Wednesday, 5 October 2011
Monday, 14 February 2011
Tuesday, 1 February 2011
Monday, 11 January 2010
From Here To Modernity
Cool new website from the BBC and Open University
http://www.open2.net/modernity/
http://www.open2.net/modernity/
Tuesday, 5 January 2010
Modernity, The Machine and The Arts
In order to write this extended blog I started by reading through everything we have done so far, not all the books, but at least my blogs, some by others and some of the articles and extracts we have read. It seems an interesting journey that we have been on; all part of Paul’s evil plan no doubt!
So on that basis I felt it appropriate to look at the idea of modernity and the machine and relate it to various aspects of the course that we have covered. Although this is meant to be about one aspect of the course surely they are all related!
I have always been interested in how ways of thinking, in terms of the arts, have come about and have always looked at the development of movements as a way to give reason for their existence and invention. So for Zaha Hadid to claim she is anti contextual comes across to me as total rubbish. I know she means it in the physical sense, but I don’t think you can really separate design simply based on its physical appearance and the appearance of things around. Surely there is much more to it than that! A good example of where we are in terms of architectural development though, add to this the monstrosity of Dubai and surely with the opening of the Burj this week everyone is thinking WTF (excuse the horrible abbreviation). How the hell can something like that be being built and opened when we are in the midst of one of the biggest economic crises of the last hundred or so years? That’s where we are, but how did we get here!
So if we are to understand the world around us, or the context in which we live, we have to look back at history, not necessarily in some sort of nostalgic trance and definitely not as if development were the only thing that mattered like our friend Faust. I see it simply as a means to understanding, which in turn enables us to move forward. I have to admit, however, that my history is rubbish despite my father being a historian. I do have a good knowledge of art and architectural history at least so I am using that as a basis for argument.
To understand where we are and where we are going is then what we are trying to achieve and in terms of architecture we need to look at society and its development as a whole. Looking at Eagleton was a chance to try and understand theory itself, but to then look at Lefebvre was equivalent to jumping in at the deep end. Lefebvre’s most important work was on understanding the importance of space and its production; this has particularly influenced the world’s attitude towards urban theory. He was a Marxist thinker and is recognised to have significantly increased the scope of Marxist theory.
So Lefebvre is particularly important in terms of gaining understanding in the development of our current social position in relation to the physical world. Understanding whether space is a product would first of all require understanding what a product is and this falls back to Marx. Marxism however is, or was I should say, a sociological, economical and political philosophy and whilst it is fascinating isn’t directly linked to our understanding of our current architectural position. It is however a link to understanding society and in turn how current architectural and urban culture has come about.
The past hundred years has been a crescendo of development, basically ever since the industrial revolution the world has gone ape! The capitalist system which we have settled in has allowed continual growth, building and building like a Faustian machine. Progress is what the world survives on, if we weren’t moving forward what else would we be doing!
What I particularly liked about the Marshall Berman book (another Marxist) was his use of literary and artistic subjects to help define what has happened in the modern age. In the same way we looked at Evelyn Waugh and his satirical story about the decline of power in British society after World War I. We also looked at Allen Ginsberg and the other beatnik writers as literary examples of modernism, even Dave Hickey, although not part of the beat generation, had a distinctly beatnik style and those guys were all about going against the machine! Whilst Waugh’s Decline and Fall was written at a time when Le Corbusier was a prominent figure in world architecture, Archigram were at work at more or less the same time as the beatnik writers, so when we look at the parallels of these different art forms it helps to define the mood and societal condition of those periods.
Cinema, being the most public of art forms, is particularly representative of its period. Whilst not always visually so there is nearly always some representation of the time it is made, whether it be from the way cameras are used or the way narratives are put together or the general cinematic style. The Fountainhead was a good example in that it was about an architect and the rise of modernist architecture. Ayn Rand, whilst dedicating the film to architecture, was really only using architecture as a vehicle to relate her ideas of selflessness and remaining true to ideals in the face of influence from others. This was part of her philosophy, Objectivism, which was a sort of capitalist agenda based on the idea that reality exists outside of perception. This is to say that the individual is supreme and that selfishness is a virtue, a load of rubbish really. Far more interesting to me is the style of the movie as it is indicative of the Hollywood of the time and whilst Rand’s intentions are somewhat askew the subject matter is still a great representation of the state of society and architecture at the time. King Vidor, the director, holds the title of longest spanning career as a director from 1913 to 1980! He must have been the perfect choice to direct The Fountainhead as he is recognised to have produced some of the most creative films of the twenties and thirties usually dealing with idealism and disillusionment with contemporary life!
