Your reactions are childish because you overlook pertinent info and focus soley on things you've incorrectly (and pointlessly) taken personal offense to.
make him more important? no.
a better architect for study? arguably.
again, you're missing a key distinction. slow down a bit.
I agree with manamana, beta, etc. There is SO MUCH useful information and potential for discussion in this thread. It is actually a great topic of discussion but your responses are keeping it from happening. Some of the points brought up are fantastic, let them happen.
You do set yourself up for attack by putting down people's ideas when it is evident that there is some fundamental information that you are lacking. Or maybe you don't do a good job representing yourself online. I read what is on the screen and respond accordingly.
beta, lets focus on the letters that I typed saying "is/was" and use that to hint that I know nothing about architecture. Yes. I knew that. Are there any other tests that I should take to validate my opinion? By the appearance of it, I don't deserve to have my opinion because I haven't studied architecture enough.
As for taking offense to insensitive postings is my right, whether manamana thinks it is valid or not, does not take away from the conversation that I was trying to have. What if I said that my father was black and that the picture that beta posted offended me? Does that maike my taking offense pointless and incorrectly?
When the topic of Modernism is raised, Le Corbusier is always the first architect to come to most architects minds. Is that because his work is better suited for study or because history books have been abridged into icons for people to cling onto? And bringing it back to the original topic, is it possible that studying topics other than icons can give an arguably better study?
I'm just gonna stick to giving my responses to questions asked.
Is that because his work is better suited for study or because history books have been abridged into icons for people to cling onto?
I don't see how this could be anything other than BOTH, though I wouldn't word it how you have.
And bringing it back to the original topic, is it possible that studying topics other than icons can give an arguably better study?
I think in different situations that will depend on many, many other factors, so sometimes
which I think is more or less how the education system works. different schools have different areas of focus, students usually have some say in who their studio professors are... etc. Is the conclusion that what's really important is that students find the right school for them?
is there enough diversity represented in the architectural profession and education?
I don't personally know anyone who would answer yes to this. there have been many comprehensive threads on the diversity issue - try search.
I think perhaps the issue here is what 'creativity' is. In a different field, literature, Harold Bloom has argued that literary greatness is defined by struggling with precursors. I think Stephen's 'reenactment' (so far as I understand) is pretty apt here.
[ ulterior, I was teaching at UA, but I'm now at AUT. are you in nz? ]
These are fascinating topics.
1) Art for Art's sake: I think bluegoose is right. What-do-I-have-to-do?-Set-my-hair-on-fire? designs deserve little respect. But at the same time, it may be inevitable. At a movement matures, and ripens to the point of spoiling, we get sweet, syrupy works.
2) "I really believe that sweeping aesthetic changes tie in with social movements." (Denise Scott Brown) So something like Modernisn can be seen as a reaction to Classicism; and in the 30's and 40's, it seems to have represented that poignantly. It's not like great design movements just appear.
3) Creativity vs. Research: I had a teacher (hi Andy Ogden!) who had us read a book on the creative process that looked at it as using both halves of the brain. Your left brain was the information-gathering side and your right brain was the creative side. And you have to use both to come up with a design. But they're separate halves, and you switch between the two to make something and test it out, then go back and inform/ideate. It's really fascinating to watch someone immersed in this process, and I'm sure you all do it.
4) Is there someone in Manhattan that can tickle 21ronin?
cool morgan freeman pick. i musta seen that afore, but totally forgot.
nothing offensive intended, clearly. just some friendly and humorously delivered advice...but really, why would being black make that offensive? its morgan freeman man, being cool with the reading thing.
i don't think anyone cares where you are from or your education, dude. the responses are pretty decent and thoughtful answers to content, not the deliverer. most of us made an assumption that you were trained in architecture, and are just surprised you don't know hedjuk. nothing more than that. but if you don't understand the answer it isn't our fault...
anyway...what manamana says above works for me...
i think corb is famous for the same reason mozart is famous. don't make mozart or corb less than the best jes cuz they are so accessable, so i don't think there is any problem with studying them, obsessively or otherwise. they both were masters.
gropius is i think equivalent to corb, as is mies, and FLW. Meier fits in there too as well as Meyer, and lots of others...corb maybe wrote better and more, but that is all. it only matters if you don't go past the surface...
