Must have books for Student

Discussion among students of architecture, planning, interiors, landscape, and environmental design. Occasional contributions by lurking design professionals.

Postby average joe » Wed Dec 29, 2010 9:27 am

phansford,

I am not all down about our profession. I took the route most architects take and continue to take. There have been ups and downs. As you said, we make our own success. I am fortunate enough to be above that breaking point. I don't design walmarts or sams clubs but I don't look down my nose at the architects that do. As much as great designers doing one of a kind mega buildings are important, so are those architects who design the average every day buildings that we, the general public, must live in day in and day out. I get the impression you have forgotten this.

Last post so good luck to everyone.
average joe
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:56 am

Postby phansford » Wed Dec 29, 2010 10:21 am

average joe wrote:As much as great designers doing one of a kind mega buildings are important, so are those architects who design the average every day buildings that we, the general public, must live in day in and day out. I get the impression you have forgotten this.


You are greatly mistaken. But doing "average" buildings doesn't mean we have to design schlock. Design needs to occur at all levels - even a small vinyl box house. Its just a different level of design. That is where the "Average" architect misses the point. You still have to address budget... than doesn't it needs to look and function like crap and not be designed with scale, mass, proportion in mind.

Take a look at some of Thomas Beebe's early work. That little branch library in Chicago is a good example of using a pre-eng steel frame, but doing something thoughtful. Or look at some of Wright's smaller houses.

average joe wrote:Last post so good luck to everyone.


I get the impression you changed your user name to Average Joe so you could say a few things. Is that correct?
phansford
millennium club
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Postby csintexas » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:07 pm

Why, -what is your guess?

I have to agree that if you went directly from college to design you are a very unusual person.

Peter Eisenmann is a dumb a$$ and as far as I can tell has never said anything worth listening to.

I browsed through the Vitruvius ten books -mostly they are irrelivant maybe a little entertaining. If I ever need to build a balista or doric temple I might re-examine them.
csintexas
millennium club
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:12 pm
Location: USA

Postby average joe » Wed Dec 29, 2010 12:39 pm

Phansford, pm me. I can't seem to send you a PM for some reason. Maybe I can reply to one of yours.
average joe
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2010 11:56 am

Postby phansford » Wed Dec 29, 2010 3:09 pm

average joe wrote:Phansford, pm me. I can't seem to send you a PM for some reason. Maybe I can reply to one of yours.


Sent..... if that doesn't work go to my website and send an email.
phansford
millennium club
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Postby Checkpoint43 » Wed Dec 29, 2010 4:51 pm

phansford wrote:I think this video sums it up .... if you don't know architecture history and theory... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IQFEaAUrfAk


Does Eisenmann have an issue with the student's design, or is he condemming the student's upbringing?
He even says "I don't know how to judge this performance because I don't now what it's based on... I don't know if she knows the difference between Palladio and Borromini."

Why is he focused on that, instead of the project presented?
He can't determine the design's merit because he doesn't know about the student's upbringing?
What kind of nonsense is that?

I think this video makes a good counterpoint.
Just substitute the word "Designer" where they mention "Poetry".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiKM6g-dfBo#t=2m0s

Then you have a graph with which to judge architecture.
"Well, they have designed a beautiful building, but they didn't attend the right school, or study enough architectural history, so I'll have to give them a lower score overall."

Rip out that whole page. It's useless.
User avatar
Checkpoint43
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 4:28 pm
Location: Lexington, VA

Postby phansford » Wed Dec 29, 2010 5:35 pm

I think Eisenmann is dead-on.

He is saying.... you can put a monkey in front of a typewriter and the monkey will bang of the keys, but the monkey won't create literature.

The monkey doesn't understand or have knowledge on language and writing. He doesn't know how to structure a sentence, or how to use an allegory, or build suspense, or the many other tools used by writers to create literature.

Just like we can give you a flute, but without musical training and knowledge you can't create or write music.

Eisenmann's real issue here is this particular student has not been taught or does not seem to know the fundamental principals of architecture and in particular lacks a knowledge of historical work. (That's the question early in the vid (1:50) about whether the student knows the difference between Palladio and Borromini ).

So how is he to critic the work if the student is just drawing buildings without knowledge of architecture and the principles used to make architecture. (Obviously there was something wrong with this student's project that just made it impossible to discuss in architectural terms.)

