Hi

"Christopher K. Egan" skrev i en meddelelse
om...
"Syd Mead" wrote in message
news:fhZcb.6374$Rd4.3448@fed1read07...


(big snips)


Don, (a draftsman/designer in alt.architecture) began calling Per "a true
visionary" etc.
It all went downhill from there.


.......................

For the record...I like Don.

As for his judgement regarding our dear friend Pers....

I will only say.....


I like Don.

Don likes the rebel in Pers....Don likes and encourages the guy who
has a passion and follows it.

I think Don cares less about the quality of Per's idea in this case
than the passion of Per the idealist.

I accept Don's attitude....more than Per's ideas.

But I also like Per. ...more than I like his ideas.

Christopher

Thank's for the nice words.
I just wonder how many of groups members who realise if it is easy or difficult
, to build from scratch clearing a new road.
Esp. when the last thing you want to do, is to build from scratch as if you pick
a brick your lead is done , and why pick a new road when you anyway will build
from bricks.
Ok , you then can decide that this new road must be projected with computers, so
after you spend your time not just being a user, but a super user and
application develober , then you are sure you don't just use the old method in
new clotches , ------ what the hell is then all these bricks laying around, when
the last thing you wanted to do, was to continue out of the Lego-Mind road .
Right then you get glad, as people with hands-on experience and knowing the
weight of the materials and the actural trouble with these must be the right
direction, ------ but then why is it the boxwork seem so damn'ed square , when
technology let you form and create just as you form, ------- why must one wall
have the weight of 500 ton, to hold millimeter thin sheets in the air ; is all
this hount for high-tech and fancy , just an attitude ?
Now I don't know if you fully understand when I say, that from mid 90' and even
before, the claim to visionary artists, been to be master of high-tech ; know
and master the software aswell as software , as "we want somthing new"
---------- Problem is, that even millions spended and just as much cluless
writing , all that came out of this hount for an image , is the sentense that
follow the claim "we want somthing new and fantastic high-tech " acturly the
next claim is ; " But the new thing we ask, must be somthing we already know".
Now this already fit with the idear that "the new" must be somthing
revolusionary , ------ except a few details. First it must not mean a revolution
and secondly it must not question the emporor. "The new" must not be so
difficult that the old architcts lose their posision and it must be so easy that
the same ones can lecture . You se "the new" and exiting options must not prove
better than a brick and it must work as how we laied bricks for thousands of
years , as if not it is not "new" , right ?
Beside when steel been cut and assembled with rivets ,bolts and welding for
decades, a "new" thing must ofcaurse be as rigid as alway's , as what is more
important than just getting a bright new Vision that bring new jobs is, that it
in not to be seen as somthing that question the settled way, --------- "we want
somthing new and fancy, but it must not look as being better than the old scrap,
and it must not challance our good friends".

The fight against the advanced high-tech tools I been bringing, have most often
not been a fight based on technical facts, ------- but one thing I learned in
these discussions is, that nomatter my self critic and systematic following the
few safe tracks I document with true knowleage about what I speak, and within I
work, ---------- You my friend can only understand the image you already want
to se. No one want "the new" , as this mean that a self thought guy, will
challance the gains and the social inviroment , -------- the emporors clotches
is not missing they just carry visual stealth and the thief alway's needed a bad
exchouse , a bad exchouse allow any academic to steal whatever , as long as the
rest of the crowd back up the bad exchouse, ------- just wait and se, social
harasment within the architectural world is not just about bullying , but I made
it a bit more difficult by publishing my works on the web.

Let me point to an old example ; I filed in to a contest and as you proberly
will know, I spended some halve of the short written presentation , to point out
that this was about new building methods and a direct link production method,
explained with good drawings and calculated in terms of cost pr.sq. meter build
, I recived the jury's papers that on first page wrote ; " not one single of
the 47 suggestions, did even scratch the surface or point to the obvious options
connecting the computer drawing with the actural production of the building
element" ---------- as so it continued.
Now please ansver me, if somthing is rotten in the state where the architects
display Liebskinds suggestion about a wtc rebuild ?

Please tell me if what you tell the students is not just one big lie.

You want another example , or can anyone already tell where all the nice
buildings that could have been , has gone.

P.C.