked about, but that i shouldn't actually credit any of these documents for achieving it. and i sort of agree with your other comments.
and your last statement (deserves to be copied: is this...flirting with dissent (stylistically) a subliminal result of the architect's realization of how powerless s/he is...hand-in-hand with the...complacency shown lately in going with the flow and against dissent actual?) cuts to the quick. i suspect there is a lot of truth in it.
i guess i'm resisting the 'questioning of authority' not in favor of 'going with the flow' but in favor of recognizing that there are people who know more about some things than i do and that it would be helpful to me to use them as a resource. we can't know everything. it used to be that an architects' job was less about knowing all than it was about knowing where to find what information you need in the given circumstances. in my own conservative way i worry that there is a laziness afoot and it's become more acceptable to resist authority, NOT find the information, and just make things up that seem interesting.
Dude, I'm rereading David's bio sketch on wikipedia right now, if there's ever anyone who thought he was more 'avant garde' than the next ten guys it was him. C'mon, going on a hunger strike to get the Rome Prize? He sounds like an opportunistic poseur to me, it just so happens he could also paint pretty well.
To be explicit about it: who cares whether anyone thinks they are avant garde or not? If you're doing good work, great, if you're not, so be it. it's the the process of criticism to sort that out, they usually get it right in the long run, it just takes a couple of centuries.
Jul 25, 07 4:15 pm ·
·
vado retro, if you think you're in control of legitimacy, you're not.
Noc:
Questioning authority is in the realm of the "youthful strata".
Your local AIA, authority in all matters Architecture, would be pleased to offer you their leadership by means of AIA subcommittee in the matter of your venture's legitimacy in the community at large.
"well said noctilucent.
actually i find a lot of the 'architectural acedemia' in the state of trying to reinvent itself in urgency. and adapt. all that rebel rausing is to sharpen their own blade and guard the lectern. to appeal.
irony is,
students know more than their instructors about the terrain. because they don't have to buy into that terrain since they are the children of that location, by default, however conceptually or experiencially.
now, the slightly older academics are trying hard for that reinvention. thats right it is not the classic teacher older student-younger anymore.
rebels (teaching class), choosing rather selfish causes and trying to grab the gallant but retired swords from the display walls of a gallery. flip/flap/fold?"
but the funny thing is they'll tell u they're not avant garde and that they're against the idea of avant garde and somehow that , being against the avant garde, becomes and sounds like the new avant garde. like anti-theory becoming the new de rigeur theory.
in undergrad theory we learned that a major component of the 'avant garde' was that it becomes a reorientation of the criteria for critique, i.e, the old rules of engagement don't work.
very few are doing that kind of major shifting of the plates these days.
possibly some of those who have gotten so completely away from traditional modes of building design/development via digital modeling-straight-to-production that their critique has a different language? but a lot of that gets bogged down in sculptural manipulation to no purpose, allowing no critique.
google, maybe?
Jul 25, 07 5:26 pm ·
·
The real funny thing is that any good design, whether avant garde or not, is soon enough reenacted.
I wonder how much reenactment is actually involved in legitimacy.
re:digital ( i dont mean to lump this with all the above)
i believe the current trends of digital mode of design is to bypass scultpural manipulation altogether. i read a lot pf claims about the joint process of scripting, programming (both architectural and computer simultaneously), parametric manipulation (and therefor only , as a consequence, transitively formal manipulation) .... in a way i understand that architecture, in that manner of design, is the consequence of designing and manipulating formulas. the real design effort goes not directly in the associated formal representation but the coding of that representation, its numerical rubrics. it seems to me therefor, that if there is the possibility of a critical disposition, it should be at the level of computer programming. i cannot really truly understand what i'm writing now, since i do not possess that tool or know-how...but as a general assumption on my part, the tool u use can just as clearly and amiably dipict (or regurgitate) reality as it can abrasively disfigure and refigure it. perhaps, in this manner, using its own language in a self reflexive manner, the digital can be self reflexive and not just regurgitate something that is its orthodox reality. having said that, i liked that, as an example, the Emergent group at the AA produce work (ive only seen it on websites) that is based on such technologies and has a formal and structural affinity to archaic natural structures (plants and other organisms). in a retro way, its quite romantic and sometimes poetic work actually, techno with resonance of the natural
Once again, no one has the right to make assertions but your own, one-liner droppin' self, right?
