Understanding a conversation
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J-giyFlROM
The conversation between Peter Eisenman and Rem Koolhaas offers vocabulary to understand architecture and its critical practices. This vocabulary deals with autonomy, Content- Form, subjectivity and Diagram- Figure relationships. It seems through the conversation that the evolution of an architectural discipline has only occurred through ‘breaks’ and not out of continuities. Hence it is important to identify these breaks in the social, political and economical scenarios to know what shapes critical architectural practice.
In an age of Image saturated consumer culture the idea of spectacle engages the architectural discourse. The Form-content relationship and its diagrammatic representation offers an architectural process.
How does one understand the genesis of ‘Form’ and what affect it creates at the audience over time?
Does the spectacle says more than it allures attention? How one does engage with the spectacle in different contexts?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J-giyFlROM
The conversation between Peter Eisenman and Rem Koolhaas offers vocabulary to understand architecture and its critical practices. This vocabulary deals with autonomy, Content- Form, subjectivity and Diagram- Figure relationships. It seems through the conversation that the evolution of an architectural discipline has only occurred through ‘breaks’ and not out of continuities. Hence it is important to identify these breaks in the social, political and economical scenarios to know what shapes critical architectural practice.
In an age of Image saturated consumer culture the idea of spectacle engages the architectural discourse. The Form-content relationship and its diagrammatic representation offers an architectural process.
How does one understand the genesis of ‘Form’ and what affect it creates at the audience over time?
Does the spectacle says more than it allures attention? How one does engage with the spectacle in different contexts?
No comments:
Post a Comment