The free media building in Turkmenistan, The House of Free Creativity. Journalism is state-controlled. Turkmenistan has no private or foreign media, and the internet is inaccessible for most people.
I am very surprised at the posts here. If most of these images were considered plagiarism architecture would die.
If you think about music and art, many of the most famous artists directly borrowed/copied from each other, many times quite openly giving reference to the original.
The only things taht look like rip offs to me are Corbu's stuff. But, as noted above, as long as there is an acknowledgment, I suppose it isn't as bad (I think about the rip-off Eames chairs, Mies chairs, etc., that rarely give direct credit but are still legal).
How long does copyrights last? 70 years after death?
May 16, 08 8:02 am ·
·
Copyright is a legality, and different governing bodies write different copyright laws. If you want answers, look up the laws.
Disney is a strong lobbyist for extended copyright protection.
Damn you Romans , here you go again.
----- And when you reach your conclution I know I heard it again and again ; true visions do not exist, there are no dangerous people, no genuine artists, that was before ,not today. We killed the artist.
it's that creative evolution has always been a streaming continuity of iteration, permutation, reconfiguration and bricolage -- sometimes in bigger jumps than others. and, that your picture of the "genuine artist" with "true vision" as someone who brackets out the world and lets the golden nuggets fall out of that subconscious portal to the netherworld of the New, is a symptom of a naive socially conditioned relationship to history and context.
Art is like plumbing a serious thing, and exactly like plumbing terrible things happen when "we are all plumbers". Only with art the dameage don't ruin your house the same way.
Newer try replace the genuine plumber. The mess will be as bad as if you replace the genuine artist with art as a social act. All you gain is a slow reduction in peoples respect of art, Art become meaningless and the only thing that will happen, is that people when they see something they reconise as beauty will realise that as true art, --- now that is not my oppinion but what I hear, what people tell me. Me I am just bored with art as a social thng, tired of fat words about something that say me nothing.
--- Not that I find no meaning killing beauty, that would be allright if reconising beauty was the idea. but you seem more dsrespectfull than I , you omit beauty and replace it with anything.
Yoy are quite right my aproach are naive -- But havn't this art thing gone to far ? --- For me it's allright "we all are artists", only problem I se is that the juice became either to thin or art just an attitude, arts became without meaning . Anything count as art that is when things lose meaning.
At the risk of exposing my nerdiness... It's interesting but the origin of the concept for the death star, as it was conceived by the creative team behind star wars was inspired by an olive on a toothpick... George Lucas, especially early in his career, I think was fond of using a kind of surrealist paranoid critical method to "serendipitously" discover new ideas for his films (and to create new iconic forms)... the original star wars was based on kurosawa's "hidden fortress"... the two comical characters in the kurosawa film were eventually portrayed as the two droids, r2d2 and c3po... the milenium falcon was invented by manipulating a hamburger with a pickle sticking out of it... the majority of star wars fighter ships were designed based on "flying letters of the alphabet", and then later refined as models built from the various scraps of battleship and airplane model sets... maybe there's even a bit of wizard of oz in star wars... the tin man (c3po), the lion (chewbaca), and the scarecrow (han solo), dorothy (princess leia) and toto(r2d2)?
Interestingly, Rem Koolhaas, who was originally trained as a film maker I believe, actually wrote about Dali's paranoid critical method some place I think... I don't remember the context for the article, but he certainly is aware of the idea of intentionally juxtaposing extraneous ideas or objects as method for creative idea generation...
Re: OMA's "death star" projects... I remember reading someplace that they actually had photographs of the death star pinned up in their studio... Seems almost like something of an inside joke turned form for a real project... Maybe a kind of satirical commentary on the state of architecture in UAE/Dubai...
When faced with a world of high profile, high iconic nature, spectacle architecture such as Dubai, when glitzy ducks are in fashion, and spectacle is everywhere, and it's all about attention grabbing, how do you compete with that? how do you make something that stands out in a world of icons, that epitomizes the media icon, something with enough iconic weight, recognizable all over the world... It's funny but the death star is certainly memorable, identifiable the world over, and playful... The answer: Death Star... orbiting the city, ready to architecturally pulverize the rest of the architectural icons...
Is it me, or does that other bar in the original OMA project above look like an ipod shuffle, complete with "headphone cables"...? Is that project basically just "the ipod meets the death star in dubai"?
Archinect's The Plagiarius Awards Gallery
This:
& this:
fog
is that blue one by Gaston Nuggles as well?
wow. which came first?
the one by borromini
Wow, cowerd, good one!
i think both are cool!!
