Architectural History

[csintexas]

[ahmeds]

The great change in architecture will not be directly caused by computer, but coming of
1) new concept
2) introduction of new materials
At the moment architecture is taking a slow turn from industrial age to advanced technology age, but however this changes impact will be felt when technology will give much more modern or rather computerized building, (though at the moment they are there), but I mean to say advanced technology yet to come.
As advancing of architecture is being observed, people should not forget the past, how building technology was applied, the different types, forms, and styles of architecture that prevailed during those days,
They (architectural designs) had or still have some attraction and explains to us how those people in those days worked, without computers, simply they had great minds, and applied architecture as required.
At the moment there are few architects I believe who are out to design and produce landmarks to be admired for the sake of architecture, but they rather do that for the sake of FEES...(sorry guys-this is my opinion and wish to be pardoned if I may have offended any one anywhere) unlike the past when the great architects worked ( without computers) and produced what we can see now.
Lets look at how the steelless beams,columns,and slabs are, lets see at how they plastered their walls, type of finishes, from greek to colonial to other forms, all these have actually a lot to be admired from.

[P.C.]

And when we again realised the architecture we will be back here. Here is where we can not see, what calculated building structure will deliver, we think we know , that what we admire is tradisional we expect a new architecture to be destructive , we think computers are the issue, when simple allmost to easy a solution is rignt at hand.
Our emagination is limited within what is not alian, just aincient in architecture, cute but heavily inefficient and not at all digital --- how can something digital be better than that?
It just can, as some of the aincient can be better than some of the new digital, --- realy , most of what is said against new methods , production and manufactoring, is serius irelevant.

[P.C.]

I often feel people complain, they can not get the old leaking, hyber expensive ,vorn out fasion house, expensive to maintain and by many repairs doubtfull style architecture --- how can 3dh be better than that?

Well maybe 3dh can't be better, but if a nice , sweet design , a design in rugid everlasting core structure heavyweight ,by a small extra for stronger sheet, a perfectly safe interlocked framework ,if that is better than the old architecture in it's own way, what's wrong then, wrong then it only cost a third and is four times stronger, as the buildings parts, simply , are put together , in a new way and the creature is fine tuned in a 3D program ?

[JonBailey]

[usarender]

You should take it lightly, JonBailey, there are a lot of people like this csintexas around these forums, that like to give free advice, offend other people's visions, ideas, plans and turn and spew out their opinion on various topics on these forums, with frequent ill phrased responses to complex topics that demonstrate their lack of in depth insight. It is no surprise therefore that they are not amused by these subjects or have no significant contribution to make other then to despise the ideas, diminish your cause or try to get you to take your ideas elsewhere. As you are new around these forums, you have not their names down yet or know who they are, but slowly they start to pop up around here and start offending those with vision and ideas. Frequently they are not architects yet seem to still stick their nose in architectural discussions, with frequent ill founded remarks that demonstrate a lack of understanding of the topics and subjects at hand. These people have been persistent in their attempt to diminish our cause, to ridicule our ideas and to harass other forum members with their sarcastic humor, silly remarks and downright crude behavior. They call others "nuts", "wacky dreamers", and many other derogatory terms, just for the sake of trying to somehow make fun of those with vision, insight, ideas or something new. They are the type of people who try to dominate with their silly posts on "modern designs" and have been frequently rebuked for their lack of insight on topics and silly remarks, but they keep coming back and seem to never learn. Sorry I need to be so frank about this, but it is best you be forewarned. Now that they perceive that someone like you comes along and has similar thinking to I, similar ideas and much in common, they proceed to try to destroy you, as they have been attempting to do with my ideas. They are fools, and their folly is clear to see. They won't get very far with their games as the global force of combined intelligence will not be despised by such insignificant thinking as this.

