quondam @ archinect/79/7900s.htm
so what then is architecture?
Stephen Lauf 2003.06.26 00:27
Architecture is a product of the imagination, and I believe human imagination reenacts corporal physiology. This is not to say that architecture is synonymous with the body, nor that building be identical to bodies.
The notion that touch is the first sense to come about (and really what sense could have preceded it?) provides a firm place to start (thinking about beginnings).
The notion of female hardness and male softness suggests that the typical notion of male hardness and female softness is a superficial perception at best. I'm suggesting looking at the design of the human male and female body the way it really is, as opposed to the way centuries of cultural patrimony would rather it be perceived to be. It's an issue of seeing design for what it really is.
I know my thinking is provocative, but hardly rambling, and the most pseudo things in this thread are all the pseudo names.
I've learned to trust my perceptions regarding design. For example, all the architectural theorists that have ever said something about Piranesi's Campo Marzio (including the current dean of Princeton architecture) have never looked enough to find what I have found, which is that there are indeed two versions of the large plan, thus making me someone that discovered a heretofore unknown Piranesi--not exactly like discovering a lost/unknown Michelangelo, but not far away from it either.
Keep the pseudo for yourself.
|