This actually gets to my point that the students/interns should be reading extensively to learn the principles of architecture.

Architecture is always a building, but not all buildings are architecture.
phansford
millennium club
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Postby phansford » Wed Dec 29, 2010 5:51 pm

csintexas wrote:Peter Eisenmann is a dumb a$$ and as far as I can tell has never said anything worth listening to.


No offense intended, but that's because you don't have the education and the background to understand what he is talking about. Would you be able to discuss/describe the use of Space/Anti-space in post modern architecture. Do you even know what Anti-space is? How about Lux Nova.... do you know what Lux Nova is and what architectural movement it is associated with?

I don't like his buildings... but I can respect what he is trying to do architecturally.

BTW - much of his early work is influenced by the philosophy of Derrida. Have you know who Derrida is?
phansford
millennium club
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Postby Checkpoint43 » Wed Dec 29, 2010 5:58 pm

phansford wrote:Eisenmann's real issue here is this particular student has not been taught or does not seem to know the fundamental principals of architecture and in particular lacks a knowledge of historical work.


Actually, Eisenman says he doesn't know if the student knows that.

It's like Eisenman can't judge for himself.

Maybe he has dependency issues?

He can't decide if he should like something unless someone else (in this case, the board of education from student's academic background) tell him it's okay to like it first.

And as far as his statement about monkeys banging on typewriters...
It sounds like he's just repeating something he heard somewhere else and is trying to apply it to sound like he knows what he is talking about.

I hope you're not trying to insert that analogy here. I have more respect for you than to believe you would try to fit it in.
User avatar
Checkpoint43
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 4:28 pm
Location: Lexington, VA

Postby RickBalkins » Wed Dec 29, 2010 6:58 pm

phansford wrote:
csintexas wrote:Peter Eisenmann is a dumb a$$ and as far as I can tell has never said anything worth listening to.


No offense intended, but that's because you don't have the education and the background to understand what he is talking about. Would you be able to discuss/describe the use of Space/Anti-space in post modern architecture. Do you even know what Anti-space is? How about Lux Nova.... do you know what Lux Nova is and what architectural movement it is associated with?

I don't like his buildings... but I can respect what he is trying to do architecturally.

BTW - much of his early work is influenced by the philosophy of Derrida. Have you know who Derrida is?


Yeah, Lux Nova --- new light.... gothic. Space/Anti-space..... I heard this alot in sci-fi but still.... I haven't really studied so much of it in the DeConstructivist / PoMo works. I have few Francis D.K. Ching books. So be it. I understand space from convention sense.

Derrida... yes... the philosopher behind the "de"-construction technique. I am more a structuralist then a post-structuralist. PoMo falls into two categories - structuralism and post-structuralism.
RickBalkins
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

Postby csintexas » Thu Dec 30, 2010 11:35 am

Yes, anti-space is one of those idiotic terms architects (particularly the ones who teach) make up so to make themselves sound like intellectuals when they are not.

Seriously phanford -I have read enough of P.E. to know he is an idiot.
He came into that classroom wanting to sound like a pompous a$$ so as to impress everyone so he did.

He was not the first to use the monkey analogy.

Yes anyone can pick up a flute and learn to play music -it does not take special training. It is a fundamental human ability.

I agree that if students are required to defend themselves from the PE's of this world than they need to be well read because even though he is an idiot he can sure spit out a lot of spam and unless you are very well read no one will know what the hell he is talking about.

This ability alone does not make him an intellect -he is a well read idiot. In real life the need to engage in pseudo-philosophy in not needed much.

Sure I can look up those terms and see what they mean. In real life it does not matter whether I know what anti-space is.

Most young people need to be concerned with the kinds of skills that they will actually need to be successful. I suppose if ones aim is to get a teaching gig than it would be important. I doubt most interviews involve a lot of talk about architectural philosophy and obscure references.
csintexas
millennium club
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:12 pm
Location: USA

Postby phansford » Thu Dec 30, 2010 2:17 pm

@ CSinTexas and Checkpoint

There is no need to respond.... your comments have proven my point quite nicely.

As two people who have never been to architecture school, never studied architecture, never worked in an architecture firm, never read any of the major treasties on the subject - you clearly have a full grasp on the profession and the art of architecture.


