does anyone think context is neccessary?
is it possible to design and maintain culture if you don't design taking context into consideraton?
duke19_98
Oct 19, 04 2:04 am
I'm wondering where your going with this worm. We should chat about it over lunch at Thai Pepper. let me know
Kadam- F
Oct 19, 04 9:51 am
actually i don't think koolhaas intentionally wants to ignore the whole concept of context... if it it's possible u must go find a book called 'Anywhere'... there is one section that he had an arguement regarding to the meaning of contexture w/ Tadao Ando.. It's very interesting.... In my opinion, he disagree with the idea of Genius Loci, and other phenomenology approach. However, since Venturi is one of his model he gained awareness of context in relate to more abstract issues such as economic, geology, political, and many more...
On context in general:
It is my opinion that too often context is limited to the physical context. Too little time is given to studying the temporal , stylistic, psychological, political etc. It is just as important in analysing architecture to understand an architects context in regards to time, politics, philosophy, etc. as it is to look at the two buildings to the right and left of the new building. It is impossible to create a building with no context.
worm
Oct 19, 04 12:39 pm
-frels
i didn't get your post until today - my bad we should still do lunch maybe wed?
-kadam-f
word kadam, koolhaas wasn't ignoring the concept of context he was making the point that cities are too big and people are just shitting buildings here and there with no concept or strategy involving context or pertaining/retaining context...your thoughts?
“bigness is no longer part of any urban tissue. It exists; at most, it coexists. Its subtext is fuck context.†- koolhaas from bigness in smlxl
i am gonna go check out "anyhwere" thx
-josh cookie
agreed, even if one designs without acknowledging context in a building design then one is conciously ignoring context, wouldn't an example be any of eisenmen's houses? put them anywhere and they still look and function the same? and, eisenmen designed them specifically so that they function in that way...
i also like what you said about too often context just refers to the building to the right, left, back, and front and does not include the culture, society, philosophy of a location
context is important in regards to time, policitcs, philosophy, history etc. but it also changes as cities change.
Mason White
Oct 19, 04 5:46 pm
koolhaas's model (and the dutch school) for context is embedded within "deep planning." the idea that the site is a series of information layers: culture, economy, history to be quatified and prioritized. .. which is why he is more interested in:
(or lack of content) than in conTEXT.
silverlake
Oct 19, 04 7:01 pm
his point was that buildings of a certain size take on an effect all their own (bigness) and the consequence is that the context becomes irrelevant when dwarfed by this xl building typology.
he isn't proponing that architecture shouldn't be contextual; hes just arguing that responding to context is of varying degree.
archiTEKE
Oct 21, 04 9:20 am
content excellent mag.
worm
Oct 21, 04 4:41 pm
i just checked out anywhere and content
will post more when i have read up some
content looks totally sweet!
worm
thefauxed
Oct 21, 04 7:22 pm
don't forget about the great essays in content either, i'm walking in a junkspace wonderland this christmas
thefauxed
Oct 21, 04 7:28 pm
i always figured koolhaas was saying
"man, this is so fucked up"
"but dude, we live here"
"excellent!!"
whatever he's saying, i'm glad the word fuck has entered architectural discourse
bothands
Oct 23, 04 12:55 am
Rem also said (in response to Mies' "God is in the details"):
"Fuck the detail" -- which of course is also a provocation on his part, as is the proposition that we might proceed with architecture in a manner that is "entirely uncritical"...
sedrik
Oct 24, 04 6:26 am
Inorder to understand what Koolhaas means by "fuck context" you need to read it in context [ironically enough]. Koolhaas is saying that when you are working architecturally on a scale he refers to as 'Bigness' than the sheer magnitude of the architecture reaches a point where context is no longer relevant and therefore can be "fucked". Read the whole essay not just the two words.
Oct 24, 04 11:03 am
"Physical Context/Cultural Context: Including it All"
Stuart Cohen
"Ivan Leonidov's Dom Narkomtjazjprom, Moscow"
Rem Koolhaas and Gerrit Oorthuys
both these articles are within OPPOSITIONS 2, January 1974
an interesting coincidence
silverlake
Oct 24, 04 7:11 pm
sjk,
'Read the whole essay not just the two words.'
read the whole thread not just the first and last posts...
sedrik
Oct 25, 04 11:25 am
Yeah yeah, so I'm a lazy thread reader - does that mean three demerit points and a penalty cabbage ?
worm
Nov 12, 04 1:37 am
anyone still interested in conTEXT?
i am still writing this paper and am trying to define a position that is stable and well thought through...
anyone know if the opposition articles are on the internet somewhere?
our libraries at TTU don't have them-i could interlibrary loan but if some of you peeps know of online articles that would be swell!
also if you were going to spend 20 minutes of your life listening to me present to you context, what aspects would you want to hear about? i am just probing because i am putting together a presentation for tuesday. so if you have some comments on certain aspects of context that would be great. i like being an animated speaker...
any comments rock ^^
_worm
abracadabra
Nov 12, 04 5:19 pm
now we know he said that (fuck context), did he?
