After a ‘Renaissance painting’ sunset – puffy white clouds with
beaming golden trims massed over patches of deep, pale Mary-blue sky
– the evening dimmed into a light sprinkling, so fine that it
failed to catch the sparkle of the light. The walk up the path to the
Abedian School of Architecture at Bond University was a refreshing
stroll through the tinkling mist. The building glowed in its grand
display lighting that turned the plywood soffits into a rich mellow
plane with a profile that reminded one of Aalto’s work. One
pondered the efficiency and efficacy of this use of energy. Folk
could be heard milling before they were seen. It was a busy foyer,
the prelude to a pleasant evening: the beginning of semester two in
the Bond year.
Matt Eagle
The talk was introduced informally by Matt Eagle with a “Thanks
guys,” after he had read out the blurb that sounded like the text
published on the Edition Office web site with the added Eagle advice
- “direct clarity; raw materiality; deeply experiential; take
risks: a good lesson for students.”
Aaron Roberts and Kim Bridgland
Kim Bridgland, (KB), began the talk that was apparently to be a
duet.** The other director of Edition Office, (EO), Aaron Roberts,
(AR), shared the presentation – 50/50. Might this be an
over-reaction to the offer to talk about the work: just too keen? It
reminds one of a first film, where, over-enthusiastically, every Tom,
Dick and Harry seeks to have the name displayed in the credits. It
was indeed a partnership that, apart from the physical challenges of
transferring the audio technology, worked seamlessly. KB spoke
quietly but quickly, rattling off the firm’s ideas, rationales and
inspirations in what seemed like jargon-speak, spruiking phrases like
“appropriate collisions;” and “objective experience.” These
verbalisations of hoped-for expressive meaning were illustrated with
photographs to example the subtle concepts the firm worked with, or
so it appeared. It is always a difficult association to pull off, but
KB did well.
Bunker Archaeology
Adrian Skelton’s# collected images were shown with the comment
that they illustrate “how one can produce a narrative.”
Illustrations from Paul Verilio’s Bunker Archaeology were
used to introduce the relationship between form and landscape, where
“triggers and references are connected to meaning that changes
energy, emotional weight, with context and time.” Images of Martin
Lindsay’s empty buildings were spoken about as “an interaction of
context to which we ascribe meaning, emotional intent. Our feeling
gives the object a contemporary context.” Callum Morton’s HOTEL
was said to reveal “the physicality of what is, placed in an
Australian context, where the audience is engaged in a ghost-like
experience.” John Hacker’s work was promoted as illustrating “an
architectural object; an island context in which infinite space is
inserted.” Fabian Knecht’s work showed how framing and light can
transform nature, “making things architectural; re-framing
contexts; making interesting concepts;” Warwick Baker’s book on
the Balanglo Forest was referenced, and spoken about as presenting
“an event invested here, but not belonging; an emotional
landscape.”
Callum Morton's HOTEL
Isolation - Fabian Knecht
Fabian Knecht isolating
Myall Creek Massacre
Massacre sites
Queen and elder
Kim Bridgland
The subject was extended into aboriginal massacre sites, Myall Creek.
These horrors are “embodied in the history of our country.” The
two dollar coin showing the queen on one side, the aboriginal elder
on the other was used as an example to illustrate the bifurcation of
colonialism. One noted that KB looked something like the bearded
elder. Painter Daniel Boyd’s work was shown, illustrating how the
“simple transformation of images, their layering, can modify
messages and meanings.” A detail of a classical column in Berlin
with patched bullet holes was spoken about in this violent context of
cultural messaging. David Chipperfield’s new entrance to Berlin’s
museum island, Libeskin’s Jewish Museum, and Peter Eisenman’s
Holocaust Memorial were shown as examples of “truth telling”
interventions, drawing a similarity with these patches. KB showed
some of his own sculptural works, and spoke of their materiality. He
was interested in “the appropriated evolution of possessions; the
shadow of trauma; and so on and so forth.” One might have hoped for
more commitment and clarity in the statement: had KB gone over his
allotted time?
