Posted by Paul Malo on October 23, 2002 at 09:24:13:
In Reply to: Re: Space posted by steve on October 23, 2002 at 07:40:55:
Well, "definition" is prerequisite to making spatial figure. You're right that Modernists deliberately avoided defining spatial figures, prefering ambiguity. This was one of the alienating aspects of much modern building--the "no there there" quality of every space flowing on to some other space, from outside through inside and back outside again.
Modernists thought this revolutionary and futuristic--but it's been a hard sell to users, who like a "there, there." The acceptance of "universal space" as an aspect of the "international" style contributed to the anonymity of place and the anomie of purpose which aliented Modern architecture for many people.
What is "democratic" space--a place that has no significance, the ubiquitous modern "all-purpose" place? Did you love your modern hight school? Could't it be interchanged with any newer high school in Texas or New Hampshire with hardly any notice?
This is the "international" or "universal" aspect of modernism that has been rejected by many--and the Modern notion of non-figural space is integral to that paradigm.
Free 3D Models