Quote:
Originally Posted by AdrianXSands
oh? must it?
|
Yes, it must. An architect should know how every single piece of his building is constructed, and every single piece of his building should serve a purpose. When a man can slap a tube on top of a box, which is all his initial model was, and have the building actually be constructed in spite of his lack of knowledge as to how things are actually physically put together, it sets the wrong precedent for how architecture is supposed to be practiced. Architecture is in a sad state due to the fact that the precedent has become that architects are now supposed to be artists, and not give a damn about how the building is built, because that's somebody else's job.
Architecture is supposed to be the highest combination of science and art. Architects are supposed to be the most valuable person to a building in that they are supposed to know how the building is built, and to design something with some artistic merit based on their understanding of the method of how it is built and how it should function. Architects like Koolhaas certainly deserve respect for being good at delivering pretty sketches and high artistic concepts, but at the same time certainly deserve the ridicule of people like me who understand that they don't actually know what they're doing when it comes down to the details.
Quote:
yeah. he has no clue about structures. and his designs have NO basis in reality... he's just a box stacker who's all like, how can i be different?
i really don't even know how he got to where he is today, being so dumb and all. what's that LAME school that nobody's ever heard called where he got his degree? i think that fool alsop and rogers went there too...
http://www.aaschool.ac.uk/
|
Did I say he had no clue about structures? No. He's obviously got a clue about the concept of structures and how to design to the limits of what is structurally possible. I explained how he doesn't think beyond the shapes and how the building has to work as a whole mechanism. Every example I cited, I have discussed in depth with the contractors who had to deal with him. He's not Jahn where he knows what he's doing and insists on the most expensive option, he's a guy who really doesn't actually know.
Quote:
|
yeah... gehry has an extremely intellectual approach to architecture, unlike that hack FOOLhaas. have you ever heard him speak? he's BRILLIANT... and his sketches are works of art. he knows exactly how to make space work!
|
I didn't say I thought Gehry was a good architect. I'm not sure I really like anything he's ever built. But for as complex as his structures are, I know for a fact he designs them to the level of detail necessary for them to be built more easily by the contractors, rather than like Koolhaas, who couldn't care less how his boxes are put together.
I would argue the last point there all day. Have you been inside the campus center at IIT? Unless you spend the majority of your time in there, you can't find your way around in that place without a map, and I defy to you explain to me how that building is in any way anything but a spectacular failure. Overbudget, an eyesore, and completely non-functional. Mies would slit his own throat and die a second time if he ever saw his likeness on the glass on that pile of crap.
Prev
The world NEEDS a ballpark like this. I'd go eventhough I don't care about baseball at all.
Linear Mode