Libeskin's Jewish Museum, Berlin
Eisenman's Holocaust Memorial, Berlin
The speakers passed the baton: Aaron Roberts took over, introducing
“context, land, and the cultural gaze: how to make architectural
sites modifiers, bringing people into the landscape.” AR spoke of
the “physical manifestations of these qualities - the firm’s
models, site analyses, and drawings; the singularities.” He
explained that these elements allowed “a greater understanding of
the work, its singularity; its contradictory state – the fissure
between expectations and what architecture should be, and how it can
relate to values; experimentally, across boundaries as ‘landscape
portraits’.” These beginnings were “diagrams to capture the
essential quality of each project, the framework and inherent form:
the cultural object” - see: http://edition-office.com/archive/
where each project is submitted meticulously as:
- (A) BUILDING
- (B) MODEL
- (C) PLAN
- (D) SITE
- (E) DRAWING
- (F) TEXT
- (G) PARALLEL
AR moved on from his explanatory introduction to talk about a
project, noting that EO “was interested in the idea of terra
nullius”: indeed, EO has lots of ‘interests.’ This was the In
Absence project that had been undertaken in collaboration with
the artist Yhonnie Scarce who had an interest in yams, and had used
them as a cultural quotation in her work. AR spoke of the referencing
of aboriginal agriculture and industry, using these as an
inspiration. The eel traps,++ the shelters, and the smoking tree were
the stimulus for the pavilion. Here the screen went blank and HDMI
appeared: technology was not going to be kind tonight. The idea of
The Absence was to touch on “the known unknowns in history.”
One was reminded here of Donald Rumsfeld’s famous quote.* Ash
impregnated timbers had been used to frame spaces; “indigenous
elders and the community were engaged with the narrative –
agriculture and industry – to pass on knowledge.” In contrast to
the terra nullius concept, and the idea that aboriginals were merely
meandering nomads, it was emphasised that they did engage in these
organised activities. The pavilion was surrounded by a field of yams,
“decolonising the idea of the established garden.”
The Absence
The Absence interior
:compare Peter Zumthor's interior - Field Chapel
Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander War Memorial
The site
The speakers passed the baton again: KB took over, speaking more on
the pavilion, its four-metre diameter, (had AR forgotten this?),
“sized as a figure ‘8’ like the home to give the feeling of the
scale and dimensions of aboriginal housing, offering an ontological
moment in time, framed in ash, bringing the story to light.” KB did
not mention the matter of open height that contrasted with the sense
of shelter offered by the enclosed house. He moved on to speak about
the Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander War Memorial
project. Here EO
worked with the artist Daniel Boyd. It was “an unromantic plan to
make sure the figure of architecture remained fundamentally raw;
elemental.” The diagram was a circle, a centre and a line. The
ideas mentioned “interiority; to wrap up; a field of basalt, a
stone used for tools: the before and after colonisation difference.”
There was a cast bronze fireplace and a receptacle five metres deep.
This container was for sacred ceremonial items. KB noted that the
project had just been finished, “About a month ago,” adding that
“It had not been photographed.” The importance of the
‘architectural’ image appeared to be critical – see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2014/04/seeing-what-we-believe-idyllic-visions.html KB was effectively saying that this project had not yet been
cleverly, artfully, framed for public consumption and promotion, a
position that appeared to conflict with the raw intentions: this was
“a place for empathetic self-reflection with 10,000 mirrors. It was
not a didactic memorial.” From the inside, it had 10,000 windows,
allowing for “subjective thinking – how to connect with other
people.” 10,000 rays of sunshine create “a profound and
interesting space – raw: not photographed yet” - but we were
being shown photographs. What KB meant was that it had not been
transformed by the architectural camera. What might be the problem
with seeing things as they are, everyday? Why apologise twice? It was
as if architects rely on the ‘special’ photographic images to
indulge in their own outcomes, “Aren’t we clever!”, as if the
works might mystically hold more than they had put in or anticipated.