[Richard Haut]

Ahmeds, I think that there are, for want of a better term, "fashion-architects" - those who become trendy for a while and then slowly fade out, but haven't they always existed in some form or another ?

that is not in itself a main trend or change of direction for the profession - more likely it is a symptom of such a change.

however the deriding of those who do seek change/progress or simply a re-interpretation can often be dismissed as being just a fashion, a trend, whereas in some cases it has a far stronger base and longer-lasting impact.

the change has not been so much in architecture, but in societies where people stamp their feet and say "I-wanna-be-famous".

you really want to know the major change in architecture during the last half Century ? The dismissal or ignoring of notions of social responsibility.

certainly there are new materials, as there have been continuously during the last hundred years, but if the profession is seeking to renew, re-invent ot alter its "concept", then that concept cannot be simply a matter of geometry or materials. Architecture is not a pure art - it is an applied art. It has a purpose; it has a job to do.

[usarender]

With any job to do, any new vision, there must always be a catalyst of change. Others may interpret this wrong, as someone trying to be famous and thus try to downplay their cause or deride their ideas, but the underlaying backbone of what is being suggested in hidden words can be clearly seen. Others simply cannot stand to have someone with great vision come along, as they claim, "they are trying to get famous, let's walk over them.."

It is easy for those to do this who are not architects, who have no vision, and easy to give free advice and spew out accusations or even try to make fun of those with vision, and attempt to down play their cause, but the duplicity and ill intent is clear in such individuals. To claim some deserve merit in this foolish attempt to diminish others is quite amusing. It reveals there are those who lead, there are those who follow, and there are those whose no other purpose is to try to confuse both those who lead and those who follow in a nice clever composition of words that is intended to deceive, re direct the attention and diminish the cause of the visionaries.

Now there is much to be said of this social responsibility issue and it's lack of being properly addressed in architecture. It is easy for us to refer to it but we need specific examples.

Further, the hidden words can even be seen in those who criticize this new terminology of architectural language, by suggesting a concept cannot be simply a composition of materials and shapes into a nice vision. Here they error again, as they have not understood the language behind the vision, and the thinking that lead to it's inception, clearly posted on the topics of sky-scrapers: A Typology Problem? Thus, the nice words are there but the meaning behind the words is clear, blatant and not hidden. The intent to diminish the cause of others continues, and they go on to cry "he wants to be famous", "let's smash him down and diminish his visions. " They care not to respond in a logical way to the arguments, to the systems, to the visions, to the ideas, and the rationale behind the same. They rather ignore this and hide their intent behind "suggestions" and vague words, that is, vague to those who do not pay attention, but clearly exposed here. At times they proceed to demonstrate a degree of friendliness, to then in turn reveal their incapacity to adopt and respond to the vision of others in a rational way.

[csintexas]

I didn't condemn you for coming up with "new" ideas. I just said you are not sane.

If I said I just created a trans dimensional hyper drive capable of propelling us across the universe in seconds with nothing but the incredible harnessed power of human thought, so let's all work on that. -Would I be sane or insane?

I realize you are a creative person but you should focus your energy on things that are achievable. Otherwise everyone will think your off your rocker.

[usarender]

There you have it, these people are tenacious in attempting to ridicule others. They have no ideas and visions of themselves, so would rather create distorted visions of others and attempt to distort what they propose. This demonstrates their lack of knowledge, in their foolish remarks about "trans dimensional hyper drives", a lie and nothing in our proposals. Again, attempts to distort, false information, dennegration of others. These people accuse others of insanity. They are the worms of these forums, who continue to work their way into the discussions and demonstrate a lack of understanding of the issues. They accuse others of misplacing their energy, when they themselves do nothing but compose illogical or ill conceived statements on these forums, or spread false information.