The most accessible artists, architects and musicians are most likely studied upon learning about the history of architecture. My frustration is that if a person wanted to study something that is not so accessible there is little information available because most people focus on the icons. Where would a person go to study any sort of African or Middle Eastern architecture other than Africa or the Middle East?
Does anyone think that there will be any aesthetic correlations to sustainable design? And if not, does anyone think that is what is keeping it back from really being accepted broadly? (Politics aside)
Oh I think it's definitely accessible. It's like listening to Tom Schnabel and thinking, "This is too hardcore." And then listening to Nick Harcourt and finding an artist who sounds like she was influenced by something Tom played. And then really looking into that artist that Tom played.
It is so awfull easy -- take any of the designs you apriciate and has or can build in a 3D program, slice it into 3dh. Most 3D drawings is allready almost prepard just for that -- if the building is modeled with Solids in a 3D program, it can also produce the structure in pieces, that build it.
Then and only then look at how various density framework, various materials can , step by step add a new dimension, allowing the old forms , just the tradisional architecture it's forms, walls and construction, but with a new attitude, the patterns within the building core structure, how various density and materials maybe even deliver better, particular places, ---
Just slice a number of designs and it is obvious, they all be different in a new way, case that's what you want ,in fact a number of variations by sheet material choice and particular detail knowleage could even render exactly that splendid adventure, creativity is ment to be.
Beside this is prone to deliver some real architecture, the assembly for a house, and all the space for creativity you ever emagined, Right, for me Per Corell this is my delivery, but I also know it allready and in future inspire.
Now do it your own, build yourself your dream's house. Look how an old public domain design would prove made 3dh not the convensional way, edit it to your specifications, -- now it is allready your's.
"Now when I had mastered the language of this water, and had come to know every trifling features that bordered the great river as familiarly as I knew the letters of the alphabet, I had made a valuable acquisition. But I had lost something too. I had lost something which could never be restored to me while I lived. All the grace, the beauty, the poetry, had gone out of the majestic river!....All the value any feature of it had for me now was the amount of usefulness it could furnish toward compassing the safe piloting of a steamboat. Since those days, I have pitied doctors from my heart. What does the lovely flush in a beauty's cheek mean to a doctor but a "break" that ripples above some deadly disease?...doesn't he sometimes wonder whether he has gained most or lost most by learning his trade?" -- Mark Twain
that twain quote is great: entertaining, poetic, and seemingly sensible. but i expect that it was written/said with tongue in cheek or from the mouth of a character. twain was certainly NOT against learning, disenchantment or no.
i know too much about too many projects, and those that i don't know i'm pretty apt at finding information on in a short amount of time.
with every project i've undertaken, there is an intial stage of research (mostly site) and precedent study (which is a form of research)
i do feel that this stifles my creativity in some ways, it enhances it in others.
i'm able to stand on giants, sort of. it allows me to see what has been done, what works and what doesn't - and to build on it. (enhances)
sometimes after getting to a certain point w/ design, i'm afraid something looks to much like another architect's work. i usually end up abandoning there and starting over. (stifles)
i'd be very interested in learning how to actually do more research other than site related.
holz.box, I'm currently reading the book, "Color Image Scale," by Shigenobu Kobayashi (actually, looking at the colors) who developed a matrix incorporating color almost synaesthetically with emotions/feelings. I was looking at the matrix and thinking, "Now, Peter Zumthor's Thermal Bath's probably go here, and Daniel Libeskind's Denver Art Museum can go here..." And I'd get the big picture if it all was in place, but I'd need a Getty grant to see that. At least I know what colors to wear when I go to the Denver Art Museum.
one approach to research at which i'm getting much better in professional life - but which they don't teach in academic settings - is picking the brains of those who know more about something than you do.
somehow it's like you've got to start from scratch and make original synthetic observations in an academic setting....what a waste of time. now when i attack a project i figure out what i need to know and then figure out who to ask. there are experts in so many fields that are perfectly willing to share their knowledge. use them!
imo, this allows for MORE creativity. if, because i've got the information at hand from someone else who actually knew the right answers, i don't have to spend all of my time figuring out the court standards for wheelchair basketball and how to detail the right conditions for modular roof plantings, i get to spend time coordinating design decisions.
i've especially learned to use the knowledge of contractors - both generals and subs. these guys LOVE to share what they've learned. and it builds a relationship with them in which they don't feel belittled by you because they've been able to teach you something.
