Posted by Per Corell on March 13, 2003 at 02:59:06:
In Reply to: the place of "place" in architecture posted by Peter Brincat on March 13, 2003 at 01:45:10:
Please allow me to contribuate with a few thoughts about modern architecture. I think it is wierd that the structural members in modern buildings need to be hidden becaurse they are ugly.
Bad that this count both hyber modern steelframe aswell as trendy concrete boxworks being covered with fake brickwork , just to hide the veak enginering ability to make structural members do anything but Legoworks. ------- But this is seemingly how modernism evolved.
Early in past century buildings shuld perform "honest" , no Decor needed and most architects today agree. But this is not how many structures work and engineers not architects ( with a few expertations ) was those to develob new methods and experiment with new form languages.
The "place" you speak about is comford and never been anything else. The feel og harmony in a building and the right dimentions in houses where people live is as important as they feed the sense of beauty.
Delight shuld be a natural part of our inviroments nomatter we se these as space or place or just rooms they are Structures.
WTC also are a structure but the way this will rise will show it's future. As if no new technology and no true progress come from this, the world will lose it's fait and trust, ------- some designers allready have and the "process" bring nothing new except a mix of what you can find around the web, so hopefully these jokers soon start to perform their vision about what the future world shuld rest on.
Modern architecture is _not_ the playground for visions but rather hiding the true structure of lookalike ; that never brought any true progress, wonder if it will do it this time.
Types & Styles
Library Places Building Photos Free 3D Models Archiplanet