The twenties was, next to the fifties and nineties, the most economically prosperous period in recent history. In terms of the arts generally this was also an incredibly important time as the foundations had been laid for a burst in creativity. It was a time when cinema especially was exploding, indeed the big studios were created then and they made more movies per year in the twenties and thirties than they do now! Vidor would have seen all this happen, he did indeed make the largest grossing film up to that point in 1925; The Big Parade which was an epic anti war World War I romance story. More importantly the twenties gave us Expressionist cinema which had become incredibly popular in Europe and used strange camera angles and dark lighting for effect. These were visually captivating movies which were often poignant in there subject matter such as The Cabinet of Dr Caligari which was an anti bourgeois movie and made in the same year that Decline and Fall was written! FW Murnau made an expressionist version of Goethe’s Faust and there was Metropolis, Lang’s 1927 film about the social crisis between the lower and upper classes set in a futuristic urban dystopia. All this at the same time as modernism in architecture, the machine aesthetic, indeed the building as a machine and the mass production of building.
It seems to me that these artists and their movements were more often than not almost directly responding to the society that was building up around them. So using them as ways to understand our cultural and social development in the modern world is absolutely the way forward. As Terry Eagleton said in The Politics of Amnesia the golden age of cultural theory is past, it appears to be similar in the arts, do our buildings now make huge bold statements about the condition of society? They do but not in the way I’d like, they’re more like pop stars of the built environment, just look at the Burj!
So on that basis I felt it appropriate to look at the idea of modernity and the machine and relate it to various aspects of the course that we have covered. Although this is meant to be about one aspect of the course surely they are all related!
I have always been interested in how ways of thinking, in terms of the arts, have come about and have always looked at the development of movements as a way to give reason for their existence and invention. So for Zaha Hadid to claim she is anti contextual comes across to me as total rubbish. I know she means it in the physical sense, but I don’t think you can really separate design simply based on its physical appearance and the appearance of things around. Surely there is much more to it than that! A good example of where we are in terms of architectural development though, add to this the monstrosity of Dubai and surely with the opening of the Burj this week everyone is thinking WTF (excuse the horrible abbreviation). How the hell can something like that be being built and opened when we are in the midst of one of the biggest economic crises of the last hundred or so years? That’s where we are, but how did we get here!
So if we are to understand the world around us, or the context in which we live, we have to look back at history, not necessarily in some sort of nostalgic trance and definitely not as if development were the only thing that mattered like our friend Faust. I see it simply as a means to understanding, which in turn enables us to move forward. I have to admit, however, that my history is rubbish despite my father being a historian. I do have a good knowledge of art and architectural history at least so I am using that as a basis for argument.
To understand where we are and where we are going is then what we are trying to achieve and in terms of architecture we need to look at society and its development as a whole. Looking at Eagleton was a chance to try and understand theory itself, but to then look at Lefebvre was equivalent to jumping in at the deep end. Lefebvre’s most important work was on understanding the importance of space and its production; this has particularly influenced the world’s attitude towards urban theory. He was a Marxist thinker and is recognised to have significantly increased the scope of Marxist theory.
So Lefebvre is particularly important in terms of gaining understanding in the development of our current social position in relation to the physical world. Understanding whether space is a product would first of all require understanding what a product is and this falls back to Marx. Marxism however is, or was I should say, a sociological, economical and political philosophy and whilst it is fascinating isn’t directly linked to our understanding of our current architectural position. It is however a link to understanding society and in turn how current architectural and urban culture has come about.
The past hundred years has been a crescendo of development, basically ever since the industrial revolution the world has gone ape! The capitalist system which we have settled in has allowed continual growth, building and building like a Faustian machine. Progress is what the world survives on, if we weren’t moving forward what else would we be doing!
