Message - Re: anti-Architecture

    Responses | Architecture Forum | Architecture Students | Architecture Scrapbook | ArchitectureWeek    

Posted by  John DeFazio on November 01, 2002 at 12:58:29:

In Reply to:  Re: anti-Architecture posted by BRUTUS on November 01, 2002 at 11:35:58:

Sorry, now it is I that can not follow.

Subjective and Objective are, by definition, two differing ways of looking at (the same) world... Plato vs. Aristotle.

Modern Architectural Theory (or at least what it was distilled down to by 1935) sort to create a new vocabulary of forms that would only be "symbolic" of itself. It sort to be a "New Objective" art form. The machine was the model... only efficient, purposeful, functionalism was to be the organizing principal. This is all "High Theory", apriori, self-consciously intended. Vernacular is theoretical; it works pragmatically and in the manner of "this is just way this is done". Its evolutionary, and adjusted incrementally, subjective to circumstance. By its nature it is unselfconscious

Symbol systems that we read into today in Modern works are through hindsight and from the metaphorical language which abstraction evokes... ( Bilbo) like an exploding artichoke".

ArchitectureWeek     Search     Buildings     Architects     Types     Places     Pix     Free 3D Models     Store     Library

Search by name of Building, Architect, or Place:   
Examples:  "Fallingwater",  "Wright",  "Paris"           Advanced Search


Post a Response -



This is an archive page. Please post continuing discussion to the new Architecture Forums.

To post successfully to the new membership-based DesignCommunity Forums:

    1) Go to the new forums area.
    2) Register with a valid email address.
    3) Receive and respond to the confirmation email.
    4) Then login to the new forum system.


Special thanks to our Sustaining Subscribers including .

Home | Great Buildings | CAD Outpost | DesignWorkshop | Free 3D | Gallery | Search | ArchitectureWeek
This document is provided for on-line viewing only. /discussion/23076.html