|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
The Architect
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 184
|
 Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 10:57 pm Post subject: |
    |
|
| Quote: | | ...brief redaction by moderator... |
Censorship - I love it!
Gee, I wonder how come it came about only when MX2 was being called out? Its a good thing a copy my posts. If anyone wishes to read what was said before MX2 deleted it - don't hesitate to ask (including you mod  ).
I'll copy this one too, just to be safe
Take care...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1075
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 7:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
mx2 didn't delete the pointless and insulting introductory part of your comments - I did.
We do truly value your thoughtful participation and intelligent contributions to these forums.
But these conversations are also based on and require common civility. If someone can't be civil and discuss architecture in an atmosphere of basic mutual respect and appreciation, then over time their words are likely to detract from rather than contribute to the community.
To make a clearly insulting, ad-hominem comment, and then follow it by 'no insult intended', is hardly a clever substitute for actually finding mututal understanding. Rather, such a quip tends to degrade the integrity of the discussion, in addition to the degradation of civility generated by an insult to begin with.
— The Moderator
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djswan
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 553
Location: Montana, USA
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ornamentation of language.
Wars are fought over ornaments. It's the first thing to go when you lose the war. The winner then puts up thier favorite ornaments. Easter Island is such a wonderful case study.
_________________
n/a |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1906
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 2:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm very glad there is a moderator because I would probably have lost my temper and only detracted from the conversation as well...so moving on:
Syncopation is a musical term, nothing more or less. However, when alluded to in any other context, it can only mean (just as in music) how one beat relates to another...or should I say how music flows, or more specifically, how the syncopation brielfy interrupts the flow. You can empasize this structurally if you like but ultimately it's either about space, or your just an engineer.
We can continue with the personal pissing match or for once you can stick to the subject. So back to the subject; ornamentation that is not an expression of "truth" is the ultimate PoMo redaction....editing the language of Architecture to senseless banter. I object to the notion that neither time nor ornament is meaningful in Architecture. I think the great failure of the Internationl Style was just that line of thinking: that Purity shall prevail over simple comfort.
However, that said, ornamentation must have meaning and even still, should reflect some rationale,...ironically, should be as self-justifying as many Modern-Puritans would commit hari-kari for. Unfortunately, the history of Architecture is too easily forgotten. The reason Modernism even sprouted its head was in part due to the over-zealousness of some designers & owners who wished to out-do the neighbors...and in reality was yesterdays answer to what today is done with knockdown and caulk. The Raumplan was the first attempts but once reinforced steel broke the mold, all hell broke loose. Suddenly the play of structure was an added ingredient and that tremendous responsibility gave way to some rather careful study of the nature of structure and how, for the very first time, it was juxtaposed to space! As opposed to actually limting space.
So, out with ornament, in with planes, points and voids. Gehry is eventually born. However, homeowers do not seek modern houses...which would be so much easier to build. THAT is the question: how does ornament play a role in CONTEMPORARY Architecture???
The reality is, it is done so very poorly because its approached purely subjectively. But it is not only viable in todays Architecture but necessary. And how ornament is "adorned" can be accomplished in many interesting ways...
http://www.architecturaldigest.com/architects/features/2008/01/ando_article_012008
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Architect
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 184
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | mx2
"You can empasize this structurally if you like but ultimately it's either about space, or your just an engineer. " |
Wrong on both counts! It must be tuff being a grunt.
Frank Lloyd Wright's use, and mine too, of the music's structural similarites are for 'sound' reason. And it everything to do with Structure - and not space!! In music terms as F.Ll.W. and myself use them, we refer to Architecture structure. Should we now just call you Mr. Stubborn?
If structure is anything it is a ryhthm. And in the hands of an accomplished Architect, those ryhthms can be broken down, played off of, and in the end you will see a structural composition.
Welcome to the Bigs mx2.
We don't grunt reno jobs and strip malls, ok? We compose Architecture, and since you have shown your ignorance of such a world, I will endevour to save you from your world of grunts. I don't why or even if it safe for me to do so - but I will try to open your eyes, - begin with the godfather of soul! ...speaking of syncopation.
