LeDeuzzy, Q.

cancel architecture call-out

1   b   c   d   e   f   g   h   i   j   k   l   m   n   o   p   q   r   s   t   u   v   w   x   y   z

2011.07.11 15:19
Question about Charles Jencks' Declaration
It wasn't the Purist aesthetic that died with Pruitt-Igoe, rather the Modernist notion that "good form was to lead to good content, or at least good conduct; the intelligent planning of abstract space was to promote healthy behavior" is what died.
Calling out the implosion of several blocks of the Pruitt-Igoe Housing as an historic event and marker of a paradigm shift was rather astute on Jencks' part. I wonder how many other Modernist projects only 17 years old have succumb to implosion prior to that of Pruitt-Igoe. For sure, many fairly young Modernist projects have been imploded since Pruitt-Igoe, but is Pruitt-Igoe perhaps still the youngest Modernist project to have ever been imploded. And, I wonder, how many housing projects like Pruitt-Igoe have been built since the implosion of Pruitt-Igoe. I'd guess very few if not none in the United States, but perhaps such projects remained (or even still remain) in production in lands under Communist regimes.
I was eye-witness to the world's largest building implosion (the roughly 70 years old Sears Philadelphia Headquarters, 1994). It happened so close to where I lived I walked to see it. What's most striking about a building implosion is the immediate and paradoxical manifestation of absence. Jencks advocated that the ruins of the Pruitt-Igoe implosion should remain as "a great architectural symbol. It should be preserved as a warning." Well, I don't think the ruins were preserved, so all that's left are pictures and absence. I think it's fair to say that the implosion of Pruitt-Igoe left behind a certain absence within Modernist ideology as well

Philip Johnson Estate within Pruitt-Igoe Housing Project

The problem with Johnsonian postmodernism lies not so much with individual buildings—though several are out-and-out monstrosities—as with their very spirit. His buildings are cynical. Johnson would be the first to admit this, of course: flip self-criticism is a staple of his bad-boy persona, although it has gone to extreme lengths lately, even for him. In 1982, he delivered his famous “I am a whore” speech to a distinguished group of international architects gathered at the University of Virginia. (The proceedings have since been published inbook form in The Charlottesville Tapes.) When Cesar Pelli asked Johnson to justify his design for International Place in Boston, he replied: "I do not believe in principles .... I am a whore, and I am paid very well for building high-rise buildings."

Johnson has been saying “I am a whore” since 1977 at least, and it gets less funny all the time. But Johnson’s cynical verbiage does tell us something profound about his recent architecture. For his utterances are the spiritual equivalent of the soullessness characteristic of his buildings. In his commentary on the Charlottesville proceedings, Jaquelin Robertson, dean of the University of Virginia’s School of Architecture, defines the effect of Johnson’s recent work exactly when he charges him with responsibility for “the peculiar rich emptiness” typical of the latest American architecture.

Johnson’s buildings feel empty because they are informed, like his wit, by a striving for dramatic short-term effects. As buildings, they are provocative, irreverent, culturally subversive, and glib. These can be attractive qualities in an after-dinner speech, but not in urban architecture on the scale Johnson’s clients can afford. For we are not talking about witty experiments in plywood in somebody’s backyard, in the manner of Frank Gehry. We are talking about forty-story experiments in granite on Madison Avenue.
Diana Ketchum, ""I am a whore": Philip Johnson at eighty" in The New Criterion (December 1986).

From left: Andy Warhol, David Whitney, Philip Johnson, Dr. John Dalton, and Robert A. M. Stern in the Glass House in 1964.

2004.07.10 11:27
Happy birthday to Philip Johnson
Maybe it's a diet of chicken that keeps Philip alive.
From Andy Warhol's diary:
Thursday, September 5, 1986
Worked till 8:00. Took Wilfredo and Sam with me to dinner at Castellano with Philip Johnson and David Whitney. David wasn't drinking so he was reserved. Philip was thrilled with the young kids. We walked back to Philip and David's apartment and they invited us up, it was the first time they were having people, and some kids were coming out of the building as we were going in and they yelled dirty things like, "You're going up to fuck." It was great up there, my Cow wallpaper in the bathroom. ...

2011.07.20 11:53
Question about Charles Jencks' Declaration
I'm thinking luxury housing, like putting the Louie back in St. Louie.




Quondam © 2021.01.27