I recently watched a good documentary on johnathan golds exploration and critique of Los Angeles restaurants. It's on Hulu for anyone interested. His appreciation of the everyday shops snuggled in obscure strip malls is refreshing, and begs the question, is there a place for this type of appreciation of the everyday in architecture?
Johnathan Gold is a food lover that writes about peasant food for a rich gentrifying hipster class that wants to slum it for a meal. His writing is great and his suggestions are usually good. I also think its cool that a struggling restaurant can go to superstardom over night with a review. I don't think there can be something similar with architecture as a standalone because it is a symbiotic relationship between the food, the space, and the neighborhood that makes these places feel special. Would it be the same with a pinata store on Pico? I doubt it. One of the best things about LA is the hand-painted signs, run down strip malls, MacArthur Park, K town, but the places you would want to actually want to hang out in are actually pretty limited.
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 11:50 am
Basically, what I'm saying is that architectural appreciation is typically limited to the anomalous and pristine...leaving the larger condition to mostly negative critique on sprawl and urban blight...rarely do we hear a celebration of the everyday (since DSBs writing). I think we need a fresh look at the richness of the ignored places.
chigurh
Oct 25, 16 12:16 pm
Disagree -
What is the quote out there that something like 99% of the built environment is shit?
Yes, some of these restaurants mentioned by gold are special, by design/TI, or age, but really by the food. I think the validity of your point is if you were to consider period buildings with changed use.
Anything developer built after 1970 probably garbage. Any gems of ignored places are probably already on a historical register somewhere. People aren't going to pilgrimage to guelaguetza the same way they are going to the broad. Just ain't happening.
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 2:14 pm
Not talking literally about restaurants, but the overall built environment. Here's an example. There is this theater by me that plays movies that just came out of the mainstream theaters. The place is hog-pog to the max. Overdone and ridiculous with the movie posters and neon lighting and statues....but overall a very weird and unique place that adds much interest and character to the neighborhood...I have fun every time I go...another example is this Very lush and incredible front garden that this old lady keeps....it's a pretty incredible array of about 100 plant types squeezed into this 20' x 60' front yard....almost as some gift or offering to the community....growing up in NY I remember these moments of "regular" places that were quite iconic and interesting to at least the locals. The signage, street presence, eccentricities, mythologies, etc....
Architects are too dismissive of the everyday imo. The more I look at it, the everyday as messy and poorly designed as it may be has a character, grittiness, and truth that is more interesting than some fucking expensive pristine sterile concrete prick or twat....I'm looking for the greasy yet delicious taco stand equivalent in architecture...The elitist disdain for this stuff has polluted academia and brainwashed a generation of architects into ignoring the most pervasive condition in the built environment. If we can't be willing to find delight in the ordinary, how can we possibly engage it?
Marc Miller
Oct 25, 16 2:45 pm
Yes, w/o a doubt. More everyday, less culture in a fancy serif italicized sugary font. Now pass on that rack of ribs prepared in a homemade oil drum smoker.
raspberry_cat_
Oct 25, 16 3:12 pm
It seems like you want to criticize the elite more, rather than celebrate the everyday.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'celebrating the everyday' either. Finding the kitchy uses of poorly designed strip malls? That's like finding the really good cheap food place, right? Or just celebrating mundane strip malls in general... like, yay flat buildings with parking lots!
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 4:01 pm
^well, the foodies aren't celebrating burger king and Taco Bell. It's more about high-quality food that exists outside of the circles of 5 star "high brow" culture. It's about moments of specialness and thoughtfulness or just "happy accidents" (to quote bob Ross lol) within a place typically typical.
Wilma Buttfit
Oct 25, 16 4:06 pm
If I hear someone describe an architectural design as "nice and clean" one more time, I'm going to puke. I like the meaningful and engaging stuff. Is that what you mean?
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 4:09 pm
And....I gave you a few examples raspberry cat. They aren't good enough? I can think of hundreds more. The problem is, to appreciate them you would need to rid yourself of the dwell magazine bias that all things must be clean and sleek. Sometimes the worn spots on a brick wall by a bus stop or bodega can suggest a bench is needed...sometimes they are just oddly beautiful artifacts of life.
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 4:14 pm
Point is, the everyday is almost unanimously hated by architects and academics. There is beauty there that we should celebrate. Otherwise, you are no better than trump saying that "all blacks are living in hell". That's a false statement. Sure there are problems and deficiencies in the community, but there is much to be celebrated as well. Looking at the architecture within the everyday places we inhabit with a less bradly critical mindset is what I'm saying is needed.
