Mashup of 3 articles
Today’s designers seem to love using new ideas coming from science. It possesses a quality—almost indescribable—that embodies design ingenuity, connection to place, and, above all, imagination. They embrace them as analogies, metaphors, and in a few cases, tools to generate startling new designs. But metaphors about the belief in the significance of architecture is premised on the notion that we are for better or for worse, different people in different places. The complexity of the city and its adaptive structures are not the same thing as the actual complexity of the city. The trouble is, today’s architectural monuments aren’t meant only to be admired from afar. It’s not about creating an icon, but shaping public space. This confusion can produce disastrous results. It can even contribute to the slow collapse of an entire civilization. We might think that the difference between metaphor and reality is so obvious that it’s hardly worth mentioning. And yet, such confusion pervades the design world today, and spreads from there into the general culture. It plays a key role on the conviction that it is architecture’s task to render vivid to us who we might ideally be and in the delusional expectation that metaphors will create reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment