I was studying architectural styles and movements through the 20th century until now . It was amazing to study these movements,but i got lost when i began to reach the recent nowadays projects..i couldnt classify them..and couldnt categorize them...can anyone help..What is the movement of our time? is it deconstruction? high tech? virtual reality? fluid..techtonics...??
decon is over i believe, perhaps there are no classifications for this one, or better yet, until someone coins a term like Wigley or Johnson coined decon to describe it, there has been no one to say anything other than Blobitecture, but that is probably more derisive than anything.
eschew trying to pin down this moment, live in the glow and let the aging historians come up with a name.
saw some book about -isms recently (forgot the exact name though it seems like something published by taschen)
it had "metarationalism" as the last segment (which featured projects like tods omotesando and other fashion related, consumerist type of architecture..)
perhaps this could explain the current trends?
agree with iconic architecture too. especially in middle east, every project developer seems to have that clause in the project brief "to develop something iconic"....
when all these 'iconic' stuff sprout out they wont be so iconic anymore in the context and company of the rest of 'iconics'
I would like to think that the age of "isms" is now dead. There is not one single theory or style that is being perscribe currently. We have let many ideas from fields all over to influence us. But that influence is in a mostly superficial way because continuity of those ideas are retired to find the next big concept.
If there is an "ism" right now, Jencks is right on the mark. Everything that it is newsworthy in architecture is an icon. I believe this is a back lash to the post modern thinking of contextualism.
Decon died back in the late eighties/ early ninties.
Well I'll admit its a bit silly to talk about, theres just no way to identify these trends outside thier relationship to predecessors and sucessors, but youd better believe someone will give all that zaha/lynn/nox shit a name someday. Theres still a lot of decon going on, I dont know what else you could call morphosis.
Metarationalism... mmm. I do like the sound of that.
It is a paragime shift, the ability to form what structure you wish , is what , gentlemen, finaly new grought the efficient of the most efficiency ,a Rush , the digital options. So we reached the efficiency in actural building methods uncover the future. This is no -ism or fancy Decor style , this is another thing, a Mountain of money.
Feb 18, 07 12:52 pm ·
·
Reenactionary Architecturism
18 February 2000: Perhaps all abstractions are highly idealized reenactments of reality, rather than reality being a reenactment of highly idealized abstractions.
--A Quondam Banquet of Virtual Sachlichkeit: Part III, p. 451.
I think that we as an global architectural community have reached a point of anti movements, or better still anti isms....a difficulty to pigeon hole us
better do your own thing then try categorizing... the latter is usually not that interesting anyways, because it generalizes and, therefore, misses too much
Name any current mathematical, scientific or philosophical theory, and there's an architecture that will try to reenact it.
Look at the architecture of Mies, Le Corbusier (especially the late works), and Kahn (especially the early works), and there's a lot of contemporay architecture reenacting all that.
Philip Johnson's architecture is one reenactment after another.
Frank Gehry's architecture evolves via reenacting itself.
You want something original? Just reenact with a twist.
twist
–verb (used with object)
1. to combine, as two or more strands or threads, by winding together; intertwine.
2. to form by or as if by winding strands together: Several fibers were used to twist the rope.
3. to entwine (one thing) with another; interlace (something) with something else; interweave; plait.
4. to wind or coil (something) about something else; encircle; entwine; wreathe.
5. to alter in shape, as by turning the ends in opposite directions, so that parts previously in the same straight line and plane are located in a spiral curve: The sculptor twisted the form into an arabesque. He twisted his body around to look behind him.
6. to turn sharply or wrench out of place; sprain: He twisted his ankle.
7. to pull, tear, or break off by turning forcibly: He twisted the arm off the puppet.
8. to distort (the features) by tensing or contracting the facial muscles; contort: She twisted her face in a wry smile.
9. to distort the meaning or form of; pervert: He twisted my comment about to suit his own purpose.
10. to cause to become mentally or emotionally distorted; warp: The loss of his business twisted his whole outlook on life.
11. to form into a coil, knot, or the like by winding, rolling, etc.: to twist the hair into a knot.
12. to bend tortuously.
13. to cause to move with a rotary motion, as a ball pitched in a curve.