[JonBailey]

nothing that I propose suggests that I am "off my rocker". and if sane is someone like you might propose, then i shall stick to being "insane".

nanotechnology is very real, and there are very real scientists working on this. computer programming is real, and there are real people working in this field too.

im sure people called leonardo divinci crazy too. and while i am not at all comparing myself or anyone here to divinci, i am saying that people probably said he was "off his rocker" and look at the inventions we have today because of his innovative, ahead-of-his-time thinking.

and for that matter, everyday i do very real world design, in my very real world architecture firm. everyday i put my thought and creative processes to work for things that are both achievable in the present, near and not so near future.

you make it seem like i am somehow anti-architecture which i assure you i am not. i am not condemning architecture in any way, shape, or form by saying that there are more ways to solve our architectural problems than the "concept statement". --i just happen to believe that they[the concept statements] are total BS.

and another thing -- just because an architect uses the technology of a computer as a tool does not in any way mean that the architect is out for fees. not everyone out there pushing newer technology and ideas is trying to reach stardom. i am trying to solve problems by any means necessary, obviously no one else has come up with anything world-changing yet.

this threads purpose is suppose to raise questions about the studying of architectural history, which can incompass theories, concept statement debate, etc... NOT attacks on sanity to stir arguments unrelated to the topic of the question.

[P.C.]

"Would I be sane or insane?"

Maybe this is just a serious hobby ! But to construct an engine for a vessel that don't exist, to manuver a dimension you can not realise, to do or profit what ,there I think there are way more humble nessery issues, such as deciding how to transform materials when we get there, and forget that idear, that we has to bring with us everything.

Still say you are right and this hyberdrive realy work, that case there would be a difference as if you are sain you would try educate about this fantastic new thing and how it work, oposed the scene where you had no craft, no test space no use for it, and you still tried to promote the thing, without realising you need a vessel before the engine.

----- Such a trans dimensional gadged would proberly also produce side effects, so being an impossible project as you proberly had to be in space to spark it , you would focus on the side effects instead , the realistic issues of a theoretic workable ,but incomplete concept are proberly many , and --- say it was possible to find a lot of followers, there I guess your argument fake, as then it don't matter if it work or not.

[usarender]

That is the thing. These people forget some of us do real projects, have real clients and that there are real scientists and people working on these visions. Now, some propose to have the only truly world-changing technology, and this is bs also. They have not even cared to open their mind and analyze the projects at Project Liquid Universe, or anywhere else for that matter. Thus, they are like in thinking but distant in a desire to cooperate. Rather, they insist only their ideas are the truly visionary, the truly world changing. They proceed to open the possibility to the idea that there are other ways to reach an architectural statement outside of the idea "concept", then in turn proceed to call them all bs. Now, this nano technology thing, really, I have to agree. To assume nanobots could compose an entire living organism to form a building, that as an organism, responds to the environment is quite a distant proposal in deed, particularly in terms of cost. These people have not even addressed this question or responded on my question on this matter. They have not responded, for that matter, on many issues I have brought up. Rather, their limited vision and focus only on their systems has blinded them from commenting and debating on the visions and ideas of others. We live in basically a world of individuals self- absorbed only in what they are doing, and they could not see another brilliant idea in front of them even if it were so to speak lighted by a thousand strobe lights. Now, what would it be if our vision were, so to speak, soon "lighted up by a thousand strobe" lights, as thousands of workers begin to erect it's walls? Will they then still call it a fancy?

Thus, each pursues his own selfish interest, pushing others out of the way as it is convenient, and there is no spirit of cooperation, of participation in the vision and ideas of others. Rather, an individualistic, get out of my way type of attitude, or even worse, attempts to ridicule others. Let these individuals wallow in their fancys, they to will only be wasting energy that could be better otherwise spent. The truly wise will see a good vision when it is presented before them, even though they may be one in a million they are out there.

There is only one in this discussion that I can see values these visions and supports these causes. He works in one of the most progressive architectural environments on planet earth, and he is a true jewel who can understand the power of these visions.

[Richard Haut]

[usarender]

Great Buildings

What structures rank as the world’s best? We asked the AD 100.

Top Architects & Designers Opinions