It seems a strange idea that an architect might have to rely on a
clever shot for some satisfaction. Was KB suggesting that one needed
to be told what and how to see this memorial that was open for
ceremonies: that the everyday viewing was insufficient?
The speakers passed the baton yet again; this was truly a planned
event: AR took over, speaking about the Hawthorne House,
(HH).^ He began with
the models he had spoken about previously, that “aim to capture the
essential qualities,” noting that the plan was “quite
diagrammatic.” It was indeed simple – a couple of empty
rectangles in a rectangle. The concept incorporated “the idea of
the island to create a context, a platform, for the house – a space
that denies the context of Melbourne.” AR explained that the intent
was to overcome the problem of neighbours and screening while
“celebrating the large gum tree.” It was “an opportunity to
deny context.” Was this just too easy? The project seemed to
include the notion of ‘island’ and ‘contradictoriness’
mentioned in the introduction. The concrete shroud gave “a new
calibration of the site, privacy with transparency.” Strangely, the
boundary fences were never seen as the ‘screens’ that they were.
From time to time, the neighbouring brick veneer residence could be
glimpsed, begging questions about the street and its presence. Was
the ‘denial’ idea a way to explain the complete ignoring of
context? Did the idea of ‘the island’ become the excuse for
self-centred interests, freeing the architects from any civic
obligation? The shroud was intended to be “encompassed in a sea of
green.” Here the giggling over technology began – the images
started to appear clipped: Apple! - but AR soldiered on.
Is this a tribute to Roy Grounds?
National Gallery of Victoria - Roy Grounds
Roy Grounds - Hill Street House (with tree)
Academy of Science, ANU - Roy Grounds
The separate glass enclosure “re-calibrated the outside of the
building.” The ceilings were of timber, “softer, warmer,” and
“normal living” items were shown – “a fire place; a bathroom;
a kitchen” - as though these ‘incidentals’ might be a bother, a
necessary distraction, taking the eye away from the “interest in
creating an off-form concrete texture using recycled boarding.” The
idea of upper enclosure was “embroynic,” positioning the building
as “an island,” (again), using “raw materials and craft in the
detailing.” The upper courtyards “opened up to the sky and the
tree canopy,” and let in “an incredible amount of light,”
(sounds like Trump!), while allowing one “not to be observed, or to
be the observer.” No mention was made of ventilation, or that this
strategy used the idea of the courtyard house. Why did new words have
to be used to describe this ‘invention.’
The site
Is this the same tree? - compare the image above.
The speakers passed the baton once more; the change was almost
becoming tedious, as if there was some childish necessity to share
equally - “My turn; you’ve had enough!” KB took over again,
referring to the introduction, trying to tie things together –
telling how the HH fabricates “the interior zone, from boundary to
boundary, defining space and context,” again emphasising “the
island idea.” It was as though he was summing up; or did AR miss
some points once more? Then KB spoke about the Point Lonsdale
House, (LH).
Again, the concept was an island, “a whole island,” creating “a
totemic object” from the inspiration of the old fibro house. Here
the essence was “the coming together, the house as a fulcrum.”
The iconic model was shown as a linked series of pyramidal masses in
stone, like a key in stone, a diagrammatic massing that turned out to
be the schematic plan form, perhaps illustrating ‘its singularity,
its essence.’
Point Lonsdale House
The site
The idea was “one house with separate zones: car;
sleep/bath/toilet; live/dine/kitchen; sleep/ensuite; interspersed
with courtyards and decks.” One might have called it a ‘spinal’
plan with spaces linked by a core corridor along one edge: but it was
explained as “a social fulcrum that celebrated the vulnerable;
accommodating long summer holidays, being able to be fully opened up
for the sea breezes.” One wondered if the HH might not have wanted
to open up too. The entry was “ubiquitous, in the shadow of the
garage.” The idea was that of “an island,” (again), “boundaries
with planting; a slight cantilever gave a floating feel.” The work
“engaged thresholds, an important matter in all EO’s projects.”
