(quote)
If the ugly is still ingrained in a paradigm of absolute geometrical control, of an architectural interiority that asserts at indexing its logic with an excessive sistematicity; then the horrific would find a way of eloping by inserting an emphasis in the figures at play, the figures within its external immediate spatial boundaries, instead of its interior confines. As in Francis Bacon's paintings, and in particular in: Second Version of Triptych 1944-1988, where the use of the triptych, with its spatial continuum, and the emphasis in the figures, with their resonance and transformation, denotes not only the implementation of a technique but also the emphasis on producing an affected 'sensation' through its figural manipulation."
God I love Bacon, but honestly I can't make sense of that quote. I am usually a fan of rich language but to a certain extent I gotta believe that if you can't make a semi-clever person like me understand what you are trying to say in two readings than you should lighten up on the linguistic acrobatics and talk American. It's like reading Bourdieu, but less rewarding. Anyone want to explain to me what that was all about? I'm feeling rather stupid.
I tend to think hyper-intellectualization like that mess is a form of overcompensation, kinda like guys that drive trucks w/ really big wheels or women that wear way too much make up...
"With a base of rules and algorithms the digital field allows its calculating power to engender an extensive array of formal manipulations, at the same time the digital environment transforms the manipulation of the object by collapsing the vertical and horizontal, via simultaneously rendering plan, section, elevation and perspective, the three-dimensional devise enables analysis and object to become congruent."
Translation:
With, like, 3D modeling you can replace those like boring 2D drawings with like really cool-looking perspectives and stuff. You can, like, know what everything looks like, so, like, yeah?
"Bearing in mind that we have declared that this topological design paradigm is still rooted within the confines of architectures aims for proportion and beauty, the ugly and horrific are the necessary variations that allows an escape way towards a spatial model that is of a shocking presence."
But it's so, like, 20th century to use 3D modeling to make, like, beautiful buildings. SO boring. so like, ugly is, like, the new beautiful.
If the ugly is still ingrained in a paradigm of absolute geometrical control, of an architectural interiority that asserts at indexing its logic with an excessive sistematicity; then the horrific would find a way of eloping by inserting an emphasis in the figures at play, the figures within its external immediate spatial boundaries, instead of its interior confines. As in Francis Bacon's paintings, and in particular in: Second Version of Triptych 1944-1988, where the use of the triptych, with its spatial continuum, and the emphasis in the figures, with their resonance and transformation, denotes not only the implementation of a technique but also the emphasis on producing an affected 'sensation' through its figural manipulation.
So, like, there's ugly and then there's, like, horrific, which is like, really ugly. Somebody at a party, like, said i should so, like, talk about francis bacon in this lecture because, like, he's painting the same thing three times or something. Like the cubists, like, didn't do that or something. So yeah?
"From the ugly to the horrific, it is intuition through technique what creates a provocation in the material to produce distress, as shocking effects that have a resonance beyond the particularities that bring them upon. Likewise a magician whose tricks are never revealed, we appreciate them only in their effects."
So, like, the difference between ugly and horrific is, like, ugly is accidental but, like, horrific is, like, on purpose. And like, you'll never know how I make concrete look transparent in my renderings unless you, like, learn Maya.
wow - yeah I mean - Bacon's work is nice, on paper. Which is where most art resides. But we do have to build architecture, unlike Bacon's art which remains a representation of abstraction on a canvas, Hernan has to build to be called an architect.
i can probably buy the assertion that the speaker believes in the ability of shock and horror to elevate one's consciousness. but one must ask, why in architecture? why not perform that function in visual art, music, film, dance, or ... almost anything else besides something that has to keep out water and provide a safe means to exit in case of fire? at least francis bacon was in the right profession.
ultimately, in this incomprehensible statement (thanks translation) hernan is reducing his architecture to a fad aesthetic; purposeful ugliness. to define something as 'interesting' if it is a certain way confines it to a limited time period. that's why 'interesting' is such a shitty word to use regarding architecture which is sometimes related-to but isn't ever fully 'art'. hernan's work would be justifiable if he called himself an installation artist but his attempts to legitimize his work under the label of 'architecture' are totally farce. this provocateur doesn't deserve to call his self absorbed artistic tantrums architecture.
true thenewold, true...
When architecture becomes interesting to Horrific just for the sake of making too much noise (provocatour) it doesn't seem to be the right direction to! But for sure he's got a 'name' now! I really hope Hernan will built some great Monster to Fuk Gehry up and then we all will realise...but what if he is stuck in mere installations of moma kind!!! I really have faith in those guyz!!!
Francis Bacon's Horrifics to Hernans
(quote)
If the ugly is still ingrained in a paradigm of absolute geometrical control, of an architectural interiority that asserts at indexing its logic with an excessive sistematicity; then the horrific would find a way of eloping by inserting an emphasis in the figures at play, the figures within its external immediate spatial boundaries, instead of its interior confines. As in Francis Bacon's paintings, and in particular in: Second Version of Triptych 1944-1988, where the use of the triptych, with its spatial continuum, and the emphasis in the figures, with their resonance and transformation, denotes not only the implementation of a technique but also the emphasis on producing an affected 'sensation' through its figural manipulation."