<insert sarcasm>
phansford
millennium club
 
Posts: 1168
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Postby csintexas » Thu Dec 30, 2010 4:50 pm

What grasp are you referring to?

I will proudly admit to not being able to speak spam.

I have not seen any architects online displaying major ability in deep thinking. :roll:

Where are these intellectual discussions on architectural philosophy supposed to be happening? -Not Here
csintexas
millennium club
 
Posts: 2808
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 3:12 pm
Location: USA

Postby Checkpoint43 » Thu Dec 30, 2010 5:06 pm

Lux Nova - PBS
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGAumT8aNkk

Aldo Nova - MTV
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GylirgHFqeQ

Nova Scotia - Google Maps
Image

Supernova - NASA
Image

<Sarcasm Inserted>
User avatar
Checkpoint43
 
Posts: 365
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 4:28 pm
Location: Lexington, VA

Postby RickBalkins » Thu Dec 30, 2010 9:39 pm

phansford wrote:@ CSinTexas and Checkpoint

There is no need to respond.... your comments have proven my point quite nicely.

As two people who have never been to architecture school, never studied architecture, never worked in an architecture firm, never read any of the major treasties on the subject - you clearly have a full grasp on the profession and the art of architecture.


<insert sarcasm>


I have familiarity with some of the terms but some of the terms are important "buzzwords" (in techie field - they call words like that buzzwords like "multimedia". First, off computers had multimedia before the terms were coined. Terms like Lux Nova are simply obsfuscating communication because architects get an attitude of elitism that they create special coded language that only those "in the know" understand but when you decode it - they are still lame like the rest. It is no different then doing the following.

4rch1t3ct 4r3 0bfusc4t0rs w1th n0 s3ns3 0f sp34k1ng pl4in 3ngl1sh.

The concept is no more intellegent than if you talk plain english. You don't try to confuse the people by using buzzwords. Frankly Lux Nova simply had to do with the colorful ambiance of light passing through multi-color stain glass windows. This sense of dynamic color. This sensation of emotion and how emotion is associatively linked to colors by the way the human mind associates things and concepts and emotions. The dynamics of the "Lux Nova" or the sensation of the dynamics of light passing through stainglass windows of the feeling of heaven and closeness to God. Lux = Latin for Light and Nova = Latin for New. "New Light". Light in a way not experienced before the advent of stain glass. (colored glass) A term Abbot Suger coined. These are study of buzz words vs. science of light and spectrum. People care more about science then buzz words to be honest. It is great and nice to learn all this and might be helpful to grasping concepts of how to use the light to derive a feeling since everything you see is light reflected of surfaces at different frequencies and other concepts and the history.

Other words like space and antispace are words derived through concept of space within solid and space within void. Whatever the reasoning behind the concept, I am not personally familiar with. I am not deep into deconstructivism / post-structuralism architecture. They have greater meaning to deconstructivist / post-structuralist architects / designers. They don't have so much meaning to architects or designers that are more traditional or Constructivist / Structuralist range of thinking and vocabulary set.

Ask an architect who studied architecture back in the pre-60s era and most of the time, the decon terms have no meaning to them unless they went into decon architecture. Many were schooled in modern / form follows function school of thought. Some of these terms have little to no meaning outside their focus. Even if taught, those terms would naturally be forgotten over time for stuff the person cares to learn about.

However, these concepts / buzz words and the history of concepts and buzz words can help grasp them and the underlying science and how to use it. What helps to anchor and cohesion the concepts so one can bring it into their control through design.

There are different ways to describe it and get control over the concepts and use it. Whatever helps to bring the concepts together so that you can apply it under control is up to you.

It might be something to temper just a little bit. Different school of teaching and approaches to concepts. Not learning those particular individuals or buzz words does not make you an incompetent architect or designer.
RickBalkins
 
Posts: 589
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2009 12:28 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Architecture Students Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

User Control Panel

Login

Who is online

In this forum zone there are 5 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 5 guests (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 508 on Thu Jun 25, 2009 11:21 am

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests
DesignCommunity   ·   ArchitectureWeek   ·   Great Buildings   ·   Archiplanet   ·   Books   ·   Blogs   ·   Search
Special thanks to our sustaining subscribers Building Design UK, Building Design News UK, and Building Design Tenders UK.