KB said that he liked the “clarity of the architecture; the
informality of context; the pristine sharp edges and coarse
materials; the oiled timbers.” These were to go grey outside;
blackbutt was used internally to give a “monolithic, beautifully
crisp, crafted finish.” The living space could be enlarged.
One was surprised by the naked interior – see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2019/02/crofting-visions-challenge-of-meaning.html “Light brought the house to life, taking spaces right up to the
edges; there was privacy even with the front door open.” There were
“outdoor rooms.” The project was “a binary when compared to the
HH.” The HH “had no walls and a concrete shroud; a disconnect
with concrete: the LH was a clearly defined interior, possibly more
relevant to Queensland.”^ The bathroom had been “prioritised”
with a large skylight giving “a sense of verticality; to remove
context and to enjoy clouds and sunshine – the important connect to
daylight: highlighting materiality.” A glimpse of the neighbour
could be seen, but no context was ever shown for this residence, or
the previous HH either. This seems to be cleverly explained, or
excused, as self-conscious, intended, intellectual ‘denial’ - but
the real everyday experience cannot be removed. Why is it ignored by
architects who are apparently so concerned about ‘cultural
experience’? One has to be wary about being selectively
‘culturally’ interested in an exclusive manner that evades the
present and its presence.
KB finished simply in the traditional storyteller’s manner: “This
is the end of the talk.” One wondered: was the time shared equally?
The thought seemed childish.
There were a couple of questions referring to things “uncanny;
recalculating; experience; duality; post-colonial; gaze;
storytelling; fissures; raw materiality; contemporary Australian
context” - “the cacophony of perspectives we bring: the
re-calibrations of self.” These seemed to be repetitions of themes
previously expressed; perhaps expansions on these ideas?
The evening was strange. The work was intriguing, beautifully
considered and crafted as though it might have been inspired by Carlo
Scarpa. The speakers were obviously sensitive, caring and committed
architects; thankfully they lacked raw, rude arrogance: but something
annoying lingered. The repeated words concerning ‘islands,’
isolation, seemed to define the concern. Was this work merely an
exercise in iconic forms, the intellectual indulgence in theory and
ideas, or was it shaping models for city living? What might a street
full of HHs look like? Surely everything that shaped this place had
been addressed in the terrace house and the courtyard house models?
The HH ‘island’ seemed too self-centred, self-interested,
inconsiderate, like the LH island. How many open living places can be
placed together successfully and be enjoyed by all?
On reflection it appeared that this work was ‘island’ work –
see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2019/03/architectures-two-remote-islands-too.html - special, one-off pieces standing like unique
cerebral exercises for others to ‘experience’ and learn from -
perhaps, to use the EO jargon, “to re-calibrate experience and
self”: but what does this mean? What does one ‘re-calibrate,’
from what, to what, and how? One assumes this might be some subtle,
poetic, involuntary process, but who knows? This is the fudged
authority of jargon – it is powerful and pushy, bullying, without
saying anything in particular at all. This ‘icon-making’ stance
is not wholly negative or unproductive, but one must try to put ideas
into simple, ordinary English, even very complex matters, if the
mysteries of words and images are not to engulf, to bluff ordinary
understanding. How might one explain ‘materiality’ etc. to the
man in the bar; to mother; without being considered a pompous wanker?
The phrase “I am interested in . . .” that was repeated
throughout the evening seemed to suggest that the work was based on
private, personal preferences; interests that one can indulge in
while excluding everyone else who might have other interests and
preferences, by “our denial,” and are placed in the position of
the outside observers asked to appraise and praise. Expecting your
approach to be transformative, to ‘re-calibrate other’s
experience,’ appears a little grandiose, pompous. If everyone held
this attitude, the city and experience would be totally chaotic.
Ironically, the approach relies on its ‘singualrity’ for its
relevance, relying on others not to be the same. Might the successful
“re-calibration of experience and self” be the death knell of
this strategy, where everyone ignores everyone else?
