^^^ No, no they aren't. They are just making buildings that look like shit and calling it progressive. There is no philosophy or reason behind their work. Compare that with Art Deco and Modernism, and even Post-Modernism (
). They all have complex philosophical definitions and motives, while Aslop just has a stack of raggy looking shit.
I you want to see someone who is progressive, look at Jeanne Gang, Kreuek and Sexton, Tadao Ando, and even some of the starchitects like Calatava and Foster.
These people are making and have made real contributions to the field whereas Aslop will be merely a side note to our broader movement of organic, environmentally, and nature-inspired architecture. Aslop's style of architecture will probably be as much of a side note to today's movement as Brutalism was to Miesian modernism. Everyone love Mies, whereas the vast majority of people see a Brutalism building and go "gee, what were we thinking" and "wow, that didn't age well."
I'm sorry but in the long run no one is going to praise a building that looks like a giant amoeba and has no positive aesthetic properties at all, just as very few people are turned on by an abrasive concrete wall with arrow-slots for windows...
Prev
Well atleast he did when i was abusing a couple bottles of wine.
Linear Mode
