Session 10 - 04.12.09 U.S.A by John Dos Passos

So my thoughts on U.S.A...

That’s more like it! Following last weeks cheese fest that was The Fountainhead, it’s nice to get back to a good old fashioned, just telling it like it is, no fancy trimmings, no nice endings, book showing the tragedy of success.

The mini biographies within U.S.A are insightful glimpses into the lives of some of the most famous individuals from the turn of the century. The way Henry Ford, after helping create the world of the automobile, chooses in the end to hide away from it all. He spent the money he earned from manufacturing a world of motor cars, to build a world where the cars didn’t exist. He rebuilt his childhood farm, he praised the obsolete models of transport he himself had made obsolete and he moved roads away from buildings he owned. Why would he do this? Had he seen the tragedy of his life’s work, the pollution and tarmac that was covering everything in its path? Or had he simply had enough of it all, grown sick of the monster of the motor run world he had helped to create.

Do architects follow the same kind of pattern? I know that after three and a half years of designing Sainsbury’s car parks and clad sheds I am already sick of the sight of supermarkets, to point where I will do anything but go and shop in them.

Session 9 - 27.11.09 The Fountainhead

So my thoughts on The Fountainhead...

Film, as a media, is a lot harder to explore than a book, or any written media. With books authors’ say, most of the time, as they please. The thing with film is it has to be coated in Hollywood cheesiness and the token traditional fairytale ending. In the film, Roark ends up the winner, he gets the girl, he gets the success, he gets the fame, he gets the glory, he gets the money and he gets to build his big job without anyone getting in the way of his design. The “Hollywood” ending is never the case, the “machine” would never allow it, and no one man can have that much power without consequences. In real life Roark would have been thrown in jail for blowing up that building, not honoured.

The scary thought is, is this how architects are seen to be? No wonder we don’t get much respect from other sin the building industry, do people see us as ego maniacs, self obsessing with our designs and that we spit our dummy out when we don’t get our own way?

Granted a film about an architect sitting around all day drawing and taking crap from all directions would be a truly boring film.

Session 8 - 20.11.09 All that's solid melts into air

With a day to spare I can write my blog...

So my thoughts on "All that's solid melts into air"...

It is clear that the story of Faust is still very apt today. The developer phase of the story can be seen all around, we as humans are constantly building and destroying our way through time, we can’t afford to slow down or stop building as it is the basis for our livelihoods in the construction industry, it is the basis on which the economy of nations continue to grow, the only reason for the growth of our world is for wealth and money, destroying anything, including nature, that gets in our way, just when will the tragic end to our development/society occur? Looking back in time we can see the patterns of great civilisations that have grown and grown only to destroy themselves, for example the city of Babylon. A great modern example of the tragedy of development is that of Dubai. Like the devil in the story of Faust the reason behind the development of this area is purely for the purpose of money and wealth. The projects being constructed are not being built for good but for greed. The story of the developer in Faust can't afford to slow down, nor has Dubai over the last few years.

We as architecture students can relate to the problems faced in the first phase of the story, “the dreamer”, withdrawn from the outside world, feeling there are bigger challenges, on our road to our ultimate goals we have to do the bad, the car park layouts, the many hours of study, we have already turned to the devil for knowledge, in our case this devil is the machine.

Session 7 - 13.11.09 Le Corbusier & Professor Silenus

So my thoughts on Professor Silenus...

As I was laying in bed last night, unable to sleep due to the most random thoughts running through my mind and worries with regards to work/university work, I realised that this character is a great representation of, not only the most well known architect of the time Le Corbusier, but architects and students of architecture in general.

I think in his book Evelyn Waugh creates the prefect stereotypical architect in Professor Silenus. I think that these traits are still relevant today. His classic architect traits and how these compare to the current crop of architect and architect wannabes;

• Hatred for humans, their interference in his work Professor Silenus states that the prefect building is a factory, it is not possible for domestic architecture to be beautiful. Occupants of buildings will always want to change and alter pieces of architecture. The problem with a great piece of architecture is, unlike a painting that will never change in appearance, never get bigger, never be repainted in different colours, it will enviably be changed to suit a future generations need.
  I have been working on a scheme in the office recently for a mixed use development, all I seem to do for days and days on end was alter our design to suit the various needs of the number of occupiers, looking at the final design now it has completely changed from the initial design. I can definitely relate to Silenus's annoyance with human intervention.
• Eccentric behaviour
  "He removes a biscuit from his pocket and begins to munch...two hours later he had not moved...his empty jaw champed rhythmically" Definitely a few sandwiches short of a picnic. Within my office it is obvious who the architects are, we have one who looks like Sideshow Bob from the Simpsons, the other architects are the ones who have random conversations with the photocopies and are constantly shaking their computer screens. The amount of times I have found myself staring blankly at the computer screen whilst working, lost in my thoughts, is a bit weird looking back now. But I think you can't be an architect without being a bit insane, the amount of pressure and annoying clients is enough to send anyone a bit nutty.
• The pain of building regulations and standards
  Professor Silenus moans in the piece about the annoyance of having to install a staircase. The amount of times we have had to redraw designs to accommodate fire escape stairs and to allow for disabled access.
• Never happy with the final design
  "I hate and detest every bit of it" I'm pretty sure very few architects have completed a build and been 100% happy with the final result. The amount of times I have been to site to see completed builds only to find corners have been cut or the contractor has failed to finish off details as we have designed them. Plus all the redraws you have to make during the design process to suit client needs you kind of get sick of the sight of the building come completion.
• Insomnia
  Professor Silenus doesn't sleep, he just rests and thinks. I don't think I know one student of architecture who gets a good night sleep whilst studying.

