working title museum | the architecture of being... virtual fog |
A cautionary note: cyberspace, virtual place, and the notion of vituality in general are (too) often used interchangably, however, these terms are far from being necessarily interchangable. Alas, being a virtual tourist is now the best I can do. I ask this because to me there is an open gap between your initial definition and the term being described. There was also a tint of rage in the face, however a rage that he was now too old and too feeble to execute (toward Cordelia), and perhaps it was the realization of the strength to bring out the rage no longer being there that then manifests the "damnation in the mirror." They too are increasingly being inspired by particular high-end cad softwares. I think more people read it, however, and that may have led to some posters being 'caught' by their employers, thus no more posting on the boss' time. Without some factual backup, there is nothing to prevent your possibly being wrong. Remember when I was visiting you 12 November, and that was when we talked about 12 November being Eutropia's death day? My point being that "flatness" is an architectural aesthetic with a long history and very much independent of CAD. Interesting how Lost is a mixture of being stuck in a void and personal memory. It seems more and more true now a days that sounding like a good idea and being a good idea are very much not necessarily the same thing. If Piano never experienced being the first in the class, then he really can't truthfully say what that experience is like. Greatly ornamented buildings simply stopped being designed. I wound up being the one to tell VSBA, and Venturi sent me nice but sad thank you letter. With regard to what I last said here concerning the possible notion of an assimilating architecture, my further elaboration of their presently also being an imaginative operation of a metabolic nature now seems very timely. History is changed when events are recorded and taught as history but are not really reflective of what actually happened, like the 'perversion' that Venturi feels happened to his theory, and inversely, history is changed when a discovery occurs that invalidates established certainties, like the discovery of there actually being two renditions of Piranesi's Ichnograhia Campus Martius. And finally, thanks for being part of what's turning out to be a true metabolic dialogue--your anabolism (constructive metabolism) and my catabolism (destructive metabolism) most times make a very good match. But then again, the notion of the decorated shed being a design methodology to accomidate adapted reuse is not what the decorated shed vs. duck argument is originally about. I now think of Rotterdam and the Netherlands as also being very metabolic places. I remember professors in school being literally afraid that students will start doing the same thing. "These tools in the past were always in man's hands; today they have been entirely and formidably refashioned and for the time being are out of our grasp." And the whole notion of "being allowed" is what makes me think "how pedantic." My feeling all along has been that architects and designers should explore all the capabilities that CAD offers rather than being distressed over CAD's popularly per[con]ceived limitations. So, a question: does one's thinking change after one has gone from being someone that has read many books to someone that has written books? As an aside, anyone who thinks that the use of computers and CAD destroys the potential for creativity is plainly being ignorant, probably inexperienced, and overall foolish. That Husserl ultimately saw perception and primary memory (i.e., retention) as the same (ie, simultaneously present and thus together constituting the nature of presence itself) then unwittingly suggests that perception is also a mental reenactment of the phenomenon being perceived. Thankfully, I escaped with only being very shaken up and a bump to the back of my head, however, my car is totaled. How about separation of 'higher being' and state? Moreover, I never said anything about "all cultures"--when Mark says I was "assuming that all cultures want to live like we do in the industrial west!" he was perhaps being the more assuming with regard to what I meant. Just make Volume and the AMOBulletin an online publication and stop being so old fashioned yourselves! Some of my work is available at Quondam (Encyclopedia Ichnographica), yet the bulk of my material is still unpublished, and meanwhile a paper abstract is currently being submitted to a European colloquium--once the abstract is either accepted or rejected I will make the text available. I don't think architects generally have "dustbins inside their heads" (that's actually antithetical to the task of the profession), but they have been brainwashed into thinking that being original is the highest level of their art art and that all architects can achieve it. Originality is relatively rare. I'll get more specific sometime in the future, because I have been thinking a lot recently about the real implications of Quondam in terms of being so far the only real virtual building/museum presently in existence, and to that end I believe I am actually the first architect to do such a thing, i.e., to design and construct such a place. As if Liz Diller is so original herself, and her quote really doesn't make sense in that what she suggests in no way averts being plagiarized. I had a very eclectic day, did everything from being my brother's bath valet for the first time to discovering that the first master architect of Christianity was a woman. Hadrian is often credited with being the architect of the Pantheon. In this sense, concentration camps utilize architecture for what is surely among the worst of purposes, and, as an aside, Piranesi's Carceri (prisons) also represent architecture used for one of its worst purposes, however, in this case it is our perception that is "tortured" rather than our corporal beings. The notion of it being OK to explain the "Dark Ages" (i.e., several centuries of just European history) in just one sentence and then to think that that sentence explains it all is a big problem itself. Although it surfaced within the early days of my research towards developing The Timepiece of Humanity, the notion of various modes of human imagination being directly relative to our body's various physiological operations was a completely unexpected by-product. If you think all this is bullshit, so be it for you. But I'm not interested in having what I say/write being misrepresented. In what adds up to a succession of one uncanny occurrence after another, ideas regarding the body within contemporary architectural texts and the ideas within chronosomatics come very close, so close that there is even sometimes virtual sameness, yet chronosomatics, because it harbors the base notion of the human body being a timepiece-symbol-blueprint of all history, is in each comparative instance alone able to make decisive intermediate conclusions and further projections regarding the (design of the) body and its potential meaning. I have no problem with your being rude, but your saying that you don't mean to be rude is disingenuous. One could then say that the Great Pyramid regained its "tallest" status, except by that time the second pyramid of Giza may have already been taller than the Great Pyramid (like it is today--this differential is due to great Pyramid's full point no longer being there). Are you critical and always questioning the status quo when you are being creative? To more fully understand Eisenman's text it is necessary to know Tafuri's texts as compiled in The Sphere and the Labyrinth, particularly the notion of (classical) language being dead. As far as I'm concerned, the place never stopped being glorious. There are also some "spiritual" coincidences within my own recent life that lead me to have "faith" in my hypothesis, and these are being gradually disclosed in the "neo-legend" section of The Saintly Patronessing... . I like all the direct answers so far, yet I didn't expect so many to indirectly answer that they think they're creative because of what some other poeple think creativity is--that's more like being un-creative, isn't it? |
|
Quondam © 2019.12.23 |