14. to turn (something) from one direction to another, as by rotating or revolving: I twisted my chair to face the window.
15. to combine or associate intimately.
–verb (used without object)
16. to be or become intertwined.
17. to wind or twine about something.
18. to writhe or squirm.
19. to take a spiral form or course; wind, curve, or bend.
20. to turn or rotate, as on an axis; revolve, as about something; spin.
21. to turn so as to face in another direction.
22. to turn, coil, or bend into a spiral shape.
23. to change shape under forcible turning or twisting.
24. to move with a progressive rotary motion, as a ball pitched in a curve. 25. to dance the twist.
–noun
26. a deviation in direction; curve; bend; turn.
27. the action of turning or rotating on an axis; rotary motion; spin.
28. anything formed by or as if by twisting or twining parts together.
29. the act or process of twining strands together, as in thread, yarn, or rope.
30. a twisting awry or askew.
31. distortion or perversion, as of meaning or form.
32. a peculiar attitude or bias; eccentric turn or bent of mind; eccentricity.
33. spiral disposition, arrangement, or form.
34. spiral movement or course.
35. an irregular bend; crook; kink.
36. a sudden, unanticipated change of course, as of events.
37. a treatment, method, idea, version, etc., esp. one differing from that which preceded: The screenwriters gave the old plot a new twist.
38. the changing of the shape of anything by or as by turning the ends in opposite directions.
39. the stress causing this alteration; torque.
40. the resulting state.
41. a twisting or torsional action, force, or stress; torsion.
42. a strong, twisted silk thread, heavier than ordinary sewing silk, for working buttonholes and for other purposes.
43. the direction of twisting in weaving yarn; S twist or Z twist.
44. a loaf or roll of dough twisted and baked.
45. a strip of citrus peel that has been twisted and placed in a drink to add flavor.
46. a kind of tobacco manufactured in the form of a rope or thick cord.
47. a dance performed by couples and characterized by strongly rhythmic turns and twists of the arms, legs, and torso.
48. the degree of spiral formed by the grooves in a rifled firearm or cannon.
49. Gymnastics, Diving. a full rotation of the body about the vertical axis.
50. a wrench.
[note to self: reenactment with a twist, is that what Hejduk's architecture is really all about?]
but if one were to categorise the current state of architecture I suspect it would be post-consummerism with a state of architecongraphy (architect as fetish object) with an inlying of environmental & sustainable consciousness (growing to a subconsciousness)
although most starchitects don't know it yet, the biggest movement in coming years will be sustainable architecture. just as modernism was a cultural movement, so too is sustainability. a true movement extends beyond only architecture
Then again it could be called the second movement....similar to number 1 and number 2....it is just a kinder way of saying it.
You know with all the box stores and strip malls and zero lot subdivisions......it is alot like number 2 when you really take a long hard look at it.
first of all, the market of theory publication is shrinking in the past ten years. A lot of small publishers who used to publish theory has now switch to publish picture books. For theories, now is dominate by a few publisher like princeton architectural press/MIT... etc...
and in order to get ur interesting idea publish, u need to be friends with famous architects or theorist, so they will introduce u to MIT/Princeton architectural press... or else ur ideas will not even reach their desktop.
and in order to be friends with the famous architects or theorist, ur ideas need to be "coherent" with their ideas...
therefore u see "curvy form" everywhere all over the world and everyone saying the same thing. Because these things sells.
The problem with the "curvy form" is that architect only utilising 5% of what those high end computer programming can do. Now it becomes a matter of "craftmanship" to make nice curve.
today's primary movement, as evidenced by using either most square miles covered or number of rooftops as the metric, is called 'rapid vapid expansion of fields of suburban mcmansions'.
Regionalism - already seen in Dutch architecture, Chile, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, now Japan, Denmark, Austria, Germany, soon China. The expression of aesthetic, cultural, environmental and materiality from a particular locality.
Feeds into a larger fashion cycle of architourism and archieconomics [the Bilbao effect]. Iconography and shopping work hand in hand.
