Posted by Paul Malo on April 25, 2002 at 06:01:17:In Reply to: ArchWeek - Exploring a Virtual Future posted by Kevin Matthews on April 24, 2002 at 20:54:15:
Where is the dividing line between architecture and theater? Perhaps there is none, but many of us have seen a distinction between substance and illusion, between architecture that has an autonomous gestalt, and stage settings contrived for visual effect.
Some designers may be purely decorative in intention--whether the decor be Louis Quinze or DeCon--it's all about appearance, about effects, to them. I suppose that decorators have a role, but there is more to architecture than manipulating form to produce visual interest.
The difference seems to be whether a work has a self-sufficent integrity--its own reason for being what it is--or depends upon the viewer's response to validate it --the "oh, wow!' reaction. It's the difference between the Pantheon and Vierzenheilegen, between Seagram and Casa Mila--between "good" and "interesting" architecture, as Mies would say.
The "virtual" obsession with illusion seems theatrical, encouraging an architecture of effects--mere illusions for theatrical purposes.
|
ArchitectureWeek
Search
Buildings
Architects
Types
Places
Pix
Free 3D Models
Store
Library
|