I was hoping to finish a ‘proper’ blog entry this evening, but once again the hours have slipped through my fingers and I’m left with only minutes. Gone are the days when I would just ignore the natural desire for sleep and work on into the night. Instead I shall quickly hypertextualise my day.
(I must be tired. I just got up to pour some boiling water onto some white tea and reached for the iron instead of the kettle.)
One of the reasons for this evening’s disappearance is that I got a text message from a friend reminding me that Channel 4 were broadcasting the documentary ‘Fight for Ground Zero’. My pizza and I watched it together. It charts the design development of Libeskind‘s masterplan for the WTC site. It also charts the way the project has been completely hijacked by the land owner and his architect David Childs. I’ve had disparaging things to say about Libeskind in the past, but this time it’s pretty clear that he was right and everyone else was wrong. Whilst he was agonising over the grain of the masterplan, Childs was only interested in pumping his erection up to new heights. The old cliche about male architects and towers was writ large throughout the program.
I also got a running commentary throughout from my friend via text message (who was well placed to critique it from a distance, being neither a male or an architect). Highlights included; Bet you like the short fella’s design and Typical architect…wearing all black. She was right on both counts.
Flashback to lunch. A trip to the Birmingham Museums and Art Gallery to see ‘Life on the Vale’ – an exhibition that shows work inspired by the the Castle Vale housing estate in Castle Bromwich. We’ve been working on the estate in various roles for about ten years. I’m still very proud of some of the new housing that we designed there. So I was delighted to find that one of our projects featured in the photographic work of Richard Harris. That particular project is quite dear to me, as the CAD model I made in the early stages of the design was used as part of a study on consultation and virtual reality. I’ve had fun touting it at seminars in the past.
And so to the remainder of this evening. Revisiting the link that Matt sent me, I’ve been listening to some radio interviews whilst drawing a cross section. One of the most interesting being David Adjaye, in conversation with Isabel Hilton.
Hilton: What do you like about having artists as clients?
Adjaye: Artist’s vision and artist’s clarity. An artist struggles to resolve something clearly because they have to manifest it very clearly. Architects, generally, have to manifest things but they are embroiled with the business of technique and problem solving and I think it can sometimes be a problem in itself and a resolution in itself; and the art of architecture, I think, sometimes gets lost in this process.
Note to self: That’s me, that is. I lose site of the art in all the process and technique. This is exactly why my love of Anish Kapoor’s work feels so dirty.
In mathematics, an axiomatic system is any set of axioms from which some or all axioms can be used in conjunction to logically derive theorems. A mathematical theory consists of an axiomatic system and all its derived theorems. An axiomatic system that is completely described is a special kind of formal system; usually though the effort towards complete formalisation brings diminishing returns in certainty, and a lack of readability for humans.
Do you see how those two quotes collide with each other? Boom! As my friend Bobby H would say (ask him for the full story when he pops up on the comments later).
Finally, you should all watch for tonights linklog as it has a couple of great discoveries. Two links from entirely different ends of the musical spectrum, sharing a medium as common ground – both are flash movies. With this in mind it’s quite possible that they are so far apart that they meet up, like communism and fascism, somewhere round the back. As I once heard Lars Spuybroek say at an RIBA lecture, A Straight Line Is Just A Badly Informed Curve.
A rather neat axiom to finish this euclidean (data)space with.