Thread is enormous so I am scared to load it and check.Doctor Casino
here's what we were thinking about today:
Ned TRifle was thinking about treehouses - can you blame him?
and Doctor Casino was alerting us to a Herzog & DeMeuron we might have missed:
― jed_, Friday, 2 January 2009 16:30 (4 years ago) Permalink
Good idea Jed, that was a lovely thread to watch load ...10(+) architects I have been thinking about...but, yeah, getting big!
― Not me I'm the Emotional Type (Ned Trifle II), Friday, 2 January 2009 16:55 (4 years ago) Permalink
I'm on board - thanks, Jed.
― Doctor Casino, Friday, 2 January 2009 17:00 (4 years ago) Permalink
The HdM above, fyi, is condos at 40 Bond Street in Manhattan. More photos starting here. Very neat, I think, and some interesting ideas going on with the fence, which suggests an upside-down arcade, some kind of hedgee, and a reinterpretation of graffiti. The shiny metal stuff on the ground level is recycled from their Forum 2004, which seems like a smart move to me.
― Doctor Casino, Friday, 2 January 2009 17:02 (4 years ago) Permalink
LOVE the calligraphic fencing and like the rest of 40 Bond, but there's something lacking in the overall effect. The elements seem unrelated to one another. Like, "here's this moderately cool buidling ... and here's this ASTOUNDING decorative detail glued on for no particular reason." I've got nothing against ornamentation for its own sake, but I want all the pieces to fit together, somehow.
― good luck to you ladies--you need it (contenderizer), Friday, 2 January 2009 17:11 (4 years ago) Permalink
It's got a lovely lock!
Here's another one I've been thinking about. I mentioned this on the weird buildings thread but it's not really weird.Jackson Clements Burrows Architects
The house shows a projection of the house it replaces.
You can read more about it on the architects websitehttp://www.jcba.com.au/...but (like ALL architects websites) it's a pain to navigate and this one has an added clicky noise.
Here's another one of the same architects. They do nice houses.
― Not me I'm the Emotional Type (Ned Trifle II), Friday, 2 January 2009 17:11 (4 years ago) Permalink
I've found a better picture of the house in Melbourne with architects explanation.The site was controlled by a Heritage overlay which favoured the retention of existing dwellings. In response to the clients desire to demolish the existing house, we proposed a strategy to replace the dilapidated cottage with a new house integrated within a supergraphic image of its former self.
― Not me I'm the Emotional Type (Ned Trifle II), Friday, 2 January 2009 17:18 (4 years ago) Permalink
a supergraphic image
― Not me I'm the Emotional Type (Ned Trifle II), Friday, 2 January 2009 17:19 (4 years ago) Permalink
Is the issue the redundancy of "graphic" and "image"? Because I get what they're going for, in that "supergraphic" refers to a specific history/movement/motif of the late 60s and early 70s, so it's an adjective modifying "image." I dunno.
contenderizer - I agree to an extent that the green grid of windows has rather little to do with the graffiti wall, but I'm also kind of okay with that. And I'm still convinced there's something going on here in reference to Aldo Rossi but I can't really explain it coherently yet...
― Doctor Casino, Friday, 2 January 2009 17:28 (4 years ago) Permalink
tell more more of this supergraphic movement?
― Everyone is a Jedi (Will M.), Friday, 2 January 2009 20:11 (4 years ago) Permalink
I wanted to be 40 Bond's biggest fan but seeing it in person was more than a little underwhelming. I don't know if I can elaborate much but it was an "is this all there is?" kind of moment.
― I'M ACTUALLY FINE (I DIED), Friday, 2 January 2009 20:15 (4 years ago) Permalink
Well, I mean...it's just condos, y'know?
re: supergraphics - kind of a non-architectural architectural movement growing out of Op Art and a general interest in grooooovy environments through graphics. A Flickr search should turn up some typical images...here's a nice one:
You know, that stuff.
