Comments on: Architects: “Do We Matter?” http://www.vestaldesign.com/blog/2006/09/architects-do-we-matter/ A design blog with a particular emphasis on green design, design for society, and environmental technologies, Vestal Design Blog also discusses web design, product design, graphic design, and architecture. Sat, 18 Dec 2010 00:46:48 +0000 hourly 1 By: Jeffrey Warren http://www.vestaldesign.com/blog/2006/09/architects-do-we-matter/comment-page-1/#comment-1746 Jeffrey Warren Thu, 21 Sep 2006 14:34:39 +0000 http://www.vestaldesign.com/blog/2006/09/architects-do-we-matter.html#comment-1746 Harsh but fairly true. As to the obfuscatory rhetoric which architects seem to hide behind, there were a couple good quotes in the NYTimes article on Rem Koolhaas' new design for Cornell's architecture building. The article states, "He said he had entered the 'apparent warfare between blob and box' in contemporary architecture, and that he was 'trying to short-circuit that dialectic.'" “The box is always an isolated thing. But here, we use the box as a connector. You could say it’s a postmodern use of the box.” Also, “We didn’t want to do a literal masterpiece, but an almost mysterious single beam of modernity,’’ said Shohei Shigematsu, the firm’s senior associate on the project. It's not that these statements don't have merit, it's just that the extremely introspective nature of architectural theory, combined with the (in my opinion) purposeful use of such language to maintain a monopoly over all things "architectural" which I object to. Also, they're just ridiculous. Oops, that was a bit of a rant. Well, maybe not a rant, but an almost mysterious single beam of skepticism. Harsh but fairly true. As to the obfuscatory rhetoric which architects seem to hide behind, there were a couple good quotes in the NYTimes article on Rem Koolhaas’ new design for Cornell’s architecture building.

The article states, “He said he had entered the ‘apparent warfare between blob and box’ in contemporary architecture, and that he was ‘trying to short-circuit that dialectic.’”

“The box is always an isolated thing. But here, we use the box as a connector. You could say it’s a postmodern use of the box.”

Also, “We didn’t want to do a literal masterpiece, but an almost mysterious single beam of modernity,’’ said Shohei Shigematsu, the firm’s senior associate on the project.

It’s not that these statements don’t have merit, it’s just that the extremely introspective nature of architectural theory, combined with the (in my opinion) purposeful use of such language to maintain a monopoly over all things “architectural” which I object to. Also, they’re just ridiculous.

Oops, that was a bit of a rant. Well, maybe not a rant, but an almost mysterious single beam of skepticism.

]]>