Well actually, no, Steven -- the point of the quote is not about learning being a bad thing, it's not from a character, nor is it tongue in cheek. Sorry! It's really the opposite of all that that gives it its compelling power.
The quote is one of my favorites from "Life on the Mississippi", which is just such a critical read for understanding Twain. You're not alone -- most people haven't read this book.
twain is just speaking to the loss of innocence inherent in knowledge, the opening of eyes as an adult as opposed to the naive and open child (a la rousseau). It is a nice and poetic work, and i love twain dearly, however there is a point where wonder and deep understanding can co-exist; my suspicion is that twain is having a bit of a go at us, in a good way. he wants us to feel the beauty by pointing out his loss.
e.o. wilson is great example of person who knows more about a single subject than most anyone else, but walks away with that knowledge more in awe, not less. if samuel clemens was not able to do that i would be surprised. mark twain maybe couldn't afford to, or didn't want to cuz it didn't sound as romantic.
anyway, all knowledge is good (well maybe not some of the perverse things one can find on the internet...). not seeking it is not good. from any source. knowledge never hurts creativity.
actually i have read 'life on the mississippi', sandroad, but didn't recognize the passage. too long ago, i guess. and i'm with jump. his assessment seems closer to the spirit of twain: i still don't think twain was an anti-intellectual and poking around at us with provocative positions was part of who he was.
Does research kill architectural creativity?
Your reactions are childish because you overlook pertinent info and focus soley on things you've incorrectly (and pointlessly) taken personal offense to.
make him more important? no.
a better architect for study? arguably.
again, you're missing a key distinction. slow down a bit.
* Replace "for study" in my previous post with "to work through"
I like his distinction.
But I don't think I'd go so far as to label Hejduk (or anybody, for that matter) as the greatest American architect.
I agree with manamana, beta, etc. There is SO MUCH useful information and potential for discussion in this thread. It is actually a great topic of discussion but your responses are keeping it from happening. Some of the points brought up are fantastic, let them happen.
You do set yourself up for attack by putting down people's ideas when it is evident that there is some fundamental information that you are lacking. Or maybe you don't do a good job representing yourself online. I read what is on the screen and respond accordingly.
beta, lets focus on the letters that I typed saying "is/was" and use that to hint that I know nothing about architecture. Yes. I knew that. Are there any other tests that I should take to validate my opinion? By the appearance of it, I don't deserve to have my opinion because I haven't studied architecture enough.
As for taking offense to insensitive postings is my right, whether manamana thinks it is valid or not, does not take away from the conversation that I was trying to have. What if I said that my father was black and that the picture that beta posted offended me? Does that maike my taking offense pointless and incorrectly?
When the topic of Modernism is raised, Le Corbusier is always the first architect to come to most architects minds. Is that because his work is better suited for study or because history books have been abridged into icons for people to cling onto? And bringing it back to the original topic, is it possible that studying topics other than icons can give an arguably better study?
I apologize if I type too fast and I don't go back to edit.
Is there enough diversity represented in the architectural profession and education?
You are not clever.
...and yes it does take away from the topic, but clearly you can't be relied on to have an adult conversation.
Icons are antithetical to diversity
I'm just gonna stick to giving my responses to questions asked.
Is that because his work is better suited for study or because history books have been abridged into icons for people to cling onto?
I don't see how this could be anything other than BOTH, though I wouldn't word it how you have.
And bringing it back to the original topic, is it possible that studying topics other than icons can give an arguably better study?
I think in different situations that will depend on many, many other factors, so sometimes
which I think is more or less how the education system works. different schools have different areas of focus, students usually have some say in who their studio professors are... etc. Is the conclusion that what's really important is that students find the right school for them?
is there enough diversity represented in the architectural profession and education?
I don't personally know anyone who would answer yes to this. there have been many comprehensive threads on the diversity issue - try search.
I think perhaps the issue here is what 'creativity' is. In a different field, literature, Harold Bloom has argued that literary greatness is defined by struggling with precursors. I think Stephen's 'reenactment' (so far as I understand) is pretty apt here.