And while I'm at it - space doesn't flow. It's not a fluid dynamic, like water or air. It's a 'fixed' natural element. 'Things' on the other hand, can flow through space. It is Archtecture's structure which does exactly that. Architecture uses both Time and Space. Hence the structural similaries to music. Ornamentation, when done right as noted by myself and Wright, is an integral element.
| Quote: | | "So, out with ornament, in with planes, points and voids. Gehry is eventually born. " |
This is a ignorant statement. Either you are using ornament in terms Victorian style seen as appendaged adornment - or you are making yet another one of your false generalities. Knowing you as we do, I prefer the later.
Ornament is very much practised in todays works, and is now seen integral element to the over-all structural composition.
Take care...
ps. I attach a screeny of my nuked post.
|
Filesize: 83.73 KB
Filename: DesignCommunityPost_2.jpg
Viewed: 118 Time(s)
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kevin
Site Admin
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 1075
Location: Eugene, Oregon
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No need to waste your time reacting. He's outa here.
I hope we can continue this very interesting thread on ornament!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
birgco
Joined: 01 May 2007
Posts: 283
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 6:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It is funny (not ha ha funny, but ironic) I was just thinking what an interesting topic and how great it is to "listen" to or participate in the discussion, then wham, there's always has to be someone who can't play nice. What is so hard about agreeing to disagree when there's a difference of opinion, without childish namecalling and putdowns? Kinda reminds you of grade school, and amazingly, people bemoan the fact that nations of the world are in conflict............
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1906
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some people simply prefer to make it about themselves, rather than remain focused on any given subject and that always is an issue for any forum. That said, I've already had my run-ins with the Draftman and we exchanged our words before...he wasn't the worse of them either. I don't fault anyone on their opinion on any subject by why make it personal?
Aaaaanyway...too bad it was not picked up on Ando's play on ornamentation. It was a great focus piece that had everything to do ornamentation in a contemporary context. Did anyone have any comment to say about that? Sorry...I know it wasn't a DC article, but it was the most appropriate to the topic that I could find online...and it would be nice to further this discussion.
I wish it wasn't hijacked and lead down the "structure = rhythmn = ornamentation, because FLW said so" path certianly while this has nothing to do with the subject. I have detailed quite a few buildings and the final issue is always decisions made because of budgetary constraints. Gargoyles, for example being elaborate scuppers, were a way to detail this event in a more fashionable way. In other words, buiding elements were elaborated upon with detail in order to express a story. Today, we have minimized the function to the bare necessity when we must specify the minimum thickness of metal (ie, 20 oz copper), instead of detailing a solid piece. Joints, fastenings, juxtaposed materials, entablatures, roof lines, corners, openings, boundaries, all receive little attention and care in comparison to ages ago. Now it's all been reduced to "structure" and the play of space alone...
There is great opportunity to celebrate the details, not as sculptures like the bas releifs of marble friezes, but perhaps as simple as detailing the edges or surfaces of standard elements, adding color and or texture and playing with the intersection of materials in order to highlight the nature of a building...or let me re-phrase...in order to express the nature of the building. What better way is there to reinforce a concept. It's like a period at the end of a sentence. Why minimize language by reducing to "txt msging ur rktektur"?
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1906
Location: Miami, Florida
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mx2
millennium club
Joined: 18 Jan 2006
Posts: 1906
Location: Miami, Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
More food for thought:
| Quote: | When Modern architects righteously abandoned ornament on buildings, they unconsciously designed buildings that were ornament. On promoting Space and Articulation over symbolism and ornament, they distorted the whole building into a duck. They substituted for the innocent and inexpensive practive of applied decoration on a conventional shed the rather cynical and expensive distortion of program and structure to promote a duck, minimegastructures are mostly ducks. . . . It is now time to reevaluate the one-horrifying statements of John Ruskin that architecture is the decoration of construction, but we should append the warning of Pugin: It is all right to decorate construction, but never construct decoration.
Learning from Las Vegas p. 163 - Robert Venturi |
A key idea that I overlooked...the notion of symbolism. Ornamentation as symbols in Architecture? Instead of Architecture as a symbol (iconography)?
mx2.5
_________________
*Art of Architecture: The conscious use of skill and creative imagination in the production of an aesthetic building.
*Science of Architecture: The calculated use of technical skill and knowledge in the construction of a functional building. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
djswan
Joined: 17 Aug 2007
Posts: 553
Location: Montana, USA
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 07, 2008 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Architecture is ornament. A useful accessory. To adorn. The high note.
It's all basic engineering without ornament. I'm just here to embellish the topic.
Good points to all,
Derek
_________________
n/a |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
blogger
del.icio.us
digg
slashdot
