Posted by Richard Haut on September 25, 2003 at 11:40:36:
In Reply to: Re: THE ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION posted by Matt Gallagher on September 25, 2003 at 11:07:07:
if you want to disagree with Per that is up to you - discussion and the exchange of ideas inevitably involve disagreement - even the correction of one side's argument by the other.
how can Per be phoney if he is merely demonstrating ideas ?
a considerable part of what he appears to be trying to do is to encourage people to realise that new approaches are needed, that the existing methods and ideas and are far from perfect. If you look at the range of references that most people come up with on this forum, they are extremely limited.
to continually rehash modernist ideas that are up to 80 years old is ridiculous. It is not just Per, but the general public - those that use the buildings - who consider too much of contemporary architecture both alienating and blank.
when Per talks of "Lego", we all know what he means, when he talks of "Romans" take a look at the reactionary British contracting industry.
You may disagree with his conclusions, but his starting point is valid.
- but be careful of making a virtue out of negativity and pessimism. It implies that you have no interest in, or cannot accept new ideas or change. For a discipline that is by definition concerned with the future - and all architecture is and has to be for the future - you are facing the wrong way.
Types & Styles
Library Places Building Photos Free 3D Models Archiplanet