[ ulterior, I was teaching at UA, but I'm now at AUT. are you in nz? ]
These are fascinating topics.
1) Art for Art's sake: I think bluegoose is right. What-do-I-have-to-do?-Set-my-hair-on-fire? designs deserve little respect. But at the same time, it may be inevitable. At a movement matures, and ripens to the point of spoiling, we get sweet, syrupy works.
2) "I really believe that sweeping aesthetic changes tie in with social movements." (Denise Scott Brown) So something like Modernisn can be seen as a reaction to Classicism; and in the 30's and 40's, it seems to have represented that poignantly. It's not like great design movements just appear.
3) Creativity vs. Research: I had a teacher (hi Andy Ogden!) who had us read a book on the creative process that looked at it as using both halves of the brain. Your left brain was the information-gathering side and your right brain was the creative side. And you have to use both to come up with a design. But they're separate halves, and you switch between the two to make something and test it out, then go back and inform/ideate. It's really fascinating to watch someone immersed in this process, and I'm sure you all do it.
4) Is there someone in Manhattan that can tickle 21ronin?
cool morgan freeman pick. i musta seen that afore, but totally forgot.
nothing offensive intended, clearly. just some friendly and humorously delivered advice...but really, why would being black make that offensive? its morgan freeman man, being cool with the reading thing.
i don't think anyone cares where you are from or your education, dude. the responses are pretty decent and thoughtful answers to content, not the deliverer. most of us made an assumption that you were trained in architecture, and are just surprised you don't know hedjuk. nothing more than that. but if you don't understand the answer it isn't our fault...
anyway...what manamana says above works for me...
i think corb is famous for the same reason mozart is famous. don't make mozart or corb less than the best jes cuz they are so accessable, so i don't think there is any problem with studying them, obsessively or otherwise. they both were masters.
gropius is i think equivalent to corb, as is mies, and FLW. Meier fits in there too as well as Meyer, and lots of others...corb maybe wrote better and more, but that is all. it only matters if you don't go past the surface...
Oops. I meant Brooklyn.
The most accessible artists, architects and musicians are most likely studied upon learning about the history of architecture. My frustration is that if a person wanted to study something that is not so accessible there is little information available because most people focus on the icons. Where would a person go to study any sort of African or Middle Eastern architecture other than Africa or the Middle East?
Does anyone think that there will be any aesthetic correlations to sustainable design? And if not, does anyone think that is what is keeping it back from really being accepted broadly? (Politics aside)
Oh I think it's definitely accessible. It's like listening to Tom Schnabel and thinking, "This is too hardcore." And then listening to Nick Harcourt and finding an artist who sounds like she was influenced by something Tom played. And then really looking into that artist that Tom played.
It is so awfull easy -- take any of the designs you apriciate and has or can build in a 3D program, slice it into 3dh. Most 3D drawings is allready almost prepard just for that -- if the building is modeled with Solids in a 3D program, it can also produce the structure in pieces, that build it.
Then and only then look at how various density framework, various materials can , step by step add a new dimension, allowing the old forms , just the tradisional architecture it's forms, walls and construction, but with a new attitude, the patterns within the building core structure, how various density and materials maybe even deliver better, particular places, ---
Just slice a number of designs and it is obvious, they all be different in a new way, case that's what you want ,in fact a number of variations by sheet material choice and particular detail knowleage could even render exactly that splendid adventure, creativity is ment to be.
Beside this is prone to deliver some real architecture, the assembly for a house, and all the space for creativity you ever emagined, Right, for me Per Corell this is my delivery, but I also know it allready and in future inspire.
Now do it your own, build yourself your dream's house. Look how an old public domain design would prove made 3dh not the convensional way, edit it to your specifications, -- now it is allready your's.
"Now when I had mastered the language of this water, and had come to know every trifling features that bordered the great river as familiarly as I knew the letters of the alphabet, I had made a valuable acquisition. But I had lost something too. I had lost something which could never be restored to me while I lived. All the grace, the beauty, the poetry, had gone out of the majestic river!....All the value any feature of it had for me now was the amount of usefulness it could furnish toward compassing the safe piloting of a steamboat. Since those days, I have pitied doctors from my heart. What does the lovely flush in a beauty's cheek mean to a doctor but a "break" that ripples above some deadly disease?...doesn't he sometimes wonder whether he has gained most or lost most by learning his trade?" -- Mark Twain
Beautiful
Thanks Per. By chance, do you and 21Ronin know each other?
