After reading the article "Dangerously Insane" by Deyan Sudjic, presenting the book by Leon Krier, "The Architecture of Community", I have been raised some questions.
Krier This subject is represented as a simple-looking, always dressed in linen, and hair 'bohemian', in short by the appearance does not look like an architect. And also for his ideas: in fact Krier does not build! 'A responsiblearchitect built today can not possibly' '.. no respectable architect Could build anything with a clear conscience ...'. This is not for reasons linked unscrupulous use that in the last century in particular has made the environment, but because he would build the second take part in the crime of the century: the destruction of the traditional European city. While supporting this view is open to development and to accept the idea to think about the city as a city fit to cars.
What I felt I was instead an attitude like this: "glass, steel and concrete I can understand them, but the brick and mortar are strophic! Why go forward when know which ones are best? ". Now I have so clearly caused little (considering also the materials with the buildings and the types of historical periods in which these materials were mainly used).
However you refer to the article, for further reading. At this point I have been raised a couple of questions:
1. is true that lately seems to be going out of fashion just the superstars, and that is realizing that architect building a strange case, only to hit the attention of passers . But many people do not know that behind many ways apparently unlikely, as can generally be Calatrava's buildings, for example, there is a search not only in engineering but also mathematical (and often refers to the forms that exist in nature). This is because through the study of mathematical curves in three dimensional space, they want to find forms that are more resistant than those already known and used. An example of such contradiction is the Turning Torso, which as you know already has been built as if it were 'screwed' on itself with little effort to resist the pressures of the wind.
2. and then one thing is immediately evident that this rejection phobia for new buildings in historic centers. But why? .. Maybe in the past posed problems about where to place the Gothic cathedral where near a church or not? Why should we start doing now? But above all, my question is this: while it anchored to the types and traditional materials, is that you end up not having enough to go on opening? Not in danger of fossilization a little thinking that they had to stay on top of trends and considering much of the innovation as such?
0 comments:
Post a Comment