Josh Shabtai on the history of easter eggs.
[vimeo http://vimeo.com/2401034]
Cory Kahaney on gender politics in the world of comedy.
[vimeo http://vimeo.com/2409710]
Doug Jaeger on how to design a disease and celebrating its cure.
[vimeo http://vimeo.com/2411230]
Jenny Sabin on the how new information from technology allow a new way of seeing architectural forms.
[vimeo http://vimeo.com/2410366]
Videos from November Event
0 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I am an architect, teach at a university and involved in research. In particular how and why the things we make affect the societies we live in. This lecture by Jenny Sabin and the research, although interesting in and of itself, is nonsense and in all practical purposes worthless! It falls into the desperate attempts of academia to fuse and cross all disciplines for personal self worth and viability. The reality is that it has no and will have no real impact on you, me or any one else in the built world we live in!
Numbers and mathematics can generate anything we want in the computer and we can cross reference this to anything we make or study and make it interesting. However, what does this say about our profession and what we do? Do we work for our selves in a self inverted and self promotional means to alter our egos? Or are we really trying to solve problems and design objects and systems that are real. Things that are not real can be, of course anything as this is. And the current state of real architecture in America is a joke! In part do to the remote and unimportant research that is done in the academic world of architecture. This is not the case for all other professions and university studies for the most part in America. Their research is real and has real affects on the people and things that those professions deal with and address.
Believe me it is interesting but also worthless, totally worthless. It is a perfect example of how academics has infused themselves with the need to constantly research anything with out any discernment or real insight to what is really going on or from the start what it means. “Just do the research it is interesting and different and maybe something cool can be made from it”, even if it has no real meaning or impact on our human condition and real life or real “affects” of what we make and build. Just do something different and interesting! That is all this is. In fact as she graces over certain questions that have been raised about its liability she responds with rhetoric and self referencing terms.
Sorry but this kind of work is why architecture is the most misunderstood and perceived as the most worthless profession in America not to mention least paid and utilized. Just look at all the real research architects are doing in Europe and how the general population sees them! It is dramatically different. They study real things and real people, yes they use new technology but have viable and discerning interest as there base. What is this really and what does it mean!
Thanks for the presentation!
Ian
I was very conflicted about posting your comment. I don’t want to be an autocrat sensor, but because your tone is so vitriolic, posting it will potentially turn the blog into a forum for declarations, not conversations. When you use the word “worthless” more than 3 times, it sort of precludes a dialogue. You pose few questions other than rhetorical ones. You cite “architects in Europe” but don’t mention them by name.
I think you have some extremely valid points–getting out of abstraction and into, pardon the rhyme, action. But a wholesale condemnation of an approach just makes you look reactionary and angry, even when you have logic on your side.
Nevertheless, thanks for watching and contributing.
David