I hardly know myself today ...
Nope
That was, "nope" that I don't know PerCorell
that twain quote is great: entertaining, poetic, and seemingly sensible. but i expect that it was written/said with tongue in cheek or from the mouth of a character. twain was certainly NOT against learning, disenchantment or no.
just to pipe in a bit here...
i know too much about too many projects, and those that i don't know i'm pretty apt at finding information on in a short amount of time.
with every project i've undertaken, there is an intial stage of research (mostly site) and precedent study (which is a form of research)
i do feel that this stifles my creativity in some ways, it enhances it in others.
i'm able to stand on giants, sort of. it allows me to see what has been done, what works and what doesn't - and to build on it. (enhances)
sometimes after getting to a certain point w/ design, i'm afraid something looks to much like another architect's work. i usually end up abandoning there and starting over. (stifles)
i'd be very interested in learning how to actually do more research other than site related.
holz.box, I'm currently reading the book, "Color Image Scale," by Shigenobu Kobayashi (actually, looking at the colors) who developed a matrix incorporating color almost synaesthetically with emotions/feelings. I was looking at the matrix and thinking, "Now, Peter Zumthor's Thermal Bath's probably go here, and Daniel Libeskind's Denver Art Museum can go here..." And I'd get the big picture if it all was in place, but I'd need a Getty grant to see that. At least I know what colors to wear when I go to the Denver Art Museum.
interesting. i'll have to check it out.
of course, that means paying the $20 in fees i somehow racked up in a week, so that will have to be resolved first. yikes.
yeah, big picture and theory are two things i'm always struggling with. i get caught up in just trying to make it look and function right.
one approach to research at which i'm getting much better in professional life - but which they don't teach in academic settings - is picking the brains of those who know more about something than you do.
somehow it's like you've got to start from scratch and make original synthetic observations in an academic setting....what a waste of time. now when i attack a project i figure out what i need to know and then figure out who to ask. there are experts in so many fields that are perfectly willing to share their knowledge. use them!
imo, this allows for MORE creativity. if, because i've got the information at hand from someone else who actually knew the right answers, i don't have to spend all of my time figuring out the court standards for wheelchair basketball and how to detail the right conditions for modular roof plantings, i get to spend time coordinating design decisions.
i've especially learned to use the knowledge of contractors - both generals and subs. these guys LOVE to share what they've learned. and it builds a relationship with them in which they don't feel belittled by you because they've been able to teach you something.
always be happy to learn.
Great post Steven, if only more people subscribed to your modus operandi there would be many more happy campers out here.
Well actually, no, Steven -- the point of the quote is not about learning being a bad thing, it's not from a character, nor is it tongue in cheek. Sorry! It's really the opposite of all that that gives it its compelling power.
The quote is one of my favorites from "Life on the Mississippi", which is just such a critical read for understanding Twain. You're not alone -- most people haven't read this book.
twain is just speaking to the loss of innocence inherent in knowledge, the opening of eyes as an adult as opposed to the naive and open child (a la rousseau). It is a nice and poetic work, and i love twain dearly, however there is a point where wonder and deep understanding can co-exist; my suspicion is that twain is having a bit of a go at us, in a good way. he wants us to feel the beauty by pointing out his loss.
e.o. wilson is great example of person who knows more about a single subject than most anyone else, but walks away with that knowledge more in awe, not less. if samuel clemens was not able to do that i would be surprised. mark twain maybe couldn't afford to, or didn't want to cuz it didn't sound as romantic.
anyway, all knowledge is good (well maybe not some of the perverse things one can find on the internet...). not seeking it is not good. from any source. knowledge never hurts creativity.
do you/anyone think that extensive knowledge of what is held common hurts the overall creativity of the profession?
no, 21ronin.
actually i have read 'life on the mississippi', sandroad, but didn't recognize the passage. too long ago, i guess. and i'm with jump. his assessment seems closer to the spirit of twain: i still don't think twain was an anti-intellectual and poking around at us with provocative positions was part of who he was.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.