Yet one is drawn to the EO work in spite of the questions it raises.
How was water managed on the Lonsdale House? No gutters?^ What happens to water falling into the HH? Everyone
knows what water can do. Mouldings and flashings are a part of every
cathedral and shack; overhangs, like recesses, are important too, as are downpipes - see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2013/11/bond-downpipes.html These features have not been developed for no reason at all; rather
they have been adapted, on a range of scales, as decoration, a
subject that we still have to re-learn in architecture. One can
indulge in the precise beauty of fine edges (EO) but, in one way,
this becomes an excuse for having no decoration. The EO seems to be
creative with excuses.
We no longer know how or what to decorate; ironically, tattoos
thrive. There appears to be no hesitation with body decorations. Are
people more prepared to accept tradition in this art form? Maybe
architecture has to turn to its traditions to know what to do? One
can point out the astonishing success of classical architecture over
the centuries. Berlin is careful to repair it. How might our naked
forms trend in history? Sullivan always saw these stark changes as a
cleansing step to make way for a new architecture and a new,
inspirational, living decoration. We have not yet completed this
transformation. There is much more to do than to eulogise on space,
forms, materials, (raw and otherwise), and boundaries and edges,
(fine and precisely complex). Is EO relying on the ‘bullet-hole
patching’ approach for meaning rather than any self-conscious
enrichment with decoration?+
Patched bullet holes, Brandenburg Gate
The EO work was refreshingly pure and intellectually thorough,
decisive. It was a pleasure to see, but one has to say that there is
more: more to understand about materials and time; and tradition and
decoration – and community.
Melbourne
One has to remember that ‘no man is an island.’ It might be
considered to be a sad, cliché dictum, but it is so. One might
retreat to an island for contemplation and reverie, but life
incorporates more: an involvement within a complexity of cooperative
otherness. We need to consider community, town and city life and its
form, rather than bury ourselves separately into island interests,
while hoping to re-calibrate the world. The danger is that the island
will become a personal retreat, a protective shroud, rather than
being seen as a source of wisdom, of renewal. This is also the
problem with jargon words. We cannot communicate when private
interests are expressed in private concepts, no matter how personally
deep these commitments might be felt or believed. We need
complexities to be revealed in the ordinary way, in the everyday
world, because it is too easy to promote something to look
meaningfully complex in a cloud of confusion. Modern art suffers from
this indulgent approach; indeed, it relies on its latent threat that
highlights the observer’s ‘inadequacies’ if the work is
considered to be obscure: “It’s your fault if you cannot
understand.”
The search for clarity will not only make matters comprehensible for
all, but will also be of critical assistance to those promoting the
ideas: the theories will be tested, challenged, rather than being carefully shielded from doubt. Fuzzy expressions
can only too easily pretend to be otherwise, and encourage and
promote a false enthusiasm, when they remain just hazy uncertainties
for all. One should not have to construct some system of tolerant
belief or disbelief, or invent a shrewd interpretation of any
circumstance in order to pretend to comprehend anything, or to
eulogise a strategy.
Finally, one can say that there remains a future in the EO approach,
but it must eventually remove itself from the island – even though
it might be inspired by Fabian Knecht’s work that separates, isolates, minute
portions of the world “for interest’s sake.” We need an
architecture that is both rich, rooted in meaning, and communal –
everyday architecture; see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2011/05/everyday-architecture.html Promoting an island of
self-interest is the modern problem of individualism – the making
of ‘creative’ heroes. We need to make and support communities,
and celebrate this inclusion because we are a part of it, everyday,
in every way – we need to get better and better,## not more and
more distant, in denial, or self-consciously discordant.
THE INVITATION & THE PRELUDE
Lecture Series #3:
Kim Bridgland, Edition Office, Melbourne
16th May 2019
Kim Bridgland is a
founding director at the award-winning Edition Office, an
architecture studio based in Melbourne. Kim is also a practising
artist who has exhibited his work both nationally and
internationally. He gained a Master of Architecture at RMIT
University (with distinction) and a Bachelor of Architecture at the
University of Newcastle (honours).