Looking at this character it does make one wonder why I'm trying to become one of these architects, oh yeah that's right I'm slightly mad. Silly me...

Session 6 - 06.11.09 The machine and Archigram

So my thoughts on Archigram...

(As scribbled down on the train back home)

Plug-in-City is a mega-structure with no buildings, just a massive framework into which dwellings in the form of cells or standardised components could be slotted. The machine had taken over and people were the raw material being processed, the difference being that people are meant to enjoy the experience.

After the session today and looking at Archigram's designs it is quite scary to me just how close we could be to actually living in an Archigram design. I mean lets look at the world we live in, we have no need for shops, we have Amazon and Tesco's delivery, no need to talk to each other anymore, we are increasingly using texting and social networking sites (I will discuss this a bit more later), we don't need to go to the gym or for a run anymore, we have Wii Fit. Recently at work, as well as the work becoming more and more a case of copy and paste, I have noticed that more and more my boss emails me what work I need to do rather than coming to see me, I do all my work on a computer, look up information online, do I actually need to be at the office? No, not really. I laughed at the piece in week 1 on Zaha's office, how her employees are plugged into a machine, but the scary thought is that we all might not be far off working like that.

So my thoughts on the "Machine"...

I agree with Paul regarding doctors acting as mechanics. Fine by me, I'd quite like to lose the lecture every time I go to the doctors. Yes, I probably do drink more units than I should be, eat too much salt and don't exercise or look after myself as well as I should. But I do pay my taxes, I "conform" to the rules of the machine, so surely I should be entitled to a new liver or any other new part I might need off the NHS every now and again!

Due to advances in technology we are increasing the control the machine has. Facebook, much like windows 7, is the new software upgrade for the machine. Facebook, as well as any other social site, is a monitoring and controlling piece of software that is feeding the machine. People are compelled to tell it, amongst other things, how they are, what they are fans of, where they've been, who they were with...and don't think just because you haven't conformed and created a profile it doesn't know about you. You'll be in there, in someone’s photos, in someone’s comments, whether you like it or not. We have no choice but to comply, all hail the Machine!

Session 5 - 30.10.09 Las Vegas

So my thoughts on Las Vegas...

Firstly, I found both pieces of writing this week, Wolfe and Hickey, very enjoyable to read and definately did not hurt my head as much as last weeks piece.

This week I choose to write my own 'Paul style' x number of points list as I read Wolfe's piece, so here it is...

My 5 points on Vegas;

1. Signs as architecture - The triumph of adverting.

Ducks and decorated sheds, I remeber this from my theory lectures at degree level, my theory tutor had a soft spot for Vegas too actually, maybe this is a necessaity in becoming one?Hmm

"Ducks" are buildings whose very shape are meant to portend the activity carried on within.

"Decorated sheds" are fairly unexciting structures (hotels, restaurants, casinos, gas stations, etc.) where large-scale decorations, either as text (e.g., "McDonalds") or as obvious symbols (e.g. the Mcdonald's golden arches) tell the quickly-moving passerby what's within.

2. Original casino's built on ganster-financing.

A trend repeated in the future with Dubai

3. Las Vegas v. Monte Carlo

Vegas never quite matched Monte Carlo, it evolved into its own individual image. Is it now Las Vegas v. Dudai?

4. "Don't make me go to bed attitude"

Vegas is America's adult playground, anything and everything seems to go in Vegas, sex, gamlbling and drugs.

5. The darkside to Vegas

Near the end of Wolfe's piece he shows the extent to which over exposure to Vegas has a negative impact on civilisation.

My personnal favourite bit within both the piece's has to be Hickey's comparison with Vegas to the America as a whole. The point that "Vegas cheats you fair, the payoffs are posted and the odds easily calculatable", I think this is still apt today, wouldn't the world be so much better off if this was the case in everyday life... you'd still be screwed over by the goverment, your employers, but at least you'll understand why...

Session 4 - 23.10.09 Henri Lefebvre's 'The production of sapce'

So my thoughts on 'social spaces' and 'Nostalgia' session 4 discussions...

I found the text by Lefebvre hard to read and a little out of date, but I found interest in the concept of 'work' and 'Product'. As Lefebvre states "a work has something irreplaceable and unique about it" in my opinion this is something, which in present day culture, is becoming harder to find.