God I love Bacon, but honestly I can't make sense of that quote. I am usually a fan of rich language but to a certain extent I gotta believe that if you can't make a semi-clever person like me understand what you are trying to say in two readings than you should lighten up on the linguistic acrobatics and talk American. It's like reading Bourdieu, but less rewarding. Anyone want to explain to me what that was all about? I'm feeling rather stupid.
I love bacon too, and I had to this jumble.
I tend to think hyper-intellectualization like that mess is a form of overcompensation, kinda like guys that drive trucks w/ really big wheels or women that wear way too much make up...
allow me to translate from academese:
"With a base of rules and algorithms the digital field allows its calculating power to engender an extensive array of formal manipulations, at the same time the digital environment transforms the manipulation of the object by collapsing the vertical and horizontal, via simultaneously rendering plan, section, elevation and perspective, the three-dimensional devise enables analysis and object to become congruent."
Translation:
With, like, 3D modeling you can replace those like boring 2D drawings with like really cool-looking perspectives and stuff. You can, like, know what everything looks like, so, like, yeah?
"Bearing in mind that we have declared that this topological design paradigm is still rooted within the confines of architectures aims for proportion and beauty, the ugly and horrific are the necessary variations that allows an escape way towards a spatial model that is of a shocking presence."
But it's so, like, 20th century to use 3D modeling to make, like, beautiful buildings. SO boring. so like, ugly is, like, the new beautiful.
If the ugly is still ingrained in a paradigm of absolute geometrical control, of an architectural interiority that asserts at indexing its logic with an excessive sistematicity; then the horrific would find a way of eloping by inserting an emphasis in the figures at play, the figures within its external immediate spatial boundaries, instead of its interior confines. As in Francis Bacon's paintings, and in particular in: Second Version of Triptych 1944-1988, where the use of the triptych, with its spatial continuum, and the emphasis in the figures, with their resonance and transformation, denotes not only the implementation of a technique but also the emphasis on producing an affected 'sensation' through its figural manipulation.
So, like, there's ugly and then there's, like, horrific, which is like, really ugly. Somebody at a party, like, said i should so, like, talk about francis bacon in this lecture because, like, he's painting the same thing three times or something. Like the cubists, like, didn't do that or something. So yeah?
"From the ugly to the horrific, it is intuition through technique what creates a provocation in the material to produce distress, as shocking effects that have a resonance beyond the particularities that bring them upon. Likewise a magician whose tricks are never revealed, we appreciate them only in their effects."
So, like, the difference between ugly and horrific is, like, ugly is accidental but, like, horrific is, like, on purpose. And like, you'll never know how I make concrete look transparent in my renderings unless you, like, learn Maya.
yay very weatherspoon *jumps up and down squeals with joy and claps*
and bacon. yuk. its only horrific because its yuk.
wow - yeah I mean - Bacon's work is nice, on paper. Which is where most art resides. But we do have to build architecture, unlike Bacon's art which remains a representation of abstraction on a canvas, Hernan has to build to be called an architect.
Thanks ochona. What a valley girl that Hernan is.
translation: bacon looked to titian. alot.
Ochona you're so,like, 'LIKE'
Wow, like...
But I still like, can't find the point of it, like...?
had to put that speech in a way that i could understand it.
*waiting for sci-archer to defensive
*bracing
*wincing....
On a side note, I defended the PS1 project... but it looks like a mongolian clusterfuck right now...
anyone read the review in ArcRecord?
i can probably buy the assertion that the speaker believes in the ability of shock and horror to elevate one's consciousness. but one must ask, why in architecture? why not perform that function in visual art, music, film, dance, or ... almost anything else besides something that has to keep out water and provide a safe means to exit in case of fire? at least francis bacon was in the right profession.
ultimately, in this incomprehensible statement (thanks translation) hernan is reducing his architecture to a fad aesthetic; purposeful ugliness. to define something as 'interesting' if it is a certain way confines it to a limited time period. that's why 'interesting' is such a shitty word to use regarding architecture which is sometimes related-to but isn't ever fully 'art'. hernan's work would be justifiable if he called himself an installation artist but his attempts to legitimize his work under the label of 'architecture' are totally farce. this provocateur doesn't deserve to call his self absorbed artistic tantrums architecture.
true thenewold, true...
When architecture becomes interesting to Horrific just for the sake of making too much noise (provocatour) it doesn't seem to be the right direction to! But for sure he's got a 'name' now! I really hope Hernan will built some great Monster to Fuk Gehry up and then we all will realise...but what if he is stuck in mere installations of moma kind!!! I really have faith in those guyz!!!
P.S: My apologies to all the Gehry's fans, sorry :)
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.