Kim’s practice involves the interrogation of personal and cultural histories that are expanded or destabilised through the creation of physical modifiers, condition objects and temporal mourning sites. His works utilise materials and techniques that are empty of overt signification and as such they are manifested as wholly new narrative vehicles.
Kim’s practice involves the interrogation of personal and cultural histories that are expanded or destabilised through the creation of physical modifiers, condition objects and temporal mourning sites. His works utilise materials and techniques that are empty of overt signification and as such they are manifested as wholly new narrative vehicles.
Through the
execution of its built work and research, the practice is creating an
ongoing series of figures, relics, stories and relationships; all
continuing a greater investigation into material & spatial
practice.
Edition Office strive to constantly experiment with techniques and materials to uncover new processes or to re-articulate the old.
Edition Office strive to constantly experiment with techniques and materials to uncover new processes or to re-articulate the old.
This promotional
material appeared to be confusing ‘bolshy blurb.’ It was decided
to learn more about KB, so kimbridgland.com/ was opened: STOP!!
kim bridgland
Exhibition of new
work Half Life, showing at Seventh Gallery, Fitzroy
seventhgallery.org. VYAG_PROCESS_DEC2nd 2013. Monday 2 December 2013
– 6:30pm ...
Malicious
Content
We've blocked a website that
may contain Malicious Content. The http://kimbridgland.com
site you've been blocked from visiting may contain viruses, trojans
or spyware that can be harmful to your devices.
Did
you know that Telstra Broadband Protect lets you set what times that
your kids can go online in the home, including Homework Time so that
you can restrict social networking and gaming while they study? Find
out more
Report
this website as safe
To
check your settings, log in to My
Account. Then select your broadband plan, Your Add-ons, and
finally Telstra Broadband Protect.
Oh!, the next one,
perhaps:
about kim bridgland
Kim's practice
involves the interrogation of personal and cultural histories that
are expanded or destabilised through the creation of physical
modifiers, condition ...
Malicious
Content . . . .
the same!! malicious
content?
SHUCKS! MALICIOUS!
Why not try:
Edition Office is
Kim Bridgland (Director), Aaron Roberts (Director), Molly
Hibberd
, Jonathan Brener,
Laura Tindall, Karl Buck, Jane Roberts, David Carroll, Erin
...</span></div></div><!--EndFragment--
!--EndFragment-->
Edition Office is an
architecture studio based in Melbourne, Australia. Through the
execution of its built work and research, the practice is creating an
ongoing series of figures, relics, stories and relationships; all
continuing a greater investigation into material & spatial
practice. Edition Office strive to constantly experiment with
techniques and materials to uncover new processes or to re-articulate
the old. Their work is entirely dissonant, to themselves, to their
clients, to their sites and landscapes. Their work is entirely
sympathetic, to themselves, to their clients, to their sites and
landscapes. They celebrate grit and raw materiality. They celebrate
knowledge and care. Edition Office engage with their work as a long
form negotiation between a series of modifiers (people/place) and
conditioning objects (buildings/relics). They design houses and
buildings that exist within the layered realms of their environment,
their place. These built projects act as an interface between a place
and its occupier and set up an ongoing relationship of colliding
adjacencies, where the latent histories of each party are bled into
the next. Edition Office is Kim Bridgland (Director), Aaron Roberts
(Director), Molly Hibberd, Jonathan Brener, Laura Tindall, Karl Buck,
Jane Roberts, David Carroll, Erin Watson, Alex Roome.