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 4:15 pm
*broadly critical
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 4:17 pm
Yes tintt. Basically
Marc Miller
Oct 25, 16 4:46 pm
The thing about food is that it's basically a question of how a craft is demonstrated and presented. Russian service is a extremely formal service about ritual, and "the best food" frames long, involved conversations, where as French service is more about the shock and awe of a splendid table.
At the lower end you may not have the pomp and formality associated with those two traditional service types, but you still engage the food, how it has been prepared and it's location. It's presentation may not be spectacular, but the execution is still compelling.
Some of the best Korean food in DC/Alexandria locale was (is?) prepared in a storefront in an anonymous shopping plaza near a burger king managed by one of the top competitors in the food eat circuit. Food trucks aren't popular because they make only the finest food, but because they challenge you to think about how "good food" is executed. These are two examples where food survives in spite of it's location and arguably makes the architecture viable.
curtkram
Oct 25, 16 7:36 pm
it's not too late for you to become a chef jla. you could produce something with a soul, something people will love, then they will turn it into shit for you.
Marc Miller
Oct 25, 16 7:41 pm
could a new pawson cookbook, crowd sourced through archinect.
edit: and more relevant/accessible
x-jla
Oct 25, 16 7:50 pm
I'm not surprised the point was missed by curt...
archanonymous
Oct 25, 16 9:39 pm
jla-x, I have a former classmate who went to work at a banal suburban firm in order to get a crack at designing the strip malls and big box stores and bank buildings, which is what I think you are talking about. I need to check in on him and ask how it is going.
I often notice things in strip malls or suburbia that make me say "that's quite nice" but do feel like many architects (at least where I live) totally discount anything beyond the city. I saw a banal parking lot done in permeable pavers that had decent landscaping a few weeks ago and I basically freaked the person I was with out b/c I got so excited about it. Not quite the same thing, but close.
curtkram
Oct 25, 16 10:42 pm
hank green is apparently a teacher now, which is pretty cool
of course i missed the point, but being a chef may be a more tenable avenue for you to achieve your goals and follow the passions you have for aesthetics and art and such. you can't really put the feeling you get from that theater in other people. even if you were an architect that owned a theater and could afford to dress it up similarly, the feeling you get still can't be transplanted into another person. that feeling belongs to you and is unique to you. however, the nature of food, which is more fleeting and perhaps experienced in a more similar context from one person to the next, could give you more opportunity to create what you seem to want to create. sort of like ramen girl, which was a pretty good movie.
x-jla
Oct 26, 16 3:27 am
Banham was actually pointed out quite a lot as an inspiration in the doc.
I recently watched a good documentary on johnathan golds exploration and critique of Los Angeles restaurants. It's on Hulu for anyone interested. His appreciation of the everyday shops snuggled in obscure strip malls is refreshing, and begs the question, is there a place for this type of appreciation of the everyday in architecture?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=__2uT1cZWkY
Johnathan Gold is a food lover that writes about peasant food for a rich gentrifying hipster class that wants to slum it for a meal. His writing is great and his suggestions are usually good. I also think its cool that a struggling restaurant can go to superstardom over night with a review. I don't think there can be something similar with architecture as a standalone because it is a symbiotic relationship between the food, the space, and the neighborhood that makes these places feel special. Would it be the same with a pinata store on Pico? I doubt it. One of the best things about LA is the hand-painted signs, run down strip malls, MacArthur Park, K town, but the places you would want to actually want to hang out in are actually pretty limited.
Basically, what I'm saying is that architectural appreciation is typically limited to the anomalous and pristine...leaving the larger condition to mostly negative critique on sprawl and urban blight...rarely do we hear a celebration of the everyday (since DSBs writing). I think we need a fresh look at the richness of the ignored places.
Disagree -
What is the quote out there that something like 99% of the built environment is shit?
Yes, some of these restaurants mentioned by gold are special, by design/TI, or age, but really by the food. I think the validity of your point is if you were to consider period buildings with changed use.
Anything developer built after 1970 probably garbage. Any gems of ignored places are probably already on a historical register somewhere. People aren't going to pilgrimage to guelaguetza the same way they are going to the broad. Just ain't happening.
Not talking literally about restaurants, but the overall built environment. Here's an example. There is this theater by me that plays movies that just came out of the mainstream theaters. The place is hog-pog to the max. Overdone and ridiculous with the movie posters and neon lighting and statues....but overall a very weird and unique place that adds much interest and character to the neighborhood...I have fun every time I go...another example is this Very lush and incredible front garden that this old lady keeps....it's a pretty incredible array of about 100 plant types squeezed into this 20' x 60' front yard....almost as some gift or offering to the community....growing up in NY I remember these moments of "regular" places that were quite iconic and interesting to at least the locals. The signage, street presence, eccentricities, mythologies, etc....
