I have just finished the 2 latest issues of Metropolis Magazine by reading a little bit each night at bedtime. For April I started losing my patience with the way they break up stories. Many stories are cut off after the bulk of the text, and there ends up being about half a page of nearly each story at the back of the magazine. (ok maybe only half of the stories) Flipping back and forth in the dark while you're trying to fall asleep, with a clip on light in the way, is not the way I prefer to read my magazines. So I just gave up and moved on to the next story each time they cut one off. This works okay for me because I have a good memory for things I'm currently reading. Anywhoo, last night was the night I reached the ends of all these stories, and it was really strange running them all together in a way the editors weren't intending. I actually liked it quite a lot.
First there was the last page of "A Return To The Hand," about the resurgence of making physical objects, continued from page 102. Then there was half a page of "The Case for Looking Beyond Style," a case for New Urbanism, continued from page 79. Following closely was a third of a page of "The Kamikaze Mission," on deconstructivism, continued from page 84. Then there was slightly less than a page of "The Digital Playground Erupts," about blobism, continued from page 96. Next was half a page of "The Dream that Refused to Die," about prefab housing, continued from page 94 and half a page of "POMO Returns (or Maybe it Never Left)," a discussion of post modernism continued from page 73.
The effect of having all these ideas rapidly combined in a reading at bedtime, only made possible by my accursed memory, was like a surreal recent architectural history class packed into half an hour. It was also striking because of my personal exposure to some of these movements back in the day. Many young architects might also find this to be the case if they participate in this exercise.
The making of physical objects is something that we here are finding more and more desirable lately because of our wish to reduce our own carbon footprints, save money and live/work in a place that feels like our own. New Urbanism holds a dear place in my heart because at my first internship I was urged to read the monthly Congress for the New Urbanism's publication, and we worked on some developments that, while not necessarily "new urban," followed the New Urbanism's principles fairly closely. I always thought of it as a good movement despite some of its shortcomings. Alternatively, blobism is something that I found myself dealing with in graduate school. The first semester was ALL about the blob, and I was tossed into a sea of computer design programs and left to sink or swim, basically. This had the effect of strengthening my set of values with respect to the New Urbanism and struggling to defend myself against criticisms that were completely new to someone coming from the land of drawing by hand. And then the readings pushed me back again to when I was in undergrad designing in a pre-fab manner for projects involving the movement of palletized goods, the systemization and storage of books in libraries, and neighborhoods of immigrant housing.
I had a hard time sleeping last night.
First there was the last page of "A Return To The Hand," about the resurgence of making physical objects, continued from page 102. Then there was half a page of "The Case for Looking Beyond Style," a case for New Urbanism, continued from page 79. Following closely was a third of a page of "The Kamikaze Mission," on deconstructivism, continued from page 84. Then there was slightly less than a page of "The Digital Playground Erupts," about blobism, continued from page 96. Next was half a page of "The Dream that Refused to Die," about prefab housing, continued from page 94 and half a page of "POMO Returns (or Maybe it Never Left)," a discussion of post modernism continued from page 73.
The effect of having all these ideas rapidly combined in a reading at bedtime, only made possible by my accursed memory, was like a surreal recent architectural history class packed into half an hour. It was also striking because of my personal exposure to some of these movements back in the day. Many young architects might also find this to be the case if they participate in this exercise.
The making of physical objects is something that we here are finding more and more desirable lately because of our wish to reduce our own carbon footprints, save money and live/work in a place that feels like our own. New Urbanism holds a dear place in my heart because at my first internship I was urged to read the monthly Congress for the New Urbanism's publication, and we worked on some developments that, while not necessarily "new urban," followed the New Urbanism's principles fairly closely. I always thought of it as a good movement despite some of its shortcomings. Alternatively, blobism is something that I found myself dealing with in graduate school. The first semester was ALL about the blob, and I was tossed into a sea of computer design programs and left to sink or swim, basically. This had the effect of strengthening my set of values with respect to the New Urbanism and struggling to defend myself against criticisms that were completely new to someone coming from the land of drawing by hand. And then the readings pushed me back again to when I was in undergrad designing in a pre-fab manner for projects involving the movement of palletized goods, the systemization and storage of books in libraries, and neighborhoods of immigrant housing.
I had a hard time sleeping last night.
RSS Feed