Sustainability will be aligned to the regions in which it is most easily and cheaply realised [taking advantage of climate] - Australia, New Zealand, The Americas etc, therefore a subset of regionalism. May gain more precedence when its tents are more wide spread and cheaper to instigate.
Sustainability will never be labeled a movement. It is just another strategy in making a building. The idea that the building should be nice to the environment is not a concept, it is just an obvious concious implementation to design that comes with a trendy label ("certified platinum bitch!"). If the AIA sponsors it, then it is just a organized agenda. The avant garde created movement and styles, the AIA and the LEED are the opposite.
I still say that "isms" are dead. Architects will not let themselves to be categorized any more. Nobody wanted to be classified as a decon except Eisenman back then.
architectourism and photogenicism
-buildings must be photogenic and a tourist attraction...this is especially popular among architects and students of architecture and functions effectively alongside the spread of images within the internet to the world...
"How could I design something like the room in that [Broad Street Station, Richmond, VA-John Russel Pope] photograph-One of my favorite icons, a building I have never seen, in fact I think it no longer exists..."- Peter Zumthor
yeah...there are people who think we are still in modernism and some think we are in reflexive modernism, which is the second coming of modernism based on the first modernism and we are at a point where we are still trying to asses where modernism has failed and succeeded...
Dimentionalism
Facetile dimentionalism
Facetile dimentionalism in relationship to the whole
It kind of relates to works such as Greg Lynn, Nox, Alonso dias(forgive the spelling) I am still playing with the concepts . It needs more refining..I need some one to talk to that has some really extensive arch theory to full articulate the concepts to its fullest. I can represent it in form yet in text I have to work on it.
after rereading, the question was "what is today's movement"?
you can really take that in two different ways... first, what movement might most of the contemporary work around us belong? (basically, how do we categorize all this stuff around us?)
BUT ALSO:
WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY? OR IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT FLAVOR OF MOVEMENT SHALL I ORDER TODAY? It's the today part that I think is important. Just WHAT EXACTLY are we doing???
Here is a hypothesis. Honestly, not much... The truth is, the reason we don't know what movement our own work belongs to is, nobody cares anymore... Movement schmovement. Gimme money. I'll give you cool shit to feed your appetite whatever that may be, you're the client, I'm just there to give you something that we can come to terms with as good.
Maybe the thing of it is: we are right now living in a society that waffles. Recent political cultural socio economic condition basically have made "unbelievers" out of most of us, the general market consumers... The new religion being just capitalist consumption and production.
Movements in architecture are all about (have always been about) MORALISM... in other words, people who have balls, conviction, and arrogance to rant about what design should be and what it is... Its about what their gut and minds tell them to say. If we are confused about what movement we are in, it's simply because we don't know what we are trying to do. We are a-moral, or we have no balls.
I'm not sure there aren't movements... There are. For one: there is the whole Regionalist / Sustainable Tectonic Modernist thing that is hip all over in different areas of the world... That is something going on that is definitely a trend, and I'd say the proponents of it, whatever they want to call it, know what the hell they are doing...
The problem I think is that people these days are too politically correct, too wishy washy, afraid to say anything at all... Because we are living in a world of relative truths where recent history has numbed people... moralism is just making you a target of somebody or other... Its like postpostmodern... Basically we're confused, well alot of us all over in this profession are... Got no faith or conviction... Hmm maybe nowadays to believe in anything at all makes you either an idiot or a "extremist" or radical... Depressed modernism? "Shell shocked by post modern"...
It breaks down the structure of time in to a more faceted view kind of like Duchamps “the bride Stripped Bare by her bachelors, even. Also know as the large glass. For those not familiar with this piece. Think of a cell from an old animation(only thing I can think of.at the moment) . The idea is that you look through the cell/glass and are able to visually move through the piece as is you where traveling through time as you pas through it. Now if you exaggerate notion of the cell/glass being a slice of time where it actually has presence…mood...and information with in it . Where it acts on all of the human senses(as visually or physically pas through). As if the facet was solidifying a moment of human experience. It harness this moment into a dimension of time and space.. now add these dimensions in sequence one after another. So you would have experience after experience passing either physically through these multiple dimensions or just visually interpreting the work/piece/architecture it would give you a kind of the look of work by Nox , Diaz or some of Decoi’s works. They have there own sigitures but they come from this idea of Dimentionalism. I can get in to it some more but would like to talk with some one with more arch theory to compound this idea of Dimentionalism and Facitile Dimentionalism these are just some thoughts that I have had for some time. If you like to kick this around a little and you are serious by all means…contact. I am still trying to make sure this all holds up.
