201201151312
- 1 of 5
- >
Response to "Is ZAHA HADID part of the “dead era of delirious architecture” as proclaimed by Nicolai Ourousoff? " Working backwards, I think one of your most striking points is to call out the conceit of Ouroussoff who reads like a fashion major rather than (presumably) someone with an academic background. As a result any valid points in his earlier commentary, It was fun till the money ran out, are rendered mute. Ouroussoff’s “critique” is the kind that amplifies the sense that architecture is like fashion. It highlights the commodified characteristics that validates branding and perpetuates the self-referential predisposition of this profession. We like to tell ourselves how and why we’re valid in a social sense by rationalizing the fixed impression of built form. Ourousso... read full post
Is ZAHA HADID part of the “dead era of delirious architecture” as proclaimed by Nicolai Ourousoff? by Stephen Alton In a recent article posted in the Huffington Report the Co-founder of Architecture for Humanity and the Open Architecture Network, Cameron Sinclair opened a debate with the following:
“The Architect's Dilemma: The Architecture of Excess vs. an Architecture of Relevance Click here for Sinclair Article. Sinclair writes - “For the past twenty years the voice of the architecture profession has mainly been drowned out by the computer generated sky-piercing towers of luxury. Year after year some of the biggest names in architecture tried to out do each other in what is technically feasible with oddly named styles of 'deconstruction', 'blobitecture' and 'ribbon architecture'. This... read full post