Posted by  BRUTUS on November 01, 2002 at 11:35:58:

In Reply to:  Re: anti-Architecture posted by John DeFazio on November 01, 2002 at 10:56:35:

thanks for clarification...
but unfortunately i am still on a different frequency
because you clearly differentiate between two types or philosophies,which are independent from each other,as if each one belongs to a different creative world:

1-the first
the subjective -unconcious-vernacular as the(anti-architecture)model
and
2-the second
the objective-tectonic-symbolic as the (Architecture)model

but we know symbolic representions in modern architecture were based on the unconscious subjective storage,i think we all share the notion that there's no "symbols" from the "void" architecturally speaking,it has to be derived from what is hidden in our subconscious and the ancestral mental archive or the collective memory
in another way "abstraction" as a "vernacular" realm of thoughts can leads somewhere in its evolutionary history to the "less is more"
and Oskar Niemeyer modernist symbolism (as an example )derive his architectural vocabulary from the ancestral unconscious vocabulary,not to mention the postmodernistic Almighty Gehry and his fish obsession.

Responses:

• Re: anti-Architecture John DeFazio 12:58:29 11/01/2002 (4)
  • Re: anti-Architecture BRUTUS 14:45:25 11/01/2002 (3)
    • Re: anti-Architecture John DeFazio 06:42:01 11/02/2002 (2)
      • Re: anti-Architecture BRUTUS 07:18:13 11/02/2002 (1)
        • Re: anti-Architecture Per Corell 07:34:46 11/02/2002 (0)
• Re: anti-Architecture Per Corell 12:19:44 11/01/2002 (0)

Post a Response -