Posted by umesh on March 19, 2002 at 06:42:51:
In Reply to: Re: more about design posted by Paul Malo on March 18, 2002 at 08:10:24:
'insticts' had a broader meaning . as a painter or musician , you must have experienced that you follow yourself- your subconcious self.a 'self' developed by cultivation and nourishment. then you find that the last dab of a materialistic paint can unlock a deepest human emotion. this quality requires a rich 'instinct'. this process, i am sure ,is not a ' rational' one. it's not 2+2=4. it's possible because we are civilised - 'animals'.
i think that the biases that escher and picasso might have had are extensions of these insticts or intutions. the variation is in the level of predeterminancy or spontaneity and in turn, in the usage of geometry.
architecture; in my opinion is shaped primarily by such prejudices.
when we rise above solving mere functional questions , architecture tends to become pure art with technology as a medium - like paints or an instrument.
my attempt in all the previous posts has been to discover this phenomenon. is it possible that i experience pure 'space'? is it possible that concrete ,glass, details become mediocre issues ?
i think it happens when i say 'ah' to a geometrical composition in a plan or section and when i understand that this would result in to an interesting spatial experience- irrespective of the materials and colours around.
Free 3D Models