Did Le Corbusier and Venturi "act as if their building is a proof of their ideas?"
I'd say they practiced their theories, but they didn't necessarily set out to prove their theories. Also, Le Corbusier and Venturi mostly presented their theories together with a presentation of their built and unbuilt work.
Where is the proof "that architects write theories then build buildings in relation to the text, and then act as if the building is a proof of their ideas"?
Is there any proof that "we can't inhabit it--outlandish, novel architecture--in a meaningful way"?
Helsinki, you're somewhat (willfully?) confusing my point(s). First, I (re)posted my musings of a virtual Brasilia to show carolawinnie (and others) that thinking about "space without mass" has already been around for a decade. I wish I could go and find what prompted Re: Mir & the value of a city in 1998, but the architecthetics archive no longer exists online, so now I can only try to recall what the intention of the post was. For me, Brasilia began as a sort of virtual place in that it was a completely new (designed) capital/government city, and then (in 1998) I wondered, given the internet, whether "governmental entities" could be "designed" via the internet. On this there is now some positive proof, and even you seem to agree.
As to the notion of "the city as working as well in virtual space as in real is a comment from someone that has not visited a "complete" architectural environment," well, that isn't me because I never advocated "the city as working as well in virtual space as in real." What I really did was raise two questions. Nonetheless, your description of Brasilia--"the surrounding shantytowns, the deathlike calm of the center, highways lined with beggars (especially come christmastime) etc."--paints a picture more surreal that real.
And as to "the virtual has/will have it's own language and territoriality":
Subject: Alex Galloway, Rhizome Editor, Reports on Siggraph 2000
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2000 22:49:31 -0400
MOST OF THE ACTIVITY at last week's SIGGRAPH 2000, held this year in New Orleans, boiled down to a single fetish: the search for the perfect simulation.
Albeit a minority viewpoint, I nonetheless believe that "virtual reality" would more fulfill its potential by offering something other than a "perfect simulation" of what already exists. For example, "virtual reality" could possibly let us experience what a completely abstract reality is like, or perhaps what a completely inside-out reality is like -- basically allowing us to experience some "other" realities.
Then again, cloning will be a big part of this millennium, so cloned realities might just be the norm as well.
traveling just ain't what it used to be
Why do you think you're creative?
ůmost people don't even have a metabolic imagination. For that matter, even a fertile imagination is fairly uncommon.
What brought you to Archinect?
I just like giving architects more heartburn.
The day they killed Archinect
Wow, archinect chameleon, what a clever idea. Is that even possible?
house of the future
"Did you hear that Alitalia changed it's name? It's now called Genitalia."
do any one know the site of
...and so reenactionary too.