18 January

1752 birth of Sir John Nash

idea of the colossal
1996.01.18     3133 3748

tallest building in the world
1996.01.18     3133 3136 3748

"Main Street" at Disneyland
1996.01.18     3133 3748

series of contemporary plans
1996.01.18     3133 3748

Durand's Recueil et Parallèle
1996.01.18     3133 3748

some reading on scale
1996.01.18     3133 3748

Giza over Philadlephia
1996.01.18     3133 3748

Gooding House
1996.01.18     2236 3133 3748 3786

Harbeson's The Study of Architectural Design
1996.01.18     3133 3748

Capital Park West
1997.01.18     2250b

Wall House 2
1997.01.18     2219b

in memory of Aldo Rossi
1998.01.18     e2589 e2907 e2915 5398b

participatory Parkway Interpolation
1998.01.18     2205

recalling virt. mus.
2000.01.18 11:48     3142 3148 3316j 3730d 3789
2000.01.18 14:34     3316j
2000.01.18 16:43     3316j

crystal ball
2001.01.18     3773c

Re: Critical Theory Clinically Dead?
2003.01.18 10:09     3784g

Re: Libeskind on CR tonight
2003.01.18 15:52     3775g 3777d 5903

Here a Versailles, there a Versailles, Everywhere a Versailles, sigh

what is the good source to study folding architecture?
2006.01.18 13:00     3770m 3772 3775j
2006.01.18 14:38     3772
2006.01.18 16:08     3772 3775j
2006.01.18 17:39     3728h 3747h 3770m 3772 3775j 3784i 3792f

i love this guy
2009.01.18 11:12     3332u

18 January
2014.01.18 22:22     3307n

16 August
2016.01.18 10:17     3313k
2016.01.18 10:47     3313k

OMA   Bibliotheque Alexis de Tocqueville

2003.01.18 15:52
Re: Libeskind on CR tonight
Could it now be clear that nothing at Ground Zero will ever come close to what was there before, and certainly in no way capture the same intensity of event that September 11, 2001 was? If that's the case, how does one design something that is already destined to be lacking, except for the media hype. And given all the hyper media attention surrounding Ground Zero and its renewal design, one would think that the rebuilding of Hiroshima and Nagasaki would be in all the history books as a(n atomically) powerful precedent clearly explaining what such renewal really means and how to do it properly.

2006.01.18 13:00
what is the good source to study folding architecture?
And here I thought that folding architecture had to do with simply taking a building plan and then folding it. Boy, I'm glad I never told anyone else this before because they'd surely think I was just plain stupid. I mean, I didn't know that the point was not so much to fold, but rather to tie architecture up in theoretical knots where even the architects doing it don't even know that what they are really doing is advertising (more than selling) what they think is a definite Zeitgeist reality. And what? Now it's just a quondam trend or fad that's still over-intellectualized.

2006.01.18 14:38
what is the good source to study folding architecture?
This is the kind of folded architecture I like:

MVRDV, Sloterpark Swimming-pool, 1994

2006.01.18 16:08
what is the good source to study folding architecture?
James Stirling used to talk about taking an evolutionary approach to architectural design, rather than take a revolutionary approach to architectural design.
rhetorical question:
Is folded architecture evolving, or is it extinct?

2006.01.18 17:39
what is the good source to study folding architecture?
MMatt wrote:
"What French is trying to make sure everyone understands here is that "folding" isn't a technique or a style, it's an entire school of thought (philosophically) with just as much theory and thick readings to defend/quantify it as any decon or other pomo sub-strands."
Personally, I've lost most of the confidence I've ever had in this type of sentiment/position as it relates to architectural design. Nonetheless, what MMatt wrote does reflect how most student architects are now trained to think about design, technique or style.
Yet, when it really comes down to an architectural design, folding architecture really does boil down to what it looks like. So, as far as I'm concerned, folding architecture is just another form, in the long history of forms, that architecture can take on, and, like jlxarchitect says, "if it can solve my office's project's problem, then it is Ok to use."
Otherwise, the notion of "an entire school of [failed?] thought" is stillborn, rather than being something within the evolutionary continuum of architectural design. And just because it's what is taught in school doesn't necessarily make it the truth. For example, the "Metabolist" architects of Japan talked a lot about architecture reflecting "life giving" forms, while at the same time appearing oblivious to the fact that metabolism as a operation is a creative/destructive duality. Likewise, everything Tafuri and Eisenman said/say about Piranesi's Ichnographia Campus Martius is just plain incorrect, yet their mistakes are taught and published over and over again.
I hope you all now understand what I mean by saying that I've lost confidence...

12011801 St. Peter's Basilica horizontal windows with domestic elevations   2071i00

17011801 Parthenon column bench table model 5233 Arbor Street plan IQ45   2166i26
17011802 5233 Arbor Street plans model IQ45.02 plans   2166i27   b
17011803 5233 Arbor Street plans model Curatorium exhibition IQ45.02 site plan   2166i28   b
17011804 Maison Dom-ino model 5233 8415 plans Ury Farm site plan   2166i29   b   c

17011801   OMA   Bibliotheque Alexis de Tocqueville

18011801 atypical atemporality Philadelphia plan model working data   2467i12   b




Quondam © 2020.11.17