John McMorrough writes in Hunch 11:
Supergraphics are those big arrows, numbers or words painted on walls and seen throughout the late 1960s and early 1970s. Though clearly a minor occurence within the annals of architectural history during its time as a fad, it received some amount of critical attention. It was, for a time, presented as an answer (or at least a tool) to elevate to the aesthetic, social problems facing the man-made environment.
Basically, the appeal was that with just a thin coat of paint you could - without doing anything traditionally associated with architecture or interior design - transform the social conditions of a space, let's say from "boring, uptight, 1950s corporation" to "swinging, hip, groovy 1960s corporation." The limitations of this are probably pretty apparent, but that was the thinking at the time, as I understand it.
― Doctor Casino, Friday, 2 January 2009 22:05 (4 years ago) Permalink
OK, fair dos, they were not just being pretentious then! (maybe just a little).
― Not me I'm the Emotional Type (Ned Trifle II), Friday, 2 January 2009 23:58 (4 years ago) Permalink
Well, they are architects. ;)
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 3 January 2009 00:44 (4 years ago) Permalink
<3 all of you
also, are there any wittgenstein/popper-esque stories about famous architects beefing? i never encounter these. are architects just chill?
― rox qua rox (roxymuzak), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:03 (4 years ago) Permalink
ALSO: do people exist who find this style strictly beautiful?
Not interesting, not important, just awesomely beautiful.
― rox qua rox (roxymuzak), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:06 (4 years ago) Permalink
Not me, but you will find a lot of love for, and images of, that breed of blocky, primary-colored postmodernism in arch. magazines from the late 80s through the mid-90s - GA would be a good place to look I think. Also the later works of Aldo Rossi and Michael Graves, off the top of my head.
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:13 (4 years ago) Permalink
Yeah, that's a Graves there. I just can't stand that kind of thing, and I've worried about it a lot and can't figure out why! The colors, the shapes...I'm just repelled by it all. Maybe it comes from being a child of the 80s and being inundated with suburban sprawl (vaguely) reminiscient of the above. I really don't know.
― rox qua rox (roxymuzak), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:16 (4 years ago) Permalink
Damn straight, I love that deep blocky, colourful architecture, and naturally I love Aldo Rossi (these are great)and certain things by Michael Graves.
Also see that Loyola Law school by Frank Gehry, which, being somewhat of a Gehry-naysayer myself, I think is way better than his other stuff.
― Girlfriend, you've been scooped like ice cream (mehlt), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:26 (4 years ago) Permalink
x-post, that is
Wait, you can't stand it/are repelled by it, but still find it awesomely beautiful?
― Girlfriend, you've been scooped like ice cream (mehlt), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:27 (4 years ago) Permalink
Just personally, I think a lot of this stuff does play out in a really plainly dialectic fashion - so a lot of that stuff emerged specifically out of people being sick of white-box modernism in whatever its forms, which the architects in question had all been inundated with in their own formative years. And so similarly, we grew up in a world where every movie theater, doctor's office, student rec center, etc. looked like THAT stuff and we can't bloody stand it.
This is an oversimplification in a lot of ways - the architects in question are a lot smarter than I'm giving them credit for - but it does play a role.
The other story (in terms of how it became so ubiquitous) is that postmodernism's own hype had to do with communicating directly with the people, providing symbols that could be understood, etc. Whether or not the people could understand them, it reflects an interest in playing ball with the market. The architects themselves were singing the voices of cheap materials, historical quotation, and so on. The color palette might just be zeitgeist - I mean the 80s and early 90s were not, in my opinion, great times for color in general...
As a side note, I'm learning to leave room in my own tastes for things I Just Plain Like and Just Plain Don't Like, even if I can't intellectualize them yet. I can't fully rationalize my hatred of the 80s stuff or my love of Art Nouveau, the latter's just pretty and the former's just grody.
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:28 (4 years ago) Permalink
I'm generally just interested in them on aesthetic levels, especially when they're really pared down, minimal forms. cf. Michael Graves, on the other hand, does tend to be repulsive in, I guess, depending on 'postmodernism's own hype' and tend to make some disgusting buildings. Stuff like the above, though, I really like. It feels like forever since I read anything about architecture though, so I'm out of touch.
