Originally Posted by
Alan Caro
Edwin Santos,
I agree completely with the statement that the widest possible expression in architecture is desirable and interesting. There is certainly scope for architecture as pure art, that it's not mandatory to be perfectly practical, nor that it should be appreciated by everyone.
Two architect's whose work I don't always admire in every aspect: Frank Gehry, who I've met, and Zaha Hadid, who I knew as a student in the architecture school I attended, have both created work of intriguing depth and artistry, but also others of, in my view, troubling architectural iconoclasm characteristic of deconstructivism that I would associate with that level level of creative ego. The necessity of believing in one's personal aesthetic- and subverting the past in order to innovate, is to some degree a professional requirement of which Frank Lloyd Wright was the all-time master.
Yes, the loss of I.M. Pei and Cesar Pelli are both saddening as was the too-early loss of Zaha Hadid in 2016.
Alan
Alan, I love it when you bring your expert advice into threads like this. I always learn things. Thank you!
Personally, I'm way too unsophisticated to appreciate Hadid and Gehry. I just looked up both of them. To my eyes, that is some seriously unappealing architecture. It almost looks like they designed it that way just to prove they were smart enough to actually construct a building that complex. And they did! The skill it took to design and build those shapes is astonishing.
Fred
Last edited by Frederick Skelly; 07-24-2019 at 10:08 PM.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing."
“If you want to know what a man's like, take a good look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.”