"The really important kind of freedom involves attention, and awareness, and discipline, and effort, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them, over and over, in myriad petty little unsexy ways, every day."
followed tags: 21
followed domains: 0
badges given: 0 of 1
member for: 178 days
- What this says to Kim is that his nuclear investment worked.
- This is a signal to all rogue regimes that non proliferation is a scam, and that if they agree to it they lose leverage.
KJU is not going to give up nuclear capabilities in a negotiation that, from his perspective, was leveraged to even occur because of the existence of his nuclear capabilities.
I think it's more than appropriate to be skeptical. If this is a planted source and the recordings are talked up, aired, then proven by the Deripaska/Russian sources to be incomplete or fabricated it'd be a real slam to the broadcasting parties' credibility.
- i think a lot of postwar architecture boils down to an ego trip
I mean...kind of? The theory behind these "modern art" pieces is wild. Eisenman's collection pulled upon broad depths of theory. People who understand the basis of thought will understand the ego and appreciate the work.
I think a clearer distinction is that architects in the modern age are finding a stronger expressive link in their work rather than to the client. That's the distinction I made above between Alexander and Eisenman RE: Eishin vs. House VI. It's also the dynamic of public opinion that KB got at above - in short, public opinion barely matters to whether something gets built or not. In the case of public-facing architecture, the weakening of the non-paying, only-observing client link appears as (and is!) a strengthening of the architect's ego. With public/client opinion backseated, any artist will create with and from what they know, which will always be an ego-expression. There's no way around it.
As long as this thread is all dug up:
- You wanna meet the guy who created the Taliban? [Gust Avrakotos]. Explaining that will take me a thousand words, but I can do it.
Save a thousand words. Is Charlie Wilson's War a/the book to read about that? What is? Give a list if you've got time.
It's hard not to side with Alexander. His built work is meant to be occupied by humans; Eisenman's is not. That's basically the whole deal.
The Katarxis gallery you linked by Alexander's student, Michael Mehaffy, is a good example of the care Alexander put into designing these spaces, and not just the design but the construction of his projects. His published works (especially The Battle for the Life and Beauty of the Earth) describe the care he takes in tectonics, the art of construction.
Eisenman did not. He designed Wexner with 12,000 square feet of fenestrated galleries which were later refitted because prolonged and unprotected sunlight exposure damages artwork it turns out. He designed House VI just a few years before this debate, and that was a fucking shitshow saved only by the kindness and architectural appreciation of his patrons.
I mean, you can already tell the style of the guy when he said Chartres was "boring". My coworker (GSD faculty at the time) said everyone's collective jaws dropped at that considering, well...Chartres looks like this:
Just for quick comparison, this is one of Eisenman's most prized works of his career:
Which, despite looking like graphing paper ski slopes, also has this going for it:
- The project has more than doubled its original budget and has not attracted significant numbers of visitors. Construction of the final two planned buildings was stopped in 2012 and terminated definitively in March 2013 following high cost overruns.
Par for the course for Eisenman - overblown budget, unfinished project, unusable space. This article is scathing.
Meanwhile, Alexander's designing Eishin campus with Japanese school children:
- The architectural commission to build this community, came with the explicit insistence, by the managing director of the school, Hisae Hosoi, that he wanted the project to be done under conditions where faculty, staff, and students, were all taking part in the design process. And by this he meant, not the pablum of token "participation" and "charettes" that has become common in the last twenty years, but honest-to-goodness decision making by the people in the school, based on individual and group understanding.
They ended up with this - no hiccups, no errors, in budget, active client participation, highly functional, highly used.
But Eisenman's career took off in the years following this debate while Alexander's languished, and the implications of that are astounding. Design had stopped being about livable spaces, perceptual harmony, humane principles, client's needs, and basic functionality. In that vacuum had entered Eisenman's dialectic, and the academe from which it's derived. By taking a stand for functional harmony vs. post-humanism, Alexander took himself out of modern discourse and Eisenman et al became the lion and the Christian. Design's post-modern positioning can only be understood by that lens.
Do you mind me asking what connection you have to the architectural world?
I have a friend who studied under Eisenman and a coworker who was present at this debate. It's common intro reading for undergrads these days. I'm interested to talk about this subject, but I don't want to assume your experience.
Come to the bar, get advice on whiskey. Helpful stuff.
Just popping by for a moment, I won't need a drink. Did plenty of that with the sisters-in-law this weekend! They made a short visit up to see the wife, and when the three of them get together for any time at all, things get wild. We smoked up all our weed and drank all our stockpiled liquor, including some delicious Chattanooga whiskey I'd been saving for just such an occasion. I've had the reserve and the cask, and like the reserve more - though it qualifies as "cheap" in jF's rubric, it's tasty neat (the only way my wife drinks it) and cocktails well for people not so tough.
I've had more than my share of deaths in the family these past few months, so we've been seeing a lot of my half of the tree. This is the first time I've seen the in-laws since about this time last year though - missed those ol' gals.
As a point, I think I've avoided using our names because I didn't think people would care very much. Someone tell me if I should be scared of doxxing on this site, but I'm not. I'm Peter, wife's Shani, and below is a picture of us from a while back.
I like to annoy my wife with it :)
For example, a snowstorm a little while back prompted a walk through our local greenway. We passed under a tree, covered in snow, and I said the line, "I like to think some boy's been swinging them..." She didn't know to get away, despite the hint, and we both got dowsed in snow as I pulled a branch.
I read Elantris and the Mistborn series in high school. I'm not sure what age you are, but I remember Mistborn to be fairly Young Adult. I'd reread it now though, for sure. I love the idea of the Cosmere and the lore surrounding it, good sci-fi. His magic systems are unparalleled.