1. should an architect always feel a responsibility to change the way people think?
2. then is it ok to build architecture that is merely a temporal manifestation of current thought?
3. i ask this question because i believe that many architects are struggling with the idea that their work should stand the test of time. isn't that what theorists are most concerned with, and commercial architects give up on?
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Exploring Design Lecture 02.17.2008
i would have to say that this lecture was one of great enjoyment for me, and that i definitely felt an allegiance to my character of study, jeff kipnis. we were all asked in the class to choose one of the members of the panel to do research on, and seeing that i did not know anything about mr. kipnis decided to do my research on him.
his demeanor during the lecture could be explained as one of blunt honesty, and although this may come off as somewhat arrogant, i really appreciated his firm stance during the lecture. an example of this bluntness can be understood in his quote, "architectural buildings are the tombs of architecture". he was also relentless when speaking to zoe ryan, and did not have any problem telling her that the only skill she was equipped was an intuition for beautiful design. mr. kipnis was not brutal the entire time, however, and spoke of architecture also having the ability to tell a great story (to awaken dreams).
I am going to end with this, but will later add more on mr. kipnis when i finish the many readings that have now created an enormous pile on my desk.
-t
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
