http://blog.miragestudio7.com/2007/11/wolf-prix-and-peter-eisenman/ Architecture Tutorials 3D max Library Download AutoCAD ArchiCAD Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:47:54 +0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 http://blog.miragestudio7.com/2007/11/wolf-prix-and-peter-eisenman/#comment-27665 leon magnavox Sat, 06 Jun 2009 20:50:39 +0000 http://blog.miragestudio7.com/2007/11/wolf-prix-and-peter-eisenman/#comment-27665 i do agree with tali pukerson explaination. and im a support of similar anger. too many poser in our generation as result of great intelectual period of modernism+post+decon about SYSTEM that left generation beyond that period lost and abusive towards removing the system itself. i do agree with tali pukerson explaination. and im a support of similar anger. too many poser in our generation as result of great intelectual period of modernism+post+decon about SYSTEM that left generation beyond that period lost and abusive towards removing the system itself.

]]> http://blog.miragestudio7.com/2007/11/wolf-prix-and-peter-eisenman/#comment-27564 Tali Purkerson Sat, 23 May 2009 06:02:18 +0000 http://blog.miragestudio7.com/2007/11/wolf-prix-and-peter-eisenman/#comment-27564 I have to say that I believe Eisenman actually does have authority to criticize in the manner he does. His work in architectural theory, which is often difficult to decipher and explain, has actually been groundbreaking interms of philosophical implications for the history of architecture. Many people do not have this context prior to engaging with him. I do often see in my peers, a critical lack of understanding of theoretical applications within design. When he points out the average student's ignorance i.e. his assumption of a student not understanding the difference between Palladio and Borromini, on one level, yes, he is being an intellectual dick, but on the other hand, he is expressing an unconscious frustration with the commercialization of education. At this point, anyone can be an architect if they work hard enough at it, not because their ideas command merit, or that they will eventually come to develop a progressive theory through their practice. Today, it is painfully-easy to access sub-par architecture schools, because of the large growth spurt of architectural education during the era of postmodernism, which essentially the cause for all the lifeless buildings (and underskilled architects) we see today. I'm not surprised that the ideology of 'equality' and 'access' has taken over in architecture at the expense of unique and critical thought in design. In that sense, I do share Eisenman's anger. I have to say that I believe Eisenman actually does have authority to criticize in the manner he does. His work in architectural theory, which is often difficult to decipher and explain, has actually been groundbreaking interms of philosophical implications for the history of architecture. Many people do not have this context prior to engaging with him. I do often see in my peers, a critical lack of understanding of theoretical applications within design. When he points out the average student’s ignorance i.e. his assumption of a student not understanding the difference between Palladio and Borromini, on one level, yes, he is being an intellectual dick, but on the other hand, he is expressing an unconscious frustration with the commercialization of education. At this point, anyone can be an architect if they work hard enough at it, not because their ideas command merit, or that they will eventually come to develop a progressive theory through their practice. Today, it is painfully-easy to access sub-par architecture schools, because of the large growth spurt of architectural education during the era of postmodernism, which essentially the cause for all the lifeless buildings (and underskilled architects) we see today. I’m not surprised that the ideology of ‘equality’ and ‘access’ has taken over in architecture at the expense of unique and critical thought in design. In that sense, I do share Eisenman’s anger.

]]>