SU?
-
@unknownuser said:
Frankly, I think you're right. This is a surprisingly ugly design. Mental exercise: picture this house, if you like, next to a Neutra. May put things into perspective.
I think Bruce Goff did this in the 1940s already - using partly recycled materials.
Anssi
-
@kwistenbiebel said:
...And also, the Art Nouveau examples you show are more than just 'lets do flowers'. Art Nouveau as a movement was a reaction to the cold industrial age of prefabrication, standardisation and the loss of 'the natural' and 'tradition', typical for that era.
Not to mention Horta's stuff is much more elegant. It's like a well-choreographed ballet of organic forms, not just a blob like the house that's being discussed here. A decent composition relies heavily on a "hierarchy of forms" (I cannot explain this better in Eengleesh) - and there just doesn't seem to be one here.
Unlike Fred, I am not very willing to give the architect of this house props for trying. Harsh as it may sound, I reserve my appreciation for those, be it architects, artists, composers or writers, who succeed. If I wouldn't, what would my appreciation be worth?
-
Actually I do give credits to the architect for 'trying'.
It's just that this experiment should not have left her backroom.
Pure form experiments are fun and good to learn from (see Freds nice setups).
However, when going from 'form study' to a real 'project', the form needs to be supportive to a concept and never the subject itself.One of the best examples of this are the studies of the Bauhaus artist Moholy Nagy. Pure form studies but the actual built projects had so much more besides the formalistic.
-
@unknownuser said:
Unlike Fred, I am not very willing to give the architect of this house props for trying. Harsh as it may sound, I reserve my appreciation for those, be it architects, artists, composers or writers, who succeed. If I wouldn't, what would my appreciation be worth?
What do you think your appreciation is worth? I think it's worth the same as your derision - nothing.
To only reserve your appreciation for those who succeed seems pretty simplistic to me. What if the architects, writers or composers who "fail" push the boundaries so that later artists "succeed" later on? Without the failures you won't have the successes.
-
@johnsenior1973 said:
@unknownuser said:
Unlike Fred, I am not very willing to give the architect of this house props for trying. Harsh as it may sound, I reserve my appreciation for those, be it architects, artists, composers or writers, who succeed. If I wouldn't, what would my appreciation be worth?
What do you think your appreciation is worth? I think it's worth the same as your derision - nothing.
To only reserve your appreciation for those who succeed seems pretty simplistic to me. What if the architects, writers or composers who "fail" push the boundaries so that later artists "succeed" later on? Without the failures you won't have the successes.
Oh no. I once again dove head first into yet another senseless meta discussion with an ideological heir of the seventies' soft edged "jedermann ist ein künstler, we're all great and the process is all that counts" approach.
I haven't said my appreciation or derision's worth anything, now have I? I just wanted to point out I'd rather throw roses at Bach than at Jon Bon Jovi. I wish mr. Bon Jovi all the succes he desires, but I insist on maintaining a very clear distinction between quality and mediocrity.
Of course, to each his own. Tastes do differ, and I have no problem with that. Quite the contrary. But, as Alain Finkielkraut points out quite eloquently in the last chapter of the "The Defeat Of The Mind ", there's a difference between a nice pair of boots and Shakespeare.
Now I throw in the towel. No more meta discussion.
-
Don't mock Jedermann. I love his work.
Wuahahaaaaaa
I love those experiments of the seventies where they put some monkeys in front of a virgin canvas, let them tangle with a brush and paint, and then show the produced 'paintings' to the established art critics (without telling them some apes made it). Most of those art guys were convinced the art was sublime.
So yeah, let me be a 'Jedermann'
Actually, the name sounds very 'artistique'.Sincerely yours,
the true mister Kleidermann...err...I mean Jedermann.
(or was it Jagermeister?.....hell , I need to get some sleep
) -
@unknownuser said:
I haven't said my appreciation or derision's worth anything, now have I?
So what exactly did you mean when you said, "Harsh as it may sound, I reserve my appreciation for those, be it architects, artists, composers or writers, who succeed. If I wouldn't, what would my appreciation be worth?"
To me that seems to be very clear that you are making out that your appreciation is worth something.
@unknownuser said:
I just wanted to point out I'd rather throw roses at Bach than at Jon Bon Jovi. I wish mr. Bon Jovi all the succes he desires, but I insist on maintaining a very clear distinction between quality and mediocrity.
But as you reserve your appreciation for those who succeed, surely if Mr. Bon Jovi gets all the success he desires you will then appreciate him?
-
@johnsenior1973 said:
So what exactly did you mean when you said, "Harsh as it may sound, I reserve my appreciation for those, be it architects, artists, composers or writers, who succeed. If I wouldn't, what would my appreciation be worth?" To me that seems to be very clear that you are making out that your appreciation is worth something.
Oh, but it is worth something. But I wasn't talking about absolute value. I was referring to the relative value of my appreciation as opposed to my derision. Hope this makes sense.
@johnsenior1973 said:
But as you reserve your appreciation for those who succeed, surely if Mr. Bon Jovi gets all the success he desires you will then appreciate him?
I was referring to artistic merit, not worldly succes (though there's nothing wrong with the latter). Thought that one was clear.
@ Kwist: you are gonna need some aspirin in the morning.
Advertisement