I was makin' one of them analogies, too, in fact, I was tryin' to build on yours. Only I wanted to spell it out and footnote it to maybe participate in a whole conversation about it and everything. But if you wanna start swingin' it out art history style then that's cool too, I guess.
and its obsession with mathematics. adding to that...UN studio also has that romantic streak of basing a lot of their work on geometries
that are part of a history of mathetmatical knowledge. their surfaces and solids warp and all, but they always do with the closure of formulas. it all ends up being very cute and controlled and understandable in a complex way. of course, married to the architectural program. bt it does not contribute to our understanding of a wall (warped curvalicious walls have been done b4) or a column or space or...it is a very nice consummation of whats already around. its not subversive, but its stll convincing...and the nice thing about UN studio is that they Berkel does not bullshit a lot (I find FOA's Zaero-Polo more morally outraged and didactically lecturing...his berlage talk with van toorn ( <= i so dont think i liked his writings btw)
david was such a poseur that when the monarchy was reestablished in france, he was exiled to brussels and after his death his body was not allowed to be buried in france.
The AIA is pleased to announce it has decided to take control of this magazine. Please sign the attached AIA forms at your convenience. All posting and e-mail traffic will be monitored closely. Public censure will be provided for the non compliant. We are pleased to provide our leadership to the public at large.
"possibly some of those who have gotten so completely away from traditional modes of building design/development via digital modeling-straight-to-production that their critique has a different language? but a lot of that gets bogged down in sculptural manipulation to no purpose, allowing no critique."
I protest about the term "sculptural manipulation , this is the way architecture see new things from how things has been done for centuries , where are the facade drawing in a 3D model, --- more relevant issues are the focus now a day's than how a number of floor plans are what decide the structure, much more are allowed with the focus on the structure , and you can't crit that from the old perception of the build works.
"allowing no critique."
Not nessery ,the crits already is very heavy the other way -- ordering any step in that direction to comform with how things already are done, and if it is not done as how things are already done --- well then it define itself as Wrong. Isn't that true ? --- Not much critic are allowed from those who experiment and acturly know the dead-ends , so much silli words already prove that, prove that if there are no facade drawing, then this is the critic and every new issue are silenced ; I personaly seen it so often that someone critic ,only becaurse "this is different" and the person who make the critic simply don't understand as this is different ,so it's wrong. Example ; I got suggestions back based on 3D drawings, with the exchouse that the arear calculations are not done , even area calculations in a 3D drawing is not nessery , Gee the 3D drawing is alway's one to one .
See that's more than crits it is protecting the old from the new, and if any 3D drawing must confirm the rules of 2D drawing , then maybe the crits became to arogant towerds what they don't understand, the new.
Sorry it was the words "sculptural manipulation" that made me rotate, --- this termsso often has reflected a critics understanding ,done from an oldfasion perception and not at all what 3D modeling is about.
To critic the new from the pespective of the old , that's what wrong. To do this with no understanding of the core creative drive, expecting a "sculptural" attitude just becaurse the house is not a box is Wrong, and worse of all , it restrain the crits to discuss the outher expression, and when critics do that then every new issue , such as direct lik production, will be understood as how bricks alway's was made.
Just becaurse we are not tigh up by the materials restrictions anymore, just becaurse CAD make us form the rooms and spaces as we want, this don't mean that the focus are the form -- it is not the focus are the structure ,and that is different than realising the building as a mere "sculpture" , Gee as soon a new perception allow things to be made different it has to be a sculpture , wrong wrong again.
i am now interested in hearing what the Verb (n Volume) folk have to say after all this. Or else, this is not more useful than silly nagging. A review of a review? There has been a volume of negative reactions. Is that symptomatic (of variant archinect cyber reviewings or of your respective zines)?
