Archinect
anchor

Architectural Euthanasia

dd demo

“To enable a competent structure which is suffering as a result of being deemed terminal and of no further use by its owner or community to receive artistic intervention and help it die with a sense of dignity and worth prior to its disappearance.”

MISSION:

Havel Ruck Projects is an independent artist collective created by sculptors Dan Havel and Dean Ruck. The aim of the collective is to identify and coordinate the use of alternative sites for artistic intervention within the public realm. We actively seek abandoned or unused architectural spaces prior to their demolition or renovation to stage artistic actions.

INTRODUCTION:

Much has been made lately of the desire to save the architectural history of Houston. However, any dynamic city is all about change. Hundred’s of buildings in Houston are being torn down every month. Many of these structures of historic significance should be saved, but a majority of them have outlived their usefulness. “Architectural Euthanasia” seeks to intervene within this process of change to interject a greater public awareness in the artistic potential of condemned buildings prior to their demolition.

 
May 5, 09 4:53 pm
drums please, Fab?
May 5, 09 6:24 pm  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

i have been advocating for this idea for years, as a reaction to this incessant need to preserve every "historical" work of architecture. i can't tell you how many times i have seen the preservationist crowd fawn over a home or building that was built in the late 19th or early 20th, even though it's lost 90% of its detail/charm or it's in too sad a shape to financially become a viable, new structure.

i have personally advocated for selective euthanasia on several design/community charrettes, and have been looked at in a spiteful way. i say, so be it, let me be the architectural Kevorkian, and it'd be my pleasure.

May 5, 09 7:07 pm  · 
 · 
liberty bell

I brought you into this world.

I can take you out.

May 5, 09 7:55 pm  · 
 · 
dd demo

It is believed that the Anasazi, or what politically correct archeologists call "The ancient Pueblo people", practiced ceremonial abandonment of their kivas and villages as they continued the migration practice. Objects, such as turqouise under a carefully placed bowl and other objects that are methodically arranged in various places on the floor of the kiva. After the objects were placed and it was time to migrate, they would deliberately set the wood kiva roof on fire, burning until it collapsed. There is evidence that people returned to the site 100 yrs or more after its abandonment and built new kivas and vilages on top of the nowburied and burned remains of the structures that originally were there.

This practice of ceremonial abandonment allows for the respect of the structure's soul. It is more than a shelter. It needs to be ritualistically sealed with fire. We could learn a lot of things from the indigiounous american people about sustainability and new ways of looking at the community role and practice of art and architecture.

In the mean time, google
havel ruck tunnel house
or
lisa gray dan havel

for pics of a past work a current article about our recent project.

May 5, 09 8:07 pm  · 
 · 
treekiller

=




9119 St. Cyril Street
Willis Art Gallery, Detroit 1989
Frank Fantauzzi, with Jean-Claude Azar and Michael Williams

May 5, 09 9:34 pm  · 
 · 
santa monica
May 6, 09 12:59 pm  · 
 · 
dd demo

Not sure how to post images. Let me know and I will share shots of current project.....dd demo

May 6, 09 1:11 pm  · 
 · 
treekiller

see the gray text below the 'post a response...' box.

to resize an image to fit archinect, the code is:
{img}www.yadda.com/yadda.jpg width=418{/img}
(replace the {} with [], & that is a single space before 'width')

May 6, 09 1:41 pm  · 
 · 
brian buchalski

arson = art?

regardless, it appears we'll see more of it

May 6, 09 1:53 pm  · 
 · 
4arch
i can't tell you how many times i have seen the preservationist crowd fawn over a home or building that was built in the late 19th or early 20th, even though it's lost 90% of its detail/charm or it's in too sad a shape to financially become a viable, new structure.

I'm not sure they do this so much out of love for the buildings as much as out of fear of what might be put in their place.

More often than not, old but not particularly great buildings are torn down only to be replaced by things much worse. A lot of times it's not so much the loss of the individual building as it is the rifts in the urban fabric created when old urban buildings are replaced with parking lots or suburban-style fast food joints or convenience stores - or worse yet the buildings are just torn down or gutted and left to rot as vacant lots or shells after the project falls apart halfway through.

I don't disagree with the premise that we sometimes go to great lengths to save old buildings that really would be better off being put out of their misery, but when I see how rarely buildings that are demolished are replaced with something better, I can totally understand why preservationists just want to say no to demolishing or altering just about anything.

May 7, 09 9:18 am  · 
 · 
b3tadine[sutures]

4arch, that might be one experience, mine has been quite the other. some things, regardless of age, should be removed, even if a park is put in its place, that would certainly be better than trying to preserve a mess.

May 7, 09 11:12 am  · 
 · 

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.

  • ×Search in: