Radical Architectural Represenation

comparision

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Radical Architectural Represenation

  1. 2 of these (the radical) are people, the other one is a company that puts on a competition. If this was labelled correctly, you’d be comparing the two radical guys, to some random kid. Which isn’t a fair, useful or productive comparison at all.

    Similarly, this post is an example of exactly what you’re supposedly criticizing: bad representation, except this is bad criticizing. In response to this, I should post an excerpt from Learning from Las Vegas, Junkspace, and then this post. The first two being good and the last being bad forms of criticism…unless of course you think the last is also radical which in that case, never mind, cause it sure isn’t.

    Like

  2. This triptych is simply suggesting that the current stream of “radical representations” of “innovative” architecture which everyone seems to think is something new is in fact not. It is in fact a continuation of a vein of aesthetics that has been around for a while. This is a visual critique of what we consider to be radical and innovative.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s