Verb: Featured Discussion
if i was verb i would publish this thread in it is entirety when is no longer possible to post on it and put it in a zarf which also means envelope in turkish but it is basically a hot cup holder, but i am just a noun, yeah call it a zarf issue.
ahahah, analyse this. people think i speak german in fact i only studied for 6 years without speaking a word i think verb is a most fucked-with grammatic object of art in any language.
orhan, you are a verb!
"i'm going to have to ask what is architecture then?"
.
.
.
.
How should we then live? Or is that the architectural process?
What the F is the motivation for publishing VERB ? Why go through all the trouble to publish something that seems inane to the general public ? Why is it good to do something for the sake of "doing" it ? After flipping through VERB at the bookstore, I think I would like a call to arms for architects to start rethinking their priorities, we each have only 24 hours a day; what exactly are worth investigating, and what are worth making pretty graphics about!
can't believe no one has posted the 'verb!' theme song yet:
i get my thing in action (verb!)
to be, to see, to feel, to live (verb!)
that's what's happenin'
i put my heart in action (verb!)
to run, to go, to get, to give (verb!)
(you're what's happenin')
that's where i find satisfaction, yeah! (yeah!)
to search, to find, to have, to hold.
(verb! to be bold)
when i use my imagination (verb!)
i think, i plot, i plan, i dream
turning in towards creation (verb!)
i make, i write, i dance, i sing
when i'm feeling really active (verb!)
i run, i ride, i swim, i fly!
other times when life is easy
(oh!) i rest, i sleep, i sit, i lie.
(verb! that's what happenin')
i can take a noun and bend it,
give me a noun -
(bat, boat, rake, and plow)
make it a verb and really send it!
(show me how)
oh, i don't know my own power. (verb!)
i get my thing in action (verb!)
in being, (verb!) in doing, (verb!)
in saying
a verb expresses action, being, or state of being.
a verb makes a statement.
yeah, a verb tells it like it is!
(verb! that's what's happenin'.)
i can tell you when it's happenin',
(past, present, future tense)
oh! tell you more about what's happenin',
(say it so it makes some sense)
i can yell you who is happenin'!
(verb, you're so intense)
every sentence has a subject.
(noun, person, place, or thing)
find that subject: where's the action?
verb can make a subject sing.)
take the subject: what is it? (what!)
what's done to it? (what!)
what does it say?
(verb, you're what's happenin')
i can question, like: what is it?
(verb, you're so demanding.)
i can order like: go get it!
(verb, you're so commanding.)
when i hit i need an object
(verb, hit! hit the ball!)
when i see, i see the object
(verb, hit! hit the ball!)
when i see, i see the object
(do you see that furthest wall?)
if you can see it there, put that ball over the fence, man!
go ahead. yeah, all right.
what?! he hit it. it's going, it's going, it's gone!
(what?!)
i get my thing in action.
(verb, that's what happenin')
to work, (verb!)
to play, (verb!)
to live, (verb!)
to love... (verb!...)
haha! i get my thing in action! VERB that's what's happen'in!
i almost used that as the cover image--almost.
i've been thinking about verb, volume, and some of the other more recent publications and it occurred to me that their formative attitude itself may be what undermines their value for me. the 'zine' attitude, the revolution, the agitation, whatever, all basically is a questioning of any recognition of academic - um - for lack of a better word - authority.
when i read october, assemblage, any, and the oppositions publications i could know that the writers were speaking from positions of experience, accomplishment, and that their comments had been rigorously vetted - both by them and by others.
these publications seem more casual. 'if i think it, it's worth putting out there.' - sorta thing. or 'it seems interesting. let's see if it's more interesting if we put it next to this.' this sort of anti-academic, anti-author(ity) position IS interesting, but only for a short time. it doesn't have the legs, the longevity, that the more complete explorations of the past had. it's like what we do here on archinect which, sorry, is not likely to be worth publishing in hard copy.
i'm not arguing that we foster some sort of a star author culture among architectural critics. we kind of still have that, to a point. but just that there is something missing in these publications. a historic thread, a reference back to past thinking in a rigorous way (not just twee quotation and image reference).
i miss colomina, sennett, evans, rowe, and all the other folks who really challenged me to think harder, not just to drift along the surface of things.
Yes, we should all think harder. What this society needs are writers who can PRODUCE. Their texts should as rigorous as a doctorate thesis, the denser and least accessible the better.
