Against Design

[Loddfafner]

I am not sure why someone thought it fit to invite me to this group as, while I love architecture prior to about 1500 and occasionally admire post-postmodern structures, I see "design" as a euphemism for dreary architecture. I have worked in buildings whose designs might have made sense in a mock-up, but were impractical and triple-paper-bag-ugly in practice to the point that I would curse the architects daily, arguing that they should be locked up in the buildings they "designed". if I could step into a time machine and kill one man, it would be le Corbusier.

My tolerance for some of the more acrobatic recent architecture comes out of a sense of relief that architects might have finally moved beyond mere functionalism and might be realizing that mass entertainment is itself a function worth fulfilling.

[Aemma]

I am not sure why someone thought it fit to invite me to this group as, while I love architecture prior to about 1500 and occasionally admire post-postmodern structures, I see "design" as a euphemism for dreary architecture. I have worked in buildings whose designs might have made sense in a mock-up, but were impractical and triple-paper-bag-ugly in practice to the point that I would curse the architects daily, arguing that they should be locked up in the buildings they "designed". if I could step into a time machine and kill one man, it would be le Corbusier.

My tolerance for some of the more acrobatic recent architecture comes out of a sense of relief that architects might have finally moved beyond mere functionalism and might be realizing that mass entertainment is itself a function worth fulfilling.

Well perhaps some of us thought you'd have something of significance to add to the discussion. And true to form (if you'll pardon the expression), you didn't disappoint.

[anonymaus]

As furniture lovers are not required to shop at IKEA, so are lovers of architecture not bound to love Le Corbusier.

[Bloodeagle]

My tolerance for some of the more acrobatic recent architecture comes out of a sense of relief that architects might have finally moved beyond mere functionalism and might be realizing that mass entertainment is itself a function worth fulfilling.

The Winchester House of San Jose, California comes to mind when I think of a house built with out the help of a trained architect. The house does confuse and entertains 1000's of visitors every year.

The Winchester Mystery House is a well-known California mansion that was under construction continuously for 38 years, and is reported to be haunted. It once was the personal residence of Sarah Winchester, the widow of gun magnate William Wirt Winchester, but is now a tourist attraction. Under Winchester's day-to-day guidance, its "from-the-ground-up" construction proceeded around-the-clock, without interruption, from 1884 until her death on September 5, 1922, at which time work immediately ceased.[2] The cost for such constant building has been estimated at about US $5.5 million[3] (if paid in 1922, this would be equivalent to over $71 million in 2010).[4]

The mansion is renowned for its size and utter lack of any master building plan. According to popular belief, Winchester thought the house was haunted by the ghosts of individuals killed by Winchester rifles, and that only continuous construction would appease them. It is located at 525 South Winchester Blvd. in San Jose, California

[Aemma]

For the record, there are aspects of "design" that bother me as well, mostly on the more macro plane better known as "urban planning." But in the main, and in general terms, I don't find the necessary and sufficient creativity component required of Design per se to be at all objectionable.

[Eldritch]

The Winchester House of San Jose, California comes to mind when I think of a house built with out the help of a trained architect. The house does confuse and entertains 1000's of visitors every year.

I must admit to having fantasized about living in the place. I am fascinated by labyrinthine structures, secret passageways etc.

while I love architecture prior to about 1500 and occasionally admire post-postmodern structures, I see "design" as a euphemism for dreary architecture.

Well, architecture prior to 1500 is architecture too.

And by "design" I mean not buildings, but rather a wide variety of objects typically found inside them.

[Loddfafner]

And by "design" I mean not buildings, but rather a wide variety of objects typically found inside them.

"Design" as a term for interior furnishings evokes for me the taste of an Ikea showroom. I guess design as you are defining it could include the varnished wood and glass cabinets cluttered with biological remnants in a nineteenth century natural history museum but that is not the first thing that the term brings to mind.

[Aemma]

Ok so spill the beans now, Lodd. What is it about le Corbusier and his impact on post-war urban planning trends that has got you seeing red enough to want to kill him in your time machine? I'm very very curious.

[Loddfafner]

Ok so spill the beans now, Lodd. What is it about le Corbusier and his impact on post-war urban planning trends that has got you seeing red enough to want to kill him in your time machine? I'm very very curious.

Projects and panelaks are ugly, they displace any sense of community, and they replace real neighborhoods.

[Fortis in Arduis]

'Design' as you refer to it, began with mass-production and with it ended the local artisan tradition.

The reaction against this was the Arts & Crafts Movement; before that, design was more localised and innovative.

Yet, who could discount the Empire Style of the White House, or the style of John Nash or Brunswick Square, Brighton?



Buildings of that period were built at the peak of empire, at the point where finance still only just remained in the service of aesthetic and cultural sensibilities.

I shall say no more, except that mass production largely destroyed the artisan tradition. Norway, Greece, Southern ltaly and other outer European countries remained largely unscathed and the Art Deco/Nouveau/Arts and Crafts movement was a reaction/compromise against/with mass-production and its degeneracy.

In Victorian England the same tacky 'wild west saloon' style mirrored the American style of the same period. Over-embellished and derivative, it quickly became the norm; the modern day equivalent of IKEA.

Local artisanry was replaced by mass-production and designs popularised by catalogues.

This was the birth of mass production and mass style, but since then there have been efforts to innovate, and now, the best of 20th Century design commands much respect and a high price amongst the discerning few.