Recent awards : 2018
Dulux Study Tour, Victorian Architecture Awards 2018 shortlist, Small
Project Architecture, Victorian Architecture Awards 2017, Residential
Houses New Award,Houses Awards 2017, New House Over 200M2 Award,
Houses Awards 2017, Sustainability Award, Houses Awards 2017,
Emerging Practice Commendation, Thinkbrick Awards 2017, Horbury Hunt
Residential Award Finalist, Architeam Awards 2016, Residential New
Award, Architeam Awards 2016, Architeam Medal Winner
LEVEL 4 105 VICTORIA
STREET
FITZROY VIC 3065
INSTAGRAM
TWITTER
**
NOTE
One wonders if Aaron
Roberts became jealous, and insisted on having a role in the talk
that was promoted only as Kim Bridgland.
THE INTERVIEW
KB and AR
interviewed by Nick Smith – see:
https://milieuproperty.com.au/melbourne-milieu/sites-and-modifiers-with-edition-office
#
The Abedian School
of Architecture might think about asking its speakers to provide a
reference/synopsis sheet for their talks. Speakers often make
references and raise issues that are important: why else talk? Even
with one taking copious, progressive, real-time notes of the talks,
these names and ideas sometimes are difficult to interpret in the
continuing gush of the verbalisations, making it hard for anyone to
follow the individuals and issues up. This idea is more important
than ever, given that the original video recording and downloading of
the talks has stopped. Surely the aim of any talk is to encourage
further research, reading and reverie? Names are not always easy to
spell. Frequently one finds that the phonetic spelling can be
misleading. It might appear tedious, or boringly scholarly, but the
note-taking does allow one to review what has been said in another
timescale and context. The repetition of ideas and words is exposed,
as are the gaps in the logic, or the questions on the concepts; and
the ideas and publications that can extend one’s involvement are
identified. This further engagement seems to be the aim of the CPD
programme, but alas, it appears that attendance is enough to get a
couple of points – just turn up and go home; done! “What else is
there to do to reach 10/10?” is the next question and quest. The
essence of any CPD programme must be in the commitment it can
engender in the profession. The concentration on points, quantity
rather than quality, drives a cynicism that makes the idea a poor
joke on itself.
Donald Rumsfeld’s quote:
It is easier to
get into something than to get out of it. There are known knowns;
there are things we know we know. We also know there are known
unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not
know. But there are also unknown unknowns — the ones we don't know
we don't know.
^
The reference to
Queensland is interesting. This appears to relate only to the sense
of open space – interiors opening out to decks, or, in Queensland,
verandahs. Is this model appropriate for the southern climes? One
matter that contrasts with Queensland practice is the roofing
details. South of the Queensland border, roofers seem to know nothing
about neatly scribing the ridge and hip flashings into the
corrugations. The lack of this detail grates on the northern eye, as
does the lack of any roofing projection and gutter. Just what happens
to water running over this house? One always has to consider facts,
the implications of the real world, when dreaming about ‘precise,
sharp’ edges and other preferred, aesthetic visions.
The recent death of
I.M.Pei has brought his work back into consideration. His work in
China did attempt to use decoration, but he admitted that it was not
his best work. It is not as easy to decorate as we might think. Pei’s
museum in Qatar was an attempt to touch on the cultural imagery of
Islamic architecture, and likewise, can be said to not be his best
work. We do seem to struggle to structure meaning into architectural
forms and images, preferring, so it appears, to rely on the mystique
of naked nothingness to materialise our quoted mysteries. Is this
what makes architectural photography so critical today? Do
photographs pattern our perceptions, shape voids into perhaps
meanings so vague and evasive that they are likened to the most
obscure of deep and meaningful mysteries? - see: seeing as . . .
##
General. The application of his mantra-like conscious autosuggestion, "Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better" (French: Tous les jours à tous points de vue je vais de mieux en mieux) is called Couéism or the Coué method.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89mile_Cou%C3%A9
MORE PROJECTS
NOTE
STREET VIEW
The addresses of these projects are still being researched in order to see what Edition Office does not want to illustrate or talk about, other than to formally deny context as an intellectual stand: see -
^
24 February 2020
see: https://voussoirs.blogspot.com/2020/02/the-hawthorne-house-context-place-street.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.