I've found that the least accessible and lengthy, drawn out writings garner the most respect, especially if their critical nature borders on extreme passion.
Palladio is the foundation of our modern architecture, let's start at the beginning.
^^ well, it IS sarcastic wednesday.
"Boogazine"
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a color Booooogazine ?
My friends all read trendy magazines, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So Lord, won’t you buy me a new Booogazine ?
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a new Volume?
Dialing For Dollars is trying to find me.
I wait for delivery each day until three,
So oh Lord, won’t you buy me a new Volume?
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a night on the stool ?
I’m counting on you, Lord, please don’t let me un-cool.
Prove that you love me and buy the next issue,
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a night on the stool ?
Everybody!
Oh Lord, won’t you buy me a color Booooogazine ?
My friends all read trendy magazines, I must make amends.
Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends,
So Lord, won’t you buy me a new Booogazine ?
That’s it!
abracadabra from vado retro's lyrics studio
thanks for the nod abra. you're cd is in the mail. anyway, perhaps these self published journals are the equivalent of vanity presses. if i publish my own novel is it as legit as if i am picked up by a press etc. if it is good, well yes. if it is not good. well, no. but in this day and age people can self publish art, music, film etc. and that is perfectly fine. we all find little gems that the established media outlets miss. however, is criticism the same? does a critic/observer of culture need street cred? i don't know the answer. i know that my exgirlfriend/future wife at cambridge(the real one) cannot just self publish her writings on beckett, the sublime and postcolonialism and have them greeted with any legitimacy. In her case the writing must be vetted by "the experts".
Perhaps all "the experts" really want is to maintain their control of what is "legitimate".
"Official art culture is much more effective in its control of history than Republican strategists, for it knows that the best way to treat contradictory material is not to rail against it, but simply to pretend it didn't happen."
"The Establishment" has a long history of ignoring material that eminates from outside their control, and, more times than not, the establishment ultimately has to accept what it first chose to ignore (or deem illegitimate).
There is a direct relationship between ignoring and ignorance.
You are recommending the Republican strategists of this magazine to accept all "material" as worthy of consideration? Why?
What I am "recommending" is that it does not matter what "this magazine" accepts because "legitimacy" is not under their control.
Whether or not something is in verb has little bearing as to whether something is legitimate or not.
Legitimacy is an amorphous thing.
everyone who has control wants to maintain that control. and why would you bother learning/studying/writing about something unless you want to be allowed into whatever little pantheon it is that you're looking to be admitted to. most people don't do it as a hobby. that's what macrame is for.
"this sort of anti-academic, anti-author(ity) position IS interesting, but only for a short time."
" the 'zine' attitude, the revolution, the agitation, whatever, all basically is a questioning of any recognition of academic - um - for lack of a better word - authority" stephen ward
i disagree. firstly, i can't see where there is agitation or revolution. the tone, language and choice of content utilize recognizable tics of previous subversions but there is hardly any dissent, in fact there is little originality and much frivolity. i think u're being unecessarily, and maybe knowingly so, empathetic. secondly, academia, in its youthful strata, has well incorporated the 'questioning of authority' and has consequently established itself as an authority on 'questioning authority'. the ideas, or more symptomatically the style, pervading those apres the avant garde zines will not be alien to young arch. professors in barcelona, n.y and london. therefor, i doubt it is a matter of 'questioning the authority' anymore but in fact a reification of authority that is as tied down to class (middle class to well off, a certain calibre of education, resonant (within that same class) concerns and possessing of a certain 'knowing' language (peppered with foucault, de landa, deleuze, cnc milling know-how and dog training techniques)) and prejudice as much as before.
this is my question to myself and others: is this frivolty of flirting with dissent (stylistically) a subliminal result of the architect's realization of how powerless s/he in ...and goes hand-in-hand with the sombreness of complacency shown lately in going with the flow and against dissent actual?
