Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And yet, I have still to praise a building that is shaped like a bathtub.
Humour me, how do you define truth in architecture? For the bathtub building to maintain working and to-scale plumbing?
Or should I just consult the 1919 bauhaus manifesto to learn your views, you seem to have been trained well enough, wonder how close you stick to the script.
And yet, I have still to praise a building that is shaped like a bathtub.
Humour me, how do you define truth in architecture? For the bathtub building to maintain working and to-scale plumbing?
Or should I just consult the 1919 bauhaus manifesto to learn your views, you seem to have been trained well enough, wonder how close you stick to the script.
1. I did not praise the bathtub, it has faults to say the least. Mainly it's trying to hard and has no relation to site, but it is not as bad as you make out.
2. I am not a modernist, modern architecture was the architecture of it's time (ie. the industrial revolution, who'd have though it industrially produced architecture looks industrial!) We are now moving beyond that - the so called 'eco' architecture is the future IMHO. However the leading trend in architecture in any given period has an honesty in its construction, like I said - at a fundamental level technology dictates. Truth in architecture is simply about being true to the construction process and not aping forms and construction methods of historical styles that are now obsolete.
Last edited by archineer; 01-15-2013 at 11:54 AM..
Your first comment in the bathtub thread was "I like it."
I don't know what you mean when you say industrial revolution, but the industrial revolution that you may think you are talking about ended a hundred years before modern architecture began.
Architectural forms have little to do with technology, they are cultural and many have survived millennia up until the modernists who decided they should be abandoned.
You are a modernist by any measure. One need only to see your comment about architectural forms becoming obsolete. Obsolete! ridiculous. Grammar does not become obsolete. The only architecture that becomes obsolete are the giant bathtubs, thousands foot shards, and other sick jokes put over on the public by modernists and those who have abandoned language for bubbling their lips, fancying it is the superior and more honest way to communicate.
Has there ever been "Architectural Honesty" in this country? Since this country was founded we have taken architectural elements from others. The buildings in our nation's capitol take from the Greeks and Romans. The homes of colonial and Victorian times take from England. The modern styles come from Germany. Why is this so important as long as the building looks good and functions well. Jay
Does anyone remember the pbs series on Architecture hosted by Robert Stern- I think it was late 80s or early 90s? He had Leon Krier on in one episode. Here you had a US architect most famous for freely using colonial, shingle, and other historical styles in anything from his houses to his office building designs, and a European known for his greek/roman classical urban planning and architectural stylistic approaches. At the end of the show they make a toast: "To Truth" they said. It confused me, because to me, truth could only be found in style-free modern architecture, in which nothing was hidden and expression was limited to the stuff the building was made from. But there are several "Truths" in architecture. One is that we respond positively to proportions of a certain kind- those that the classical architects, but also some of the moderns exploited. Another is that the composition of spaces often trumps the stylistic aspect of them. Another might be that certain symbologies connote positive emotional responses. And another is that very little architecture is actually 100% honest. Even Mies used "decorative" elements in some of his buildings (Seagrams) that appeared at a glance to be structure.
So is there really a difference between a small decorative "I" beam on a curtain wall and vinyl clapboard siding? Does the fact that the latter is just a cost savings idea make a difference? Maybe not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
ridiculous. Grammar does not become obsolete. The only architecture that becomes obsolete are the giant bathtubs, thousands foot shards, and other sick jokes put over on the public by modernists and those who have abandoned language for bubbling their lips, fancying it is the superior and more honest way to communicate.