As we discussed within the session we live in a replay culture, a "product" culture, events are replayed on loop and thanks mainly to advances in technology, i.e. the computer and television, we find ourselves looking to the past for ideas for the present and therefore becoming very Nostalgic.

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Example 1
James May's Toy Stories, BBC 2.

I've just, prior to writing this blog, watched James May in action. Trying to reintroduce the classic Airfix models to a new generation of children. This made me reminisce the times when I myself created these models. This is a great example of nostalgia, it's the feeling of happiness of experiencing good memories again. Will I conform to May's vision to bring back Airfix as a hobby, no, but it was nice to look back for a brief moment of the past.

Example 2

Current film releases and television, 2009-2010.

Looking through the coming soon section of the local cinema it is clear to see that nostalgia is not always a good thing in culture. Do we really need a re-released Nightmare on Elm Street, no, Halloween, no. Do we need more sequels, for example, a 4th, 5th, 6th Saw movie, good God no! Why are film producer’s constantly going back and remaking, creating sequels to films. Are we incapable as a culture to produce something authentic? This trend can also be applied to other media, television, they are currently remaking the A team, why? Even when we do come up with a great authentic(ish) concept why must we then ruin it by over modifying and dragging out it's life until the original idea becomes forgotten, for example; Lost, 6 seasons later and I still have no idea what the heck is going on, I can't remember what happened at the beginning, something about a plane crash and a hatch? Why not just finish it and move on and create a new "work"?

Session 3 - 16.10.09 The Pololities of Amnesia

So my thoughts on Eagleton's After Theory...

I really did enjoy reading Eagleton's book, well what I could read of it through Amazon. (The copy I ordered is still sitting in a sack in some post office while the postman have their yearly whinge about pay etc... anyways I digress, back to Eagleton) I found the book easy to read and I could relate to what Eagleton was agonising over.

As we have discussed in the previous two sessions, Dubai and Zaha, it is hard to apply architectural theory to modern day ways of thinking, this is because over the last century the civilised world has developed at an alarmingly quick rate. What is current now can so easily not be the case tomorrow. As Eagleton highlights "we still trading on the past" yet this is no longer applicable, I feel that theory just needs a bit of time to catch up.

One point that Eagleton raises is the way in which, "In some traditionalist universities not long ago, you could not research on authors who were still alive. This was a great incentive to slip a knife between their ribs one foggy evening, or a remarkable test of patience if your chosen novelist was in rude health and only 34." This can only be seen as a good progression in the study of theory surely? How crazy would that be trying to do this very course, for the obvious fact that we won't have been able to read this very text.

Theory isn't over; it has merely evolving into something quite different...it just needs a bit of time.

Session 2 - 09.10.09 Dubai

So my thoughts on Dubai…

The opening section of this essay, by Mike Davis, gives a good account of how most people in the world view Dubai; it is a weird and crazy place which has grown out of the dessert over the last few years, it is the place to go for the ultimate phantasmagoria experience, it’s Las Vegas and Disneyland’s freakish love child, who’s role models are Jordon and Jodie Marsh, pumped full of drugs and allowed to run wild.

But what most people don’t realise, or indeed choose to turn a blind eye towards, are the underlying circumstances from which this city has been built. The quote from the session “it is like a lot of smiling people at a party” really helps to sum up the feeling that I would get if I were to visit this crazy place. This is a city built by benefiting on a terror fearing world in which we live and the fact that we need oil. This is a city which has benefited on exploiting people, workers living in poor conditions being paid very little for working long hours. There is no real reason for the developments, it’s just because they can and they want to be bigger and better than anyone else.

This is a city that’s architecture basically flaunts to world “thanks for all the money”.

Session 1 - 02.10.09 Zaha

So my thoughts on Zaha...

Her office and working environment sounds like a place I would never want to work. It sounds like something out of a sci-fi movie; All the employees hook up to computers, connected together digitally as one giant CAD organism, working in silence, fixed to their screen as if in some weird trance. But obviously it works since Zaha has created, from this giant organism, some of the most recognisable architecture in the world today.

Regarding physical location, she appears in the article not to be engaged with her surroundings in London. This is reflected in her architecture around the globe that turns its back on the historicism of their locations.

I respect the way that throughout the interview with Meades, as well as in the rest of her life, she plays her cards very close to her chest. It is clear in this piece that this woman is very clever; of course, she knows why her buildings appear as they do. She rightly doesn't give away any trade secrets to the ways in which she designs her architecture, why should she? Zaha knows the second she does copycat designs will spring up all over the place. Cheap knock offs of Zaha's style, like knock off Rolexes (half the price, looks similar from afar, but will develop problems fairly quickly), which means she will possibly lose out on commissions. I can see in the future she may write a book which will explain all her secrets, but until that time why not keep making her mark, unchallenged, on the architectural landscape of cities that can be recognised as unmistakably Zaha.