Is "movement" something that is constructed by architectural historians, the label, a category applied to work possessing common characteristics?
Or is an architectural movement at any time necessarily a part of a critical discourse?
Architecture that is not really critical, that is simply ambiguous, politically correct, market driven architecture that doesn't say anything of its own... that does not have a movement. Today, alot of architecture resists the label. The label can be bad for business, it is not playing it safe. It is sensible, it might be good working building, good architecture, but it has no movement. A work that wants not to say anything and do no harm, produce no change, simply be good, impose no moral judgement has no movement.
In my view from the 1950's a lot of arch movements that have started and finished (/evolved into something else ) have been based upon semantics.
During ancient and medieval times, guiding principles of arch movement were related to aesthetics, art , geometry etc , Its just that in our times we are seeing architecture being connected more with dialectics , with 'literature'.! of course it was there too earlier, but not in such a direct fashion).
I find this phenomenon quite interesting. worth thinking about.
what is today's movement?
I was studying architectural styles and movements through the 20th century until now . It was amazing to study these movements,but i got lost when i began to reach the recent nowadays projects..i couldnt classify them..and couldnt categorize them...can anyone help..What is the movement of our time? is it deconstruction? high tech? virtual reality? fluid..techtonics...??
decon is over i believe, perhaps there are no classifications for this one, or better yet, until someone coins a term like Wigley or Johnson coined decon to describe it, there has been no one to say anything other than Blobitecture, but that is probably more derisive than anything.
eschew trying to pin down this moment, live in the glow and let the aging historians come up with a name.
glow architecture i like it
or iconic architecture .. if Jencks counts as an aging historian
saw some book about -isms recently (forgot the exact name though it seems like something published by taschen)
it had "metarationalism" as the last segment (which featured projects like tods omotesando and other fashion related, consumerist type of architecture..)
perhaps this could explain the current trends?
agree with iconic architecture too. especially in middle east, every project developer seems to have that clause in the project brief "to develop something iconic"....
when all these 'iconic' stuff sprout out they wont be so iconic anymore in the context and company of the rest of 'iconics'
cj w.: I love the notion of icons among icons. They'd call it Icon City.
Perhaps abracadabra, faia has written about this. Or maybe he should.
I would like to think that the age of "isms" is now dead. There is not one single theory or style that is being perscribe currently. We have let many ideas from fields all over to influence us. But that influence is in a mostly superficial way because continuity of those ideas are retired to find the next big concept.
If there is an "ism" right now, Jencks is right on the mark. Everything that it is newsworthy in architecture is an icon. I believe this is a back lash to the post modern thinking of contextualism.
Decon died back in the late eighties/ early ninties.
Well I'll admit its a bit silly to talk about, theres just no way to identify these trends outside thier relationship to predecessors and sucessors, but youd better believe someone will give all that zaha/lynn/nox shit a name someday. Theres still a lot of decon going on, I dont know what else you could call morphosis.
Metarationalism... mmm. I do like the sound of that.
and Im not sold on the Icon thing. people have been doing that forever.
It is a paragime shift, the ability to form what structure you wish , is what , gentlemen, finaly new grought the efficient of the most efficiency ,a Rush , the digital options. So we reached the efficiency in actural building methods uncover the future. This is no -ism or fancy Decor style , this is another thing, a Mountain of money.
18 February 2000: Perhaps all abstractions are highly idealized reenactments of reality, rather than reality being a reenactment of highly idealized abstractions.
--A Quondam Banquet of Virtual Sachlichkeit: Part III, p. 451.
I think that we as an global architectural community have reached a point of anti movements, or better still anti isms....a difficulty to pigeon hole us
better do your own thing then try categorizing... the latter is usually not that interesting anyways, because it generalizes and, therefore, misses too much
onanism
Name any current mathematical, scientific or philosophical theory, and there's an architecture that will try to reenact it.
