Triumph of architecture, or pain in the ....?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sam im not going to post thousands of these but here are a couple of pics of the flinders ranges (More here)

93180-004-7D8F6A93.jpg


flinders-ranges-sa.jpg


HeroFlindersRanges.jpg


but you have to rember (like most people who dont live here) that the whole country is NOT the bush or desert. Most of the people live in the cities, some of which are quite beautiful like canbura (if you can avioid steping on pollies) or perth. Even places like the Dandenongs are more like temprate rain forests than desert

look at these pitures, i wont post them because i would have a hard time deciding which i liked most. There is a beautiful aborigional natural art gallery up there amongst the forest. Its all carvings like these shown on the artists wikipedia page (i cant belive he HAS a wikipedia page, wonder what he would think of that if he could see it)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Ricketts
 
james i know the sticks are not the origional yellow peril. However thats what they got called when they were first errected (errected being the opritive word:p)

Actually we named our scout truck the yellow peril as well because it was sickly yellow and had a tendancy to break down at REALLY bad times:p
 
You easterners and your weird ideas... What's next, some sort of three dimensional triangle made of glass?
 
A matter of expectations

James R said:

Does art have to represent something?

Doesn't that have at least a bit to do with one's expectation of representation?

I mean, what does the one yellow thing sticking up across from the red ones represent?

And, hey, remember, I'm someone who adores Mondrian to the point that I was offended when I saw the cover of Silverchair's Young Modern. If their music wasn't bad enough, that album cover should seal it. They haven't earned it. Or something.

But, yeah, anyway, Mondrian. What the hell does this represent?


Piet Mondrian, Composition No. 8
Oil on canvas
1939-42

Okay, maybe that's not fair, using a two-dimensional piece in an architecture thread. I'll see what I can come up with.
 
What do you see?

Start with this:


China Central Television building (left), designed by Rem Koolhaas
(image via Slog)

And then click on the picture or this link. Either works.

From the latter—and quoted at the former:



I admit the building appears to be something of an architectural feat, but whether or not it's a triumph is a separate question that I cannot, at this time, answer. Still, though, I find it hilarious that "knowledge window" and "hemorrhoids" are homophonic in Chinese. How the hell does that work?

Oh, right. That's linguistics. Anyway, you want a corner office? Or maybe something in the lower floors? Or, maybe, how about a different building altogether? I have a mild fear of heights, even when I'm caged in and can't fall off the edge. Still, I think I'd probably find working in the connecting section somewhat unnerving.
____________________

Notes:

Chow, Elaine. "China's CCTV Headquarters Trying to Shake 'Hemorrhoids' Nickname". Gizmodo. December 3, 2008. http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2008/12/c...s_trying_to_shake_hemorrhoids_nickname-2.html

See Also:

Mudede, Charles. "The Building of Hemorrhoids". Slog. December 4, 2008. http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2008/12/04/the_building_of_hemorrhoids

To me, it looks like somebody cut off a grey "Gumby" at the waist while he was in the middle of taking a step.

Sometimes I wonder where architects get their inspiration. There's one building in downtown Dallas that I swear looks like 3 books on a shelf. There's another one that is eerily similar to an old HP pavilion mid-tower computer case.

Here's fuzzy picture I shot from the bus. I kept wondering where they were going to get a windows installation cd big enough.

biggestcomputer.jpg
 
That building in the original post is stupendously ugly. It lacks any allusion, wit, or grace, nor does it offer even the vaguest hint that its designer was aware of refined aesthetics. It possesses nothing to nourish cultivated people, nor is it even satisfactorily utilitarian, as others here have pointed out. This is the legacy of post-modernism and its aching, wasteful contrivances. Its defenders ought to be ashamed, if they have the capacity for that sentiment.
 
I prefer pragmatic architecture and art, myself. Form should come from function, unless you are simply trying to be artistic, in which case it should not have function outside of aesthetics.
 
I keep wondering .....should we all like the same things in life? Should there be no variation in our taste in art or architecture or food or clothing?

And, I suppose more to the point, should we all poke fun at or denigrate the likes and dislikes of others ....have no tolerance for their differences?

Baron Max
 
tolerance is intolerable...

No, I think tolerance is what people "claim" that the rest of humanity should do, yet they can't do it themselves!

"I think all people should be tolerant of others ....especially those bastards that don't think like me!" :D

See? I'm lucky though, I hate everyone and everything so tolerance means virtually nothing to me. And it's strictly an accident if I hate some people more than others ...I'm usually an equal-opportunity hater!

Baron Max
 
I'm not so sure. I think this building may very well relate to the "new" culture of China.

It's innovative and interesting.

I think that some people think anything new is bad.

I like it on an abstract level, but they are just copying the West and it's prestige. It's a style of living that's almost obsolete already.
 
Interesting building, hemmeroids or not--I hope they don't have too many earthquakes there. I bet the people in the nearby buildings are sweating more than a bit at the thought that they're near a building that's much bigger than them and inherently unstable (certainly looks that way anyway, but I wouldn't be an architect's elbow, so what do I know):p:D
 
True art is incomprehensible

Revisiting a theme ....

S.A.M.: Thats very nice. Whats it supposed to represent?

James R: Does art have to represent something?

S.A.M.: Usually, yes.

I forget what it was I was looking up originally yesterday, but I got sidetracked at Television Tropes, including their discussion of the principle that, "True art is incomprehensible". Not that there's much in the article that is specifically relevant insofar as the thread is concerned; the concept is discussed in the context of writing and entertainment production.

Still, though, I am reminded that there is, theoretically, some merit to that. To the other, as the article recalls, there is Crispin Glover's What Is It? and John Boorman's Zardoz as a counterpoint. Yeah, Sean Connery in a red diaper ... I'm sure there's artistic merit to that. Somewhere.

But, yeah. One of my favorite paintings never actually existed as far as I know, but it was day-glo orange tape on a canvas painted dark green. Rabo Karabekian's explanation for the painting, while I haven't the text of the book here, is hilarious. Wikipedia includes a fan-made version; personally, I envisioned a darker green.

Another of my favorite paintings I haven't seen in years. It was at the Hirshhorn in Washington, D.C. Well, as I recall, it was a series of paintings. Several large planks of wood, framed and hung with the knotholes painted white.

(By Lucifer's beard! It's been over twenty years since I've been there ....)
____________________

Notes:

Television Tropes. "True Art Is Incomprehensible". TVTropes.org. Accessed April 5, 2009. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TrueArtIsIncomprehensible

Wikipedia. "Rabo Karabekian". Wikipedia.com. Accessed April 5, 2009. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabo_Karabekian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top