I learn/study/write about something precisely because it isn't a bother; it seems to happen naturally.
if you think you are avant garde. you aren't.
noctilucent -
you're right that i was accepting that 'agitation' was what was talked about, but that i shouldn't actually credit any of these documents for achieving it. and i sort of agree with your other comments.
and your last statement (deserves to be copied: is this...flirting with dissent (stylistically) a subliminal result of the architect's realization of how powerless s/he is...hand-in-hand with the...complacency shown lately in going with the flow and against dissent actual?) cuts to the quick. i suspect there is a lot of truth in it.
i guess i'm resisting the 'questioning of authority' not in favor of 'going with the flow' but in favor of recognizing that there are people who know more about some things than i do and that it would be helpful to me to use them as a resource. we can't know everything. it used to be that an architects' job was less about knowing all than it was about knowing where to find what information you need in the given circumstances. in my own conservative way i worry that there is a laziness afoot and it's become more acceptable to resist authority, NOT find the information, and just make things up that seem interesting.
all these fragonard's think they are david.
vado, what do you think david thought he was?
david sharpened the blade that beheaded his patrons.
Dude, I'm rereading David's bio sketch on wikipedia right now, if there's ever anyone who thought he was more 'avant garde' than the next ten guys it was him. C'mon, going on a hunger strike to get the Rome Prize? He sounds like an opportunistic poseur to me, it just so happens he could also paint pretty well.
To be explicit about it: who cares whether anyone thinks they are avant garde or not? If you're doing good work, great, if you're not, so be it. it's the the process of criticism to sort that out, they usually get it right in the long run, it just takes a couple of centuries.
vado retro, if you think you're in control of legitimacy, you're not.
Noc:
Questioning authority is in the realm of the "youthful strata".
Your local AIA, authority in all matters Architecture, would be pleased to offer you their leadership by means of AIA subcommittee in the matter of your venture's legitimacy in the community at large.
11:58:
"well said noctilucent.
actually i find a lot of the 'architectural acedemia' in the state of trying to reinvent itself in urgency. and adapt. all that rebel rausing is to sharpen their own blade and guard the lectern. to appeal.
irony is,
students know more than their instructors about the terrain. because they don't have to buy into that terrain since they are the children of that location, by default, however conceptually or experiencially.
now, the slightly older academics are trying hard for that reinvention. thats right it is not the classic teacher older student-younger anymore.
rebels (teaching class), choosing rather selfish causes and trying to grab the gallant but retired swords from the display walls of a gallery. flip/flap/fold?"
but the funny thing is they'll tell u they're not avant garde and that they're against the idea of avant garde and somehow that , being against the avant garde, becomes and sounds like the new avant garde. like anti-theory becoming the new de rigeur theory.
it IS kinda funny that way.
in undergrad theory we learned that a major component of the 'avant garde' was that it becomes a reorientation of the criteria for critique, i.e, the old rules of engagement don't work.
very few are doing that kind of major shifting of the plates these days.
possibly some of those who have gotten so completely away from traditional modes of building design/development via digital modeling-straight-to-production that their critique has a different language? but a lot of that gets bogged down in sculptural manipulation to no purpose, allowing no critique.
google, maybe?
The real funny thing is that any good design, whether avant garde or not, is soon enough reenacted.
I wonder how much reenactment is actually involved in legitimacy.
re:digital ( i dont mean to lump this with all the above)
i believe the current trends of digital mode of design is to bypass scultpural manipulation altogether. i read a lot pf claims about the joint process of scripting, programming (both architectural and computer simultaneously), parametric manipulation (and therefor only , as a consequence, transitively formal manipulation) .... in a way i understand that architecture, in that manner of design, is the consequence of designing and manipulating formulas. the real design effort goes not directly in the associated formal representation but the coding of that representation, its numerical rubrics. it seems to me therefor, that if there is the possibility of a critical disposition, it should be at the level of computer programming. i cannot really truly understand what i'm writing now, since i do not possess that tool or know-how...but as a general assumption on my part, the tool u use can just as clearly and amiably dipict (or regurgitate) reality as it can abrasively disfigure and refigure it. perhaps, in this manner, using its own language in a self reflexive manner, the digital can be self reflexive and not just regurgitate something that is its orthodox reality. having said that, i liked that, as an example, the Emergent group at the AA produce work (ive only seen it on websites) that is based on such technologies and has a formal and structural affinity to archaic natural structures (plants and other organisms). in a retro way, its quite romantic and sometimes poetic work actually, techno with resonance of the natural
i was makin what is called an analogy. if you think david was a poseur, you need more of an art history lesson than wikipedia can provide.
Once again, no one has the right to make assertions but your own, one-liner droppin' self, right?
I was makin' one of them analogies, too, in fact, I was tryin' to build on yours. Only I wanted to spell it out and footnote it to maybe participate in a whole conversation about it and everything. But if you wanna start swingin' it out art history style then that's cool too, I guess.
Carry on with the one-liners, boss.
and its obsession with mathematics. adding to that...UN studio also has that romantic streak of basing a lot of their work on geometries
that are part of a history of mathetmatical knowledge. their surfaces and solids warp and all, but they always do with the closure of formulas. it all ends up being very cute and controlled and understandable in a complex way. of course, married to the architectural program. bt it does not contribute to our understanding of a wall (warped curvalicious walls have been done b4) or a column or space or...it is a very nice consummation of whats already around. its not subversive, but its stll convincing...and the nice thing about UN studio is that they Berkel does not bullshit a lot (I find FOA's Zaero-Polo more morally outraged and didactically lecturing...his
berlage talk with van toorn ( <= i so dont think i liked his writings btw)
david was such a poseur that when the monarchy was reestablished in france, he was exiled to brussels and after his death his body was not allowed to be buried in france.
The AIA is pleased to announce it has decided to take control of this magazine. Please sign the attached AIA forms at your convenience. All posting and e-mail traffic will be monitored closely. Public censure will be provided for the non compliant. We are pleased to provide our leadership to the public at large.
"possibly some of those who have gotten so completely away from traditional modes of building design/development via digital modeling-straight-to-production that their critique has a different language? but a lot of that gets bogged down in sculptural manipulation to no purpose, allowing no critique."
I protest about the term "sculptural manipulation , this is the way architecture see new things from how things has been done for centuries , where are the facade drawing in a 3D model, --- more relevant issues are the focus now a day's than how a number of floor plans are what decide the structure, much more are allowed with the focus on the structure , and you can't crit that from the old perception of the build works.
"allowing no critique."
Not nessery ,the crits already is very heavy the other way -- ordering any step in that direction to comform with how things already are done, and if it is not done as how things are already done --- well then it define itself as Wrong. Isn't that true ? --- Not much critic are allowed from those who experiment and acturly know the dead-ends , so much silli words already prove that, prove that if there are no facade drawing, then this is the critic and every new issue are silenced ; I personaly seen it so often that someone critic ,only becaurse "this is different" and the person who make the critic simply don't understand as this is different ,so it's wrong. Example ; I got suggestions back based on 3D drawings, with the exchouse that the arear calculations are not done , even area calculations in a 3D drawing is not nessery , Gee the 3D drawing is alway's one to one .
See that's more than crits it is protecting the old from the new, and if any 3D drawing must confirm the rules of 2D drawing , then maybe the crits became to arogant towerds what they don't understand, the new.
Sorry it was the words "sculptural manipulation" that made me rotate, --- this termsso often has reflected a critics understanding ,done from an oldfasion perception and not at all what 3D modeling is about.
To critic the new from the pespective of the old , that's what wrong. To do this with no understanding of the core creative drive, expecting a "sculptural" attitude just becaurse the house is not a box is Wrong, and worse of all , it restrain the crits to discuss the outher expression, and when critics do that then every new issue , such as direct lik production, will be understood as how bricks alway's was made.
Just becaurse we are not tigh up by the materials restrictions anymore, just becaurse CAD make us form the rooms and spaces as we want, this don't mean that the focus are the form -- it is not the focus are the structure ,and that is different than realising the building as a mere "sculpture" , Gee as soon a new perception allow things to be made different it has to be a sculpture , wrong wrong again.
i am now interested in hearing what the Verb (n Volume) folk have to say after all this. Or else, this is not more useful than silly nagging. A review of a review? There has been a volume of negative reactions. Is that symptomatic (of variant archinect cyber reviewings or of your respective zines)?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.