Look at the architecture of Mies, Le Corbusier (especially the late works), and Kahn (especially the early works), and there's a lot of contemporay architecture reenacting all that.
Philip Johnson's architecture is one reenactment after another.
Frank Gehry's architecture evolves via reenacting itself.
You want something original? Just reenact with a twist.
twist
–verb (used with object)
1. to combine, as two or more strands or threads, by winding together; intertwine.
2. to form by or as if by winding strands together: Several fibers were used to twist the rope.
3. to entwine (one thing) with another; interlace (something) with something else; interweave; plait.
4. to wind or coil (something) about something else; encircle; entwine; wreathe.
5. to alter in shape, as by turning the ends in opposite directions, so that parts previously in the same straight line and plane are located in a spiral curve: The sculptor twisted the form into an arabesque. He twisted his body around to look behind him.
6. to turn sharply or wrench out of place; sprain: He twisted his ankle.
7. to pull, tear, or break off by turning forcibly: He twisted the arm off the puppet.
8. to distort (the features) by tensing or contracting the facial muscles; contort: She twisted her face in a wry smile.
9. to distort the meaning or form of; pervert: He twisted my comment about to suit his own purpose.
10. to cause to become mentally or emotionally distorted; warp: The loss of his business twisted his whole outlook on life.
11. to form into a coil, knot, or the like by winding, rolling, etc.: to twist the hair into a knot.
12. to bend tortuously.
13. to cause to move with a rotary motion, as a ball pitched in a curve.
14. to turn (something) from one direction to another, as by rotating or revolving: I twisted my chair to face the window.
15. to combine or associate intimately.
–verb (used without object)
16. to be or become intertwined.
17. to wind or twine about something.
18. to writhe or squirm.
19. to take a spiral form or course; wind, curve, or bend.
20. to turn or rotate, as on an axis; revolve, as about something; spin.
21. to turn so as to face in another direction.
22. to turn, coil, or bend into a spiral shape.
23. to change shape under forcible turning or twisting.
24. to move with a progressive rotary motion, as a ball pitched in a curve. 25. to dance the twist.
–noun
26. a deviation in direction; curve; bend; turn.
27. the action of turning or rotating on an axis; rotary motion; spin.
28. anything formed by or as if by twisting or twining parts together.
29. the act or process of twining strands together, as in thread, yarn, or rope.
30. a twisting awry or askew.
31. distortion or perversion, as of meaning or form.
32. a peculiar attitude or bias; eccentric turn or bent of mind; eccentricity.
33. spiral disposition, arrangement, or form.
34. spiral movement or course.
35. an irregular bend; crook; kink.
36. a sudden, unanticipated change of course, as of events.
37. a treatment, method, idea, version, etc., esp. one differing from that which preceded: The screenwriters gave the old plot a new twist.
38. the changing of the shape of anything by or as by turning the ends in opposite directions.
39. the stress causing this alteration; torque.
40. the resulting state.
41. a twisting or torsional action, force, or stress; torsion.
42. a strong, twisted silk thread, heavier than ordinary sewing silk, for working buttonholes and for other purposes.
43. the direction of twisting in weaving yarn; S twist or Z twist.
44. a loaf or roll of dough twisted and baked.
45. a strip of citrus peel that has been twisted and placed in a drink to add flavor.
46. a kind of tobacco manufactured in the form of a rope or thick cord.
47. a dance performed by couples and characterized by strongly rhythmic turns and twists of the arms, legs, and torso.
48. the degree of spiral formed by the grooves in a rifled firearm or cannon.
49. Gymnastics, Diving. a full rotation of the body about the vertical axis.
50. a wrench.
[note to self: reenactment with a twist, is that what Hejduk's architecture is really all about?]
I left this off the post by accident
but if one were to categorise the current state of architecture I suspect it would be post-consummerism with a state of architecongraphy (architect as fetish object) with an inlying of environmental & sustainable consciousness (growing to a subconsciousness)
and reenactionary architecturism is a reenactment of deconstruction?
pigeon-hole-ism
"and reenactionary architecturism is a reenactment of deconstruction?"
you tell me
der
organism architecture......just makes you want to.....
although most starchitects don't know it yet, the biggest movement in coming years will be sustainable architecture. just as modernism was a cultural movement, so too is sustainability. a true movement extends beyond only architecture
movement or catch phrase???