― Girlfriend, you've been scooped like ice cream (mehlt), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:37 (4 years ago) Permalink
the above meaning that Theatre Square building.
Xpost to myself, I misread your post. And the answer is yes, me.
― Girlfriend, you've been scooped like ice cream (mehlt), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:38 (4 years ago) Permalink
I don't mind the early Rossi (the image mehlt's just posted for example) which I think is onto a specifically interesting kick about type, history, collective memory, a lot of other dry and spooky stuff that makes a lot of sense for something like a crematorium. Rossi runs into trouble later trying to articulate things like conference centers and I don't know what else, but they start getting gross IMO.
Early Graves is also really good - let's say pre-1980, but there might be some good stuff later. In general I'm interested in everything about postmodernism EXCEPT the historicist language and material palette of the 1980s. Like, if you read Venturi's Complexity and Contradiction, everything he's talking about sounds great - complexity, multiplicity, layering of meaning, etc. The Hollein I posted to the last thread would be an example of that (to me), or for that matter this Ricardo Bofill project which I don't think I posted:
The language is cloying, but the spaces are fantastic!
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:47 (4 years ago) Permalink
― Girlfriend, you've been scooped like ice cream (mehlt), Friday, January 2, 2009 9:27 PM (21 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink
No, I find it awesomely ugly, I was asking if anyone else found it awesome beautiful.
― rox qua rox (roxymuzak), Saturday, 3 January 2009 02:49 (4 years ago) Permalink
Postmodernism breaks my heart, it's architecture's loss of innocence. Before that there had always been a utopian bent to the profession - even if the buildings were failures there was at least a continual hope and search for a better way to do things and a desire to lift society. Postmodernism purposefully stepped away from that in the face of modernism's defeat and didn't aspire to anything greater than a series of classical reference punchlines without the dignity of proportion. The buildings were never going to be awesomely beautiful because they weren't even trying to be, which is sad. I love beaux arts neoclassicism because it was at least made with a real BELIEF in classicism, I don't think postmodernists believed in anything.
― I'M ACTUALLY FINE (I DIED), Saturday, 3 January 2009 16:39 (4 years ago) Permalink
Hrm, well, I think that varies a bit...one thread of postmodernism was certainly the "Collage City"/Jane Jacobs line (that eventually leads to new urbanism) where there's an active project of trying to save the city, move away from the monumental and embrace the fabric - that seems like a project with social ambition to me. Or in the Bofill posted above, maybe those images don't quite get it across but there was a clear desire to give "palaces to the people," quoting history specifically to create something that the residents would recognize as grand and honorific.
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 3 January 2009 17:39 (4 years ago) Permalink
I used to think that the only thing unifying about postmodernist thought (or the only thing postmodernists "believe in") is a rejection of enlightenment ideals, but that's obviously glossing over a lot. For me, it is easy to view Modernism as truly beautiful as applied to one building, but equally as easy to view it as one-note as an archtectural movement, and even potentially oppressive. One manifestation of post-modernism's "social concern" (lol) would be multivalence, and the presentation of a variety (I was going to say "of aesthetic sensibilities", but I think "variety" is enough).
― rox qua rox (roxymuzak), Saturday, 3 January 2009 21:37 (4 years ago) Permalink
Yes - and then you have even more severe examples like Lucien Kroll (I think it's Kroll) where the architect's office has an open door, serving soda to the people who are going to live in the building and inviting them to make design decisions. Or Leon Krier, who believed that industrial building practice was so dehumanizing that it was better not to build, so as to avoid participating in the alienation of the worker. Postmodernism was a big umbrella, for a while there - I mean if you read an early edition of Jencks's Language of Post-Modern Architecture it really seems exciting. By the fifth or sixth edition all the photos look like the late Graves and the jig is up.
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:33 (4 years ago) Permalink
Oh, and I finally posted my pics of WORKac's Public Farm 1. On the previous thread, I wrote:
"re: P.F.1 - Yeah, it was great - particularly in light of the kind of stuff that typically wins. They seem to feel that the committee or jury or whoever realized they were getting really tired of atmospheric projects. "We could have won last year, but not ten years ago." It was refreshing to me as a living example of Dutch-ness here on our shores (they both worked at OMA) by architects young enough that you could imagine "hey, that could be me!" So that's always going to be encouraging. But I also loved how much it was filled in with fun little gimmicks and gizmos - the periscope, the audio and video of working farms, the chicken coop...it was cool."
Extended, archi-nerd ramblings here.
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:37 (4 years ago) Permalink
Jencks's Language of Post-Modern Architecture
This is what got me into architecture in the first place!
― roxymuzak, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:51 (4 years ago) Permalink
Haha! Just read it last year after it seemed to keep coming up. Good stuff, I read a later-ish edition that was starting to really drag by the end though. Needed a fresh edit I think, got repetitious, but as a showcase of just neat stuff and ideas the first half is essential. The "Death of Modern Architecture" chapter is classic.
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:53 (4 years ago) Permalink
I still remember where I was when I read that.
― roxymuzak, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:55 (4 years ago) Permalink
...don't leave us hanging!
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:56 (4 years ago) Permalink
Well, it's not exciting in re: this thread, but I was in Nashville sitting on a couch at Douglas Corners waiting to go play a show. It's just a vivid memory because I enjoyed the reading so much.
― roxymuzak, Monday, 5 January 2009 02:59 (4 years ago) Permalink
Know just what you mean - although in these grad school years there's pretty much one of three places I'm ever reading anything.
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 5 January 2009 03:02 (4 years ago) Permalink
i got the other thread locked, i hope no one objects to this? i think it's just confusing having 2 threads being revived and it's more of a rolling discussion thread at this point so it makes sense. if you do i'm sure we can get it reopened.
last post on the previous thread was hyggeligt helpfully linking us to SpaceInvading
thanks for that, it's actually a great link and saves quite a bit of trawling around various different blogs although it still has links to those blogs for more description, which is cool.
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:17 (4 years ago) Permalink
Sou Fujimoto Architects' Wooden House. love it or hate it, you've never seen anything like it.
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:23 (4 years ago) Permalink
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:26 (4 years ago) Permalink
I think anybody who ever had blocks as a kid has seen something like it.
― El Tomboto, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:26 (4 years ago) Permalink
ha, i was just about to add a similar caveat.
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:28 (4 years ago) Permalink
BLOOMFRAME®The BLOOMFRAME® breaks out of the 2-dimensional facade to add to the usable space in this innovative design by Hofman Dujardin Architects.
prototype that is expected to go into actual production early this year:
Bloomframe® is an innovative window frame that can be transformed into a balcony allowing an increase in usable space with minimal intervention.
Bloomframe® offers the user a flexible living environment. By opening the window frame, it is possible to walk out through the facade and to enjoy a comfortable balcony. The dynamic balcony enables adding outdoor space to compact apartments in urban high-rise areas.
The Bloomframe® balcony can be operated automatically with a simple push of the button. The system includes provisions to guarantee collapse safety during opening and closing.
The drive consists of an rpm-controlled electric motor that operates the balcony at two points via an auto-braking reduction (drop safety). The movement is transferred by tie rods from these linear guides.
The fully open position is limited mechanically, which guarantees optimum safety of the converted balcony. The application of a combined powered/mechanical movement makes the system user-friendly and easy to open and close for everyone.
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:34 (4 years ago) Permalink
I don't think I really understand the Bloomframe? It creates a not very attractive half-window when closed and doesn't seem to offer any advantages over a regular building other than potentially animating the building facade more - and you have to keep your patio furniture inside when you're not using it. I think I'd like it more with a glass bottom panel since it'll be up 80% of the time.
― Tina Fey's narrative bonsai (I DIED), Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:49 (4 years ago) Permalink
SpaceInvading is one of my favorite things about 2009
I'm glad so many designers are doing these weird 3D circulation intensive tiny houses/follies, but I'd sure like to see some upholstery in them or at least first aid kits for the inevitable bloody heads.
― Tina Fey's narrative bonsai (I DIED), Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:52 (4 years ago) Permalink
bloomframe would be cooler if the patio furniture folded out with it, like a pop-up book.
― El Tomboto, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:53 (4 years ago) Permalink
I'd like that! Or if the patio furniture was permanently secured to it so it stuck out from the inside wall of your house when closed.
― Tina Fey's narrative bonsai (I DIED), Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:56 (4 years ago) Permalink
and if it wasn't the color of an HVAC component.
― El Tomboto, Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:56 (4 years ago) Permalink
haha yeah it looks like a big access panel.
― Tina Fey's narrative bonsai (I DIED), Thursday, 15 January 2009 01:57 (4 years ago) Permalink
well, i love it. obviously it doesn't have to be khaki/grey, it can be any colour, i would imagine. the bottom half could possibly be glass but people have vertigo. white steel is fine by me. also you just sit on a chair that you have in your lounge, or whatever. i wouldn't imagine you would have specific furniture for it unless it was some cheap folding deck chair you could keep in a cupboard?
― jed_, Thursday, 15 January 2009 02:21 (4 years ago) Permalink
great photos. particularly like the bottom two.
― jed_, Sunday, 11 March 2012 14:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Thanks - yeah, their firm has a really nice handle on texture, for lack of a better way of putting it.
― Doctor Casino, Sunday, 11 March 2012 14:45 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 12:20 (1 year ago) Permalink
― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 12:21 (1 year ago) Permalink
― nickn, Wednesday, 4 April 2012 18:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
put a cat on it
― desk calendar white out (Matt P), Wednesday, 4 April 2012 18:31 (1 year ago) Permalink
Is Daniel Libeskind the worst major contemporary architect? Cheap looking if not cheap to build structures that are notorious for user complaints. A few decent projects mixed in with a ton of shlock.
― I DIED, Saturday, 5 May 2012 15:02 (1 year ago) Permalink
fyi that last lighting sculpture is called "masterpiece"
― I DIED, Saturday, 5 May 2012 15:03 (1 year ago) Permalink
Libeskind is such a tragedy to me because the Jewish Museum is kind of great (kind of badly flawed but kind of great), and at the very least a kind of definitive study on the idea of trying to use a building to produce certain emotional and perhaps bodily effects - - - and each subsequent piece that reuses the language to no effect at all just cheapens the impact of the one good building. That one in Cincy just blows IMO although I've talked to people that liked it.
Worst major name, I'd have to think about for a bit. There's plenty of people where they are just not to my taste at all but I believe they are competent builders who have something interesting they're trying to do so it's hard to say they should just be tarred and feathered. Hmm.
― Doctor Casino, Saturday, 5 May 2012 15:24 (1 year ago) Permalink
yes he's the worst by some distance. "competent builder" is the last way to describe him.
― jed_, Saturday, 5 May 2012 21:22 (1 year ago) Permalink
I think part of it may be that he just tends to accept the types of projects with questionable clients and budgets that others at his level turn down. But only a part of it.
― I DIED, Sunday, 6 May 2012 02:41 (1 year ago) Permalink
I do not like those buildings.
― mh, Monday, 7 May 2012 14:25 (1 year ago) Permalink
so it may read different in person but the photos of the H&dM/Al Weiwei Serpentine pavilion sure are disappointing :(
― I DIED, Thursday, 7 June 2012 17:57 (11 months ago) Permalink
it looks totally joyless from the pics. i could have forgiven the somewhat forced/undergrad nature of the "excavation" (even though there was nothing to excavate, as it turns out, which should have been obvious) if the result had some sense of fun or any other spatial interest.
― jed_, Thursday, 7 June 2012 19:15 (11 months ago) Permalink
having said that the nouvel pavillion seemed fun from the images but was kind of oppressive to spend time in.
― jed_, Thursday, 7 June 2012 19:20 (11 months ago) Permalink
architecture photography is a hell of a field
― mh, Thursday, 7 June 2012 19:27 (11 months ago) Permalink
I'm pretty stoked by the concept of the pavilion but it definitely pushes up against the limits of a "statement" versus material/space/promenade/detail/whatever else might actually make up an architectural experience. I'm a fan of everybody involved so I want to give it a fair shake... we're taking the students to see it later this month hopefully.
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 7 June 2012 21:36 (11 months ago) Permalink
^ yeah I think my high expectations where part of why I found the result so disappointing. Seems like they felt the need to create a sort of anti-pavilion but SANAA already stripped it back about as far as it could go.
I'm breaking my own rule of trying to ignore things called pavilions or viewing towers in architectural discourse as I generally think just providing shade or a platform is too low a bar to clear in terms of dealing with actual challenges of buildings.
― I DIED, Thursday, 7 June 2012 22:39 (11 months ago) Permalink
Ha yeah - - they can be nice experiments for ideas though, and at their best they really can have as much thinking and care as a building, in the way that, I dunno, a haiku can take as long to write as a novel (or whatever) but it really is a whole different order of challenges.
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 7 June 2012 23:46 (11 months ago) Permalink
(Viewing towers are the worst though, somehow!)
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 7 June 2012 23:47 (11 months ago) Permalink
― mh, Thursday, 7 June 2012 20:27 (2 months ago)
Might I recommend the pretty (if boring) Julius Shulman Documentary Visual Acoustics: The Modernism of Julius Shulman?
Also since I've spent a couple of days up and down by this building this weekend I have been thinking about (and cussing the budget panel that approved such an ugly monolithic building):
Kevin Roche, you should be ashamed. Actually that entire stretch at the moment is a bit shameful with the empty Anglo Irish building...
― hyggeligt, Sunday, 26 August 2012 08:51 (8 months ago) Permalink
I really loved the Kevin Roche exhibit I saw at the National Building Museum last month but it really glosses over some of the terrible things he's done and influenced (on the planning side even more than the aesthetic side).
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Sunday, 2 September 2012 04:06 (8 months ago) Permalink
USA pavilion at the Biennale is I guess a wry commentary on the difficulties wheelchair users face in the built environment
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Sunday, 2 September 2012 04:07 (8 months ago) Permalink
I already hawked this to I Love Photography, but FWIW I am finally starting in with the 2012 "adventure" photos, this time beginning with a chronologically-organized look at Alvar Aalto. This means opening with the "awkward early stuff for fans only" material but maybe it'll be of interest to some people here. First image here, following ones to the "left" in the Flickr interface. (I only recently realized you could just use the arrow keys to get around - whee!)
Highlights of the limited stuff posted so far:
Seinäjoki Defense Corps Buildings, 1924-1926
Villa Väinölä, 1926
Turun Sanomat Building, 1928-1930
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 27 September 2012 16:55 (7 months ago) Permalink
(2010 and 2011 "Adventure" collections coming, uh, someday. Just ordered a new film scanner the other day...)
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 27 September 2012 17:07 (7 months ago) Permalink
that Turun Sanomat photo is great! Did you make it to the Savoy restaurant?
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Thursday, 27 September 2012 18:28 (7 months ago) Permalink
Thanks! And nope, sadly. On the trip it felt like we must have seen every Aalto building known to man, but, turns out, guy built a LOT....
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 27 September 2012 19:57 (7 months ago) Permalink
I watched this film over the weekend: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1233611/
I'm kind of considering a desert/Palm Springs road trip/architecture tour sometime. Has anyone been out that way? It looks like a lot of Palm Springs city buildings are of the period.
I also ended up watching Urbanized (finally) and the contrast between people in the two films who have a love of architecture and an interest in its relation to the surrounding environment juxtaposed with a Phoenix, Arizona house arrangement is depressing.
― mh, Monday, 19 November 2012 22:22 (6 months ago) Permalink
There is a Modernism Week they hold out there, next one is Feb 2013. this past one included a lautner house tour that looked good, but i just couldn't work up the enthusiasm to go out there (also, the weekend tour sold out pretty quickly).
― nickn, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 01:50 (6 months ago) Permalink
thinking of taking my ridiculous architect friend, doing the reverse F&L In Las Vegas drive, go see some architecture
― mh, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 01:52 (6 months ago) Permalink
Looks like a lot of the home tours are already sold out. There's probably a guide (or maybe use the Gerbhard/Winter So Cal one) that you could do on your own.
― nickn, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 01:54 (6 months ago) Permalink
Gebhard, that is. It's about a 2-2.5 hour drive for me, but I've never tried just driving out and looking around.
― nickn, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 01:56 (6 months ago) Permalink
Sounds like a good thing to do if you're bored on a Saturday!
― mh, Tuesday, 20 November 2012 01:59 (6 months ago) Permalink
upcoming Lebbeus Woods exhibit at SF MOMA
― mh, Tuesday, 27 November 2012 18:33 (5 months ago) Permalink
Rest in peace, Oscar Niemeyer - 1907-2012. The last heroic Modern.
― Doctor Casino, Thursday, 6 December 2012 00:56 (5 months ago) Permalink
damn, Niemeyer and now Ada Louise Huxtable, all the greats I thought would live forever are going. When all is said and done I don't know if there will be any 20th century architects seen to have changed architecture more than Huxtable's writing.
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Tuesday, 8 January 2013 09:04 (4 months ago) Permalink
[http://www.sfmoma.org/exhib_events/exhibitions/509upcoming Lebbeus Woods exhibit at SF MO MA
upcoming Lebbeus Woods exhibit at SF MO MA
We are almost finished with this show, it is A-M-A-Z-I-N-G
opens saturdayplease don't touch, the models are disturbingly fragile (every one arrived broken)
― "Turkey In The Straw" coming from someplace in the clouds (Sparkle Motion), Friday, 15 February 2013 06:23 (3 months ago) Permalink
how can you even tell if a Lebbeus Woods model is broken
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Friday, 15 February 2013 13:27 (3 months ago) Permalink
It made for a very difficult conservation task.
― "Turkey In The Straw" coming from someplace in the clouds (Sparkle Motion), Friday, 15 February 2013 14:56 (3 months ago) Permalink
Planning on seeing this when I'm in SF on vacation in March (please do not break them before then)
― mh, Friday, 15 February 2013 15:59 (3 months ago) Permalink
Guys, this Woods thing at SF MOMA is so awesome
― ☠ ☃ ☠ (mh), Saturday, 23 March 2013 17:59 (2 months ago) Permalink
― jed_, Sunday, 24 March 2013 01:26 (2 months ago) Permalink
― ☠ ☃ ☠ (mh), Sunday, 24 March 2013 01:51 (2 months ago) Permalink
― Sadly, 99.99 percent of sheeple will never wake up (I DIED), Tuesday, 2 April 2013 18:18 (1 month ago) Permalink
Hahaha, totally. Also I would live in terror of branches, or whole trees, ripped loose and careening down 50 stories to the street. Would make a good moment in a disaster, superhero, or shit Transformer movie, but otherwise, yikes.
― Doctor Casino, Wednesday, 3 April 2013 12:22 (1 month ago) Permalink
Zaha Hadid and Rem Koolhaas in the 1970s
― Elvis Telecom, Sunday, 21 April 2013 21:16 (1 month ago) Permalink
― i lost my shoes on acid (jed_), Sunday, 21 April 2013 22:23 (1 month ago) Permalink
haha yeah, love young Rem
with dear old Wallace Harrison, 1977
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 22 April 2013 01:03 (1 month ago) Permalink
Ken Frampton & Peter Eisenman, 1970
Bernard Tschumi, 1978
― Doctor Casino, Monday, 22 April 2013 01:07 (1 month ago) Permalink