Architects are too dismissive of the everyday imo. The more I look at it, the everyday as messy and poorly designed as it may be has a character, grittiness, and truth that is more interesting than some fucking expensive pristine sterile concrete prick or twat....I'm looking for the greasy yet delicious taco stand equivalent in architecture...The elitist disdain for this stuff has polluted academia and brainwashed a generation of architects into ignoring the most pervasive condition in the built environment. If we can't be willing to find delight in the ordinary, how can we possibly engage it?
Yes, w/o a doubt. More everyday, less culture in a fancy serif italicized sugary font. Now pass on that rack of ribs prepared in a homemade oil drum smoker.
It seems like you want to criticize the elite more, rather than celebrate the everyday.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'celebrating the everyday' either. Finding the kitchy uses of poorly designed strip malls? That's like finding the really good cheap food place, right? Or just celebrating mundane strip malls in general... like, yay flat buildings with parking lots!
^well, the foodies aren't celebrating burger king and Taco Bell. It's more about high-quality food that exists outside of the circles of 5 star "high brow" culture. It's about moments of specialness and thoughtfulness or just "happy accidents" (to quote bob Ross lol) within a place typically typical.
If I hear someone describe an architectural design as "nice and clean" one more time, I'm going to puke. I like the meaningful and engaging stuff. Is that what you mean?
And....I gave you a few examples raspberry cat. They aren't good enough? I can think of hundreds more. The problem is, to appreciate them you would need to rid yourself of the dwell magazine bias that all things must be clean and sleek. Sometimes the worn spots on a brick wall by a bus stop or bodega can suggest a bench is needed...sometimes they are just oddly beautiful artifacts of life.
Point is, the everyday is almost unanimously hated by architects and academics. There is beauty there that we should celebrate. Otherwise, you are no better than trump saying that "all blacks are living in hell". That's a false statement. Sure there are problems and deficiencies in the community, but there is much to be celebrated as well. Looking at the architecture within the everyday places we inhabit with a less bradly critical mindset is what I'm saying is needed.
*broadly critical
Yes tintt. Basically
The thing about food is that it's basically a question of how a craft is demonstrated and presented. Russian service is a extremely formal service about ritual, and "the best food" frames long, involved conversations, where as French service is more about the shock and awe of a splendid table.
At the lower end you may not have the pomp and formality associated with those two traditional service types, but you still engage the food, how it has been prepared and it's location. It's presentation may not be spectacular, but the execution is still compelling.
Some of the best Korean food in DC/Alexandria locale was (is?) prepared in a storefront in an anonymous shopping plaza near a burger king managed by one of the top competitors in the food eat circuit. Food trucks aren't popular because they make only the finest food, but because they challenge you to think about how "good food" is executed. These are two examples where food survives in spite of it's location and arguably makes the architecture viable.
it's not too late for you to become a chef jla. you could produce something with a soul, something people will love, then they will turn it into shit for you.
could a new pawson cookbook, crowd sourced through archinect.
edit: and more relevant/accessible
I'm not surprised the point was missed by curt...
jla-x, I have a former classmate who went to work at a banal suburban firm in order to get a crack at designing the strip malls and big box stores and bank buildings, which is what I think you are talking about. I need to check in on him and ask how it is going.
I often notice things in strip malls or suburbia that make me say "that's quite nice" but do feel like many architects (at least where I live) totally discount anything beyond the city. I saw a banal parking lot done in permeable pavers that had decent landscaping a few weeks ago and I basically freaked the person I was with out b/c I got so excited about it. Not quite the same thing, but close.
hank green is apparently a teacher now, which is pretty cool
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NZ5duzln2wI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDL4Zf2yEa4
of course i missed the point, but being a chef may be a more tenable avenue for you to achieve your goals and follow the passions you have for aesthetics and art and such. you can't really put the feeling you get from that theater in other people. even if you were an architect that owned a theater and could afford to dress it up similarly, the feeling you get still can't be transplanted into another person. that feeling belongs to you and is unique to you. however, the nature of food, which is more fleeting and perhaps experienced in a more similar context from one person to the next, could give you more opportunity to create what you seem to want to create. sort of like ramen girl, which was a pretty good movie.
Banham was actually pointed out quite a lot as an inspiration in the doc.
https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/aug/24/radical-alternative-reyner-banham-man-changed-perception-los-angeles?0p19G=c