Then again it could be called the second movement....similar to number 1 and number 2....it is just a kinder way of saying it.
You know with all the box stores and strip malls and zero lot subdivisions......it is alot like number 2 when you really take a long hard look at it.
no movement is today's movement, maybe :)
hypermodernism,
or ADDmodernism,
or maybe demodernism?
or its ecoecono-modernism...?
or remodelinism.
or just blowing shit up.
first of all, the market of theory publication is shrinking in the past ten years. A lot of small publishers who used to publish theory has now switch to publish picture books. For theories, now is dominate by a few publisher like princeton architectural press/MIT... etc...
and in order to get ur interesting idea publish, u need to be friends with famous architects or theorist, so they will introduce u to MIT/Princeton architectural press... or else ur ideas will not even reach their desktop.
and in order to be friends with the famous architects or theorist, ur ideas need to be "coherent" with their ideas...
therefore u see "curvy form" everywhere all over the world and everyone saying the same thing. Because these things sells.
The problem with the "curvy form" is that architect only utilising 5% of what those high end computer programming can do. Now it becomes a matter of "craftmanship" to make nice curve.
sex sells
brink is right sex always sells...
today's primary movement, as evidenced by using either most square miles covered or number of rooftops as the metric, is called 'rapid vapid expansion of fields of suburban mcmansions'.
or '2020 teardowns' for short.
Regionalism - already seen in Dutch architecture, Chile, Portugal, Spain, Switzerland, now Japan, Denmark, Austria, Germany, soon China. The expression of aesthetic, cultural, environmental and materiality from a particular locality.
Feeds into a larger fashion cycle of architourism and archieconomics [the Bilbao effect]. Iconography and shopping work hand in hand.
Sustainability will be aligned to the regions in which it is most easily and cheaply realised [taking advantage of climate] - Australia, New Zealand, The Americas etc, therefore a subset of regionalism. May gain more precedence when its tents are more wide spread and cheaper to instigate.
That should be tenets, but may or may not include the use of tents.
Steven, love that - '2020 teardowns' - brilliant.
The Tribe need a new movement. Its been too long.
Sustainability will never be labeled a movement. It is just another strategy in making a building. The idea that the building should be nice to the environment is not a concept, it is just an obvious concious implementation to design that comes with a trendy label ("certified platinum bitch!"). If the AIA sponsors it, then it is just a organized agenda. The avant garde created movement and styles, the AIA and the LEED are the opposite.
I still say that "isms" are dead. Architects will not let themselves to be categorized any more. Nobody wanted to be classified as a decon except Eisenman back then.
architectourism and photogenicism
-buildings must be photogenic and a tourist attraction...this is especially popular among architects and students of architecture and functions effectively alongside the spread of images within the internet to the world...
"How could I design something like the room in that [Broad Street Station, Richmond, VA-John Russel Pope] photograph-One of my favorite icons, a building I have never seen, in fact I think it no longer exists..."- Peter Zumthor
aspect touched it...
"A lot of small publishers who used to publish theory has now switch to publish picture books."
I think we are a bit lost right now when it comes to movements, however, I've seen a lot of shabby sheik interiors – eewww….
yeah...there are people who think we are still in modernism and some think we are in reflexive modernism, which is the second coming of modernism based on the first modernism and we are at a point where we are still trying to asses where modernism has failed and succeeded...
Dimentionalism
Facetile dimentionalism
Facetile dimentionalism in relationship to the whole
It kind of relates to works such as Greg Lynn, Nox, Alonso dias(forgive the spelling) I am still playing with the concepts . It needs more refining..I need some one to talk to that has some really extensive arch theory to full articulate the concepts to its fullest. I can represent it in form yet in text I have to work on it.
after rereading, the question was "what is today's movement"?
you can really take that in two different ways... first, what movement might most of the contemporary work around us belong? (basically, how do we categorize all this stuff around us?)