The free media building in Turkmenistan, The House of Free Creativity. Journalism is state-controlled. Turkmenistan has no private or foreign media, and the internet is inaccessible for most people.
i know what they plagiarized!
vino anyone?
come on, mrtjr. those rocks are a COMPLETELY different color than the ones h&dm used!
besides, using rocks as wallpaper MAY actually be a new idea....
I am very surprised at the posts here. If most of these images were considered plagiarism architecture would die.
If you think about music and art, many of the most famous artists directly borrowed/copied from each other, many times quite openly giving reference to the original.
The only things taht look like rip offs to me are Corbu's stuff. But, as noted above, as long as there is an acknowledgment, I suppose it isn't as bad (I think about the rip-off Eames chairs, Mies chairs, etc., that rarely give direct credit but are still legal).
How long does copyrights last? 70 years after death?
Copyright is a legality, and different governing bodies write different copyright laws. If you want answers, look up the laws.
Disney is a strong lobbyist for extended copyright protection.
re: trace's comments--
fantastic article in harper's on the topic (might need a subsription to access the page):
The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagarism
by Jonathon Lethem
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2007/02/0081387
it's worth reading if only for the "twist" at the end, which I don't want to spoil. blew me away.
Damn you Romans , here you go again.
----- And when you reach your conclution I know I heard it again and again ; true visions do not exist, there are no dangerous people, no genuine artists, that was before ,not today. We killed the artist.
no-- the opposite per corell.
it's that creative evolution has always been a streaming continuity of iteration, permutation, reconfiguration and bricolage -- sometimes in bigger jumps than others. and, that your picture of the "genuine artist" with "true vision" as someone who brackets out the world and lets the golden nuggets fall out of that subconscious portal to the netherworld of the New, is a symptom of a naive socially conditioned relationship to history and context.
Art is like plumbing a serious thing, and exactly like plumbing terrible things happen when "we are all plumbers". Only with art the dameage don't ruin your house the same way.
Newer try replace the genuine plumber. The mess will be as bad as if you replace the genuine artist with art as a social act. All you gain is a slow reduction in peoples respect of art, Art become meaningless and the only thing that will happen, is that people when they see something they reconise as beauty will realise that as true art, --- now that is not my oppinion but what I hear, what people tell me. Me I am just bored with art as a social thng, tired of fat words about something that say me nothing.
--- Not that I find no meaning killing beauty, that would be allright if reconising beauty was the idea. but you seem more dsrespectfull than I , you omit beauty and replace it with anything.
Yoy are quite right my aproach are naive -- But havn't this art thing gone to far ? --- For me it's allright "we all are artists", only problem I se is that the juice became either to thin or art just an attitude, arts became without meaning . Anything count as art that is when things lose meaning.
"That's no moon..."
At the risk of exposing my nerdiness... It's interesting but the origin of the concept for the death star, as it was conceived by the creative team behind star wars was inspired by an olive on a toothpick... George Lucas, especially early in his career, I think was fond of using a kind of surrealist paranoid critical method to "serendipitously" discover new ideas for his films (and to create new iconic forms)... the original star wars was based on kurosawa's "hidden fortress"... the two comical characters in the kurosawa film were eventually portrayed as the two droids, r2d2 and c3po... the milenium falcon was invented by manipulating a hamburger with a pickle sticking out of it... the majority of star wars fighter ships were designed based on "flying letters of the alphabet", and then later refined as models built from the various scraps of battleship and airplane model sets... maybe there's even a bit of wizard of oz in star wars... the tin man (c3po), the lion (chewbaca), and the scarecrow (han solo), dorothy (princess leia) and toto(r2d2)?
Interestingly, Rem Koolhaas, who was originally trained as a film maker I believe, actually wrote about Dali's paranoid critical method some place I think... I don't remember the context for the article, but he certainly is aware of the idea of intentionally juxtaposing extraneous ideas or objects as method for creative idea generation...
Re: OMA's "death star" projects... I remember reading someplace that they actually had photographs of the death star pinned up in their studio... Seems almost like something of an inside joke turned form for a real project... Maybe a kind of satirical commentary on the state of architecture in UAE/Dubai...
When faced with a world of high profile, high iconic nature, spectacle architecture such as Dubai, when glitzy ducks are in fashion, and spectacle is everywhere, and it's all about attention grabbing, how do you compete with that? how do you make something that stands out in a world of icons, that epitomizes the media icon, something with enough iconic weight, recognizable all over the world... It's funny but the death star is certainly memorable, identifiable the world over, and playful... The answer: Death Star... orbiting the city, ready to architecturally pulverize the rest of the architectural icons...
Is it me, or does that other bar in the original OMA project above look like an ipod shuffle, complete with "headphone cables"...? Is that project basically just "the ipod meets the death star in dubai"?
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.