Conversation
So… what are actual modern examples of his thinking driving the “synthesis of form”? If architects reject him and the software version failed, who’s actually using his ideas for design as opposed to design criticism? Or is it reduced now to a purely analytical/critical frame?
6
2
but seriously though, the design pattern stuff (according to ) was primarily a failure to transmit the important aspects of patterns to the software dev community, but imo to paraphrase gretzky, they were "skating to where the puck was, not where it was going"
1
1
The designs he did himself were mostly utilitarian, somewhat trad looking buildings right? I recall you shared photos of the campus of a school or something.
1
Replying to
yeah though the fact that it looks trad is a red herring; ask yourself instead why contemporary architects have to use wacky materials and dangerous-looking cantilevers etc
1
Replying to
yeah so hopefully now you can see the fundamental impedance mismatch: alexander was never trying to make a "statement" with his work like his contemporaries do, he was primarily trying to build something that worked for his clients—he didn't give a shit about getting in magazines
2
2
Replying to
What I like is expansion of possibilities due to new materials and methods, like how reinforced concrete allowed building heights to jump 5x in a century. Or glass facades.
Meeting client needs is nice. But discovering what new tech can do is equally legit/valuable activity.
2
3
Replying to
when i try to get clients to pay for my exploratory tinkering i try to at least be honest about it
1
1
Replying to
I think most architecture contracts are awarded through design competitions? So you could say when you get avant garde, it’s usually because the client chose to go experimental etc.
Replying to
alexander's biggest project was the eishin campus, like 10 mill in 80s dollars; he got the gig because the client picked up one of his books by chance
1
Show replies