BUT ALSO:
WHAT ARE WE DOING TODAY? OR IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT FLAVOR OF MOVEMENT SHALL I ORDER TODAY? It's the today part that I think is important. Just WHAT EXACTLY are we doing???
Here is a hypothesis. Honestly, not much... The truth is, the reason we don't know what movement our own work belongs to is, nobody cares anymore... Movement schmovement. Gimme money. I'll give you cool shit to feed your appetite whatever that may be, you're the client, I'm just there to give you something that we can come to terms with as good.
Maybe the thing of it is: we are right now living in a society that waffles. Recent political cultural socio economic condition basically have made "unbelievers" out of most of us, the general market consumers... The new religion being just capitalist consumption and production.
Movements in architecture are all about (have always been about) MORALISM... in other words, people who have balls, conviction, and arrogance to rant about what design should be and what it is... Its about what their gut and minds tell them to say. If we are confused about what movement we are in, it's simply because we don't know what we are trying to do. We are a-moral, or we have no balls.
I'm not sure there aren't movements... There are. For one: there is the whole Regionalist / Sustainable Tectonic Modernist thing that is hip all over in different areas of the world... That is something going on that is definitely a trend, and I'd say the proponents of it, whatever they want to call it, know what the hell they are doing...
The problem I think is that people these days are too politically correct, too wishy washy, afraid to say anything at all... Because we are living in a world of relative truths where recent history has numbed people... moralism is just making you a target of somebody or other... Its like postpostmodern... Basically we're confused, well alot of us all over in this profession are... Got no faith or conviction... Hmm maybe nowadays to believe in anything at all makes you either an idiot or a "extremist" or radical... Depressed modernism? "Shell shocked by post modern"...
what's that all about?
Dimentionalism
It breaks down the structure of time in to a more faceted view kind of like Duchamps “the bride Stripped Bare by her bachelors, even. Also know as the large glass. For those not familiar with this piece. Think of a cell from an old animation(only thing I can think of.at the moment) . The idea is that you look through the cell/glass and are able to visually move through the piece as is you where traveling through time as you pas through it. Now if you exaggerate notion of the cell/glass being a slice of time where it actually has presence…mood...and information with in it . Where it acts on all of the human senses(as visually or physically pas through). As if the facet was solidifying a moment of human experience. It harness this moment into a dimension of time and space.. now add these dimensions in sequence one after another. So you would have experience after experience passing either physically through these multiple dimensions or just visually interpreting the work/piece/architecture it would give you a kind of the look of work by Nox , Diaz or some of Decoi’s works. They have there own sigitures but they come from this idea of Dimentionalism. I can get in to it some more but would like to talk with some one with more arch theory to compound this idea of Dimentionalism and Facitile Dimentionalism these are just some thoughts that I have had for some time. If you like to kick this around a little and you are serious by all means…contact. I am still trying to make sure this all holds up.
you'll have way too much of free time.
Not really just these things seem to add up Nevermore
well alot of it is just good sensible architecture these days...
Is "movement" something that is constructed by architectural historians, the label, a category applied to work possessing common characteristics?
Or is an architectural movement at any time necessarily a part of a critical discourse?
Architecture that is not really critical, that is simply ambiguous, politically correct, market driven architecture that doesn't say anything of its own... that does not have a movement. Today, alot of architecture resists the label. The label can be bad for business, it is not playing it safe. It is sensible, it might be good working building, good architecture, but it has no movement. A work that wants not to say anything and do no harm, produce no change, simply be good, impose no moral judgement has no movement.
Movement implies change.
was just kidding d4.
In my view from the 1950's a lot of arch movements that have started and finished (/evolved into something else ) have been based upon semantics.
During ancient and medieval times, guiding principles of arch movement were related to aesthetics, art , geometry etc , Its just that in our times we are seeing architecture being connected more with dialectics , with 'literature'.! of course it was there too earlier, but not in such a direct fashion).
I find this phenomenon quite interesting. worth thinking about.
not much movement today. dunno what happened? must of been something i ate yesterday.
maybe 'starchitecture'?
todays movement? solid, well formed bm...the fiber seems to be working.
3DHism
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.