AbdElrahman SharfAdDin
May 13, 16 2:20 pm
It was an article From "Bigness or the problem of Large", published in S,M,L,XL, New York: The Monacelli Press, 1995
and he said """" Bigness is no longer part of any urban tissue. (...) Its subtext is fuck context.""""
anybody know where i can find the entire article/book etc. that koolhaas made this quote?
is it in mutations?
i am writing a paper on context any other ideas/comments/links would be sweet...
"Bigness" in SMLxL
sweet thanks...
worm
other ideas/comments/links:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A2=ind0012&L=architecthetics&P=R1335&I=-1
thx rita
does anyone think context is neccessary?
is it possible to design and maintain culture if you don't design taking context into consideraton?
I'm wondering where your going with this worm. We should chat about it over lunch at Thai Pepper. let me know
actually i don't think koolhaas intentionally wants to ignore the whole concept of context... if it it's possible u must go find a book called 'Anywhere'... there is one section that he had an arguement regarding to the meaning of contexture w/ Tadao Ando.. It's very interesting.... In my opinion, he disagree with the idea of Genius Loci, and other phenomenology approach. However, since Venturi is one of his model he gained awareness of context in relate to more abstract issues such as economic, geology, political, and many more...
One more thing, if he really 'fuck context'... how could he editted Wired Magazine on KoolWorld issue (11/06)??? http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/11.06/
On context in general:
It is my opinion that too often context is limited to the physical context. Too little time is given to studying the temporal , stylistic, psychological, political etc. It is just as important in analysing architecture to understand an architects context in regards to time, politics, philosophy, etc. as it is to look at the two buildings to the right and left of the new building. It is impossible to create a building with no context.
-frels
i didn't get your post until today - my bad we should still do lunch maybe wed?
-kadam-f
word kadam, koolhaas wasn't ignoring the concept of context he was making the point that cities are too big and people are just shitting buildings here and there with no concept or strategy involving context or pertaining/retaining context...your thoughts?
“bigness is no longer part of any urban tissue. It exists; at most, it coexists. Its subtext is fuck context.†- koolhaas from bigness in smlxl
i am gonna go check out "anyhwere" thx
-josh cookie
agreed, even if one designs without acknowledging context in a building design then one is conciously ignoring context, wouldn't an example be any of eisenmen's houses? put them anywhere and they still look and function the same? and, eisenmen designed them specifically so that they function in that way...
i also like what you said about too often context just refers to the building to the right, left, back, and front and does not include the culture, society, philosophy of a location
context is important in regards to time, policitcs, philosophy, history etc. but it also changes as cities change.
koolhaas's model (and the dutch school) for context is embedded within "deep planning." the idea that the site is a series of information layers: culture, economy, history to be quatified and prioritized. .. which is why he is more interested in:
(or lack of content) than in conTEXT.
his point was that buildings of a certain size take on an effect all their own (bigness) and the consequence is that the context becomes irrelevant when dwarfed by this xl building typology.
he isn't proponing that architecture shouldn't be contextual; hes just arguing that responding to context is of varying degree.
content excellent mag.
i just checked out anywhere and content
will post more when i have read up some
content looks totally sweet!
worm
don't forget about the great essays in content either, i'm walking in a junkspace wonderland this christmas
i always figured koolhaas was saying
"man, this is so fucked up"
"but dude, we live here"
"excellent!!"
whatever he's saying, i'm glad the word fuck has entered architectural discourse
Rem also said (in response to Mies' "God is in the details"):
"Fuck the detail" -- which of course is also a provocation on his part, as is the proposition that we might proceed with architecture in a manner that is "entirely uncritical"...
Inorder to understand what Koolhaas means by "fuck context" you need to read it in context [ironically enough]. Koolhaas is saying that when you are working architecturally on a scale he refers to as 'Bigness' than the sheer magnitude of the architecture reaches a point where context is no longer relevant and therefore can be "fucked". Read the whole essay not just the two words.
"Physical Context/Cultural Context: Including it All"
Stuart Cohen
"Ivan Leonidov's Dom Narkomtjazjprom, Moscow"
Rem Koolhaas and Gerrit Oorthuys
both these articles are within OPPOSITIONS 2, January 1974
an interesting coincidence
sjk,
'Read the whole essay not just the two words.'
read the whole thread not just the first and last posts...
Yeah yeah, so I'm a lazy thread reader - does that mean three demerit points and a penalty cabbage ?
anyone still interested in conTEXT?
i am still writing this paper and am trying to define a position that is stable and well thought through...
anyone know if the opposition articles are on the internet somewhere?
our libraries at TTU don't have them-i could interlibrary loan but if some of you peeps know of online articles that would be swell!
also if you were going to spend 20 minutes of your life listening to me present to you context, what aspects would you want to hear about? i am just probing because i am putting together a presentation for tuesday. so if you have some comments on certain aspects of context that would be great. i like being an animated speaker...
any comments rock ^^
_worm
now we know he said that (fuck context), did he?
It was an article From "Bigness or the problem of Large", published in S,M,L,XL, New York: The Monacelli Press, 1995
where have you been all my life