What I particularly liked about the Marshall Berman book (another Marxist) was his use of literary and artistic subjects to help define what has happened in the modern age. In the same way we looked at Evelyn Waugh and his satirical story about the decline of power in British society after World War I. We also looked at Allen Ginsberg and the other beatnik writers as literary examples of modernism, even Dave Hickey, although not part of the beat generation, had a distinctly beatnik style and those guys were all about going against the machine! Whilst Waugh’s Decline and Fall was written at a time when Le Corbusier was a prominent figure in world architecture, Archigram were at work at more or less the same time as the beatnik writers, so when we look at the parallels of these different art forms it helps to define the mood and societal condition of those periods.
Cinema, being the most public of art forms, is particularly representative of its period. Whilst not always visually so there is nearly always some representation of the time it is made, whether it be from the way cameras are used or the way narratives are put together or the general cinematic style. The Fountainhead was a good example in that it was about an architect and the rise of modernist architecture. Ayn Rand, whilst dedicating the film to architecture, was really only using architecture as a vehicle to relate her ideas of selflessness and remaining true to ideals in the face of influence from others. This was part of her philosophy, Objectivism, which was a sort of capitalist agenda based on the idea that reality exists outside of perception. This is to say that the individual is supreme and that selfishness is a virtue, a load of rubbish really. Far more interesting to me is the style of the movie as it is indicative of the Hollywood of the time and whilst Rand’s intentions are somewhat askew the subject matter is still a great representation of the state of society and architecture at the time. King Vidor, the director, holds the title of longest spanning career as a director from 1913 to 1980! He must have been the perfect choice to direct The Fountainhead as he is recognised to have produced some of the most creative films of the twenties and thirties usually dealing with idealism and disillusionment with contemporary life!
The twenties was, next to the fifties and nineties, the most economically prosperous period in recent history. In terms of the arts generally this was also an incredibly important time as the foundations had been laid for a burst in creativity. It was a time when cinema especially was exploding, indeed the big studios were created then and they made more movies per year in the twenties and thirties than they do now! Vidor would have seen all this happen, he did indeed make the largest grossing film up to that point in 1925; The Big Parade which was an epic anti war World War I romance story. More importantly the twenties gave us Expressionist cinema which had become incredibly popular in Europe and used strange camera angles and dark lighting for effect. These were visually captivating movies which were often poignant in there subject matter such as The Cabinet of Dr Caligari which was an anti bourgeois movie and made in the same year that Decline and Fall was written! FW Murnau made an expressionist version of Goethe’s Faust and there was Metropolis, Lang’s 1927 film about the social crisis between the lower and upper classes set in a futuristic urban dystopia. All this at the same time as modernism in architecture, the machine aesthetic, indeed the building as a machine and the mass production of building.
It seems to me that these artists and their movements were more often than not almost directly responding to the society that was building up around them. So using them as ways to understand our cultural and social development in the modern world is absolutely the way forward. As Terry Eagleton said in The Politics of Amnesia the golden age of cultural theory is past, it appears to be similar in the arts, do our buildings now make huge bold statements about the condition of society? They do but not in the way I’d like, they’re more like pop stars of the built environment, just look at the Burj!
Monday, 4 January 2010
Marshall Bermann - All That Is Solid Melts Into Air - Goethe's Faust
In the first chapter of 'All That Is Solid Melts Into Air - The Experience Of Modernity' Marshall Berman uses Goethes interpretation of the legend of Faust as a literary interpretation of modernization. In the other chapters he uses Marxist texts, French poetry and Russian Literature to analyze modernisation and modernism, but I am yet to read that far. Goethe's version of Faust, as Berman tells us, is the most extensive and rich interpretaion there is, not unexpected from a man who spent sixty years working on it. The main difference, we are told, of Goethe's Faust to its predecessors is the desire for development which previous incarnations had represented by more obvious desires such as money, sex and fame.
Berman goes on to describe the most original idea in Goethes Faust as that of the two modes of development in Faust as both self-development and economic-development and that these must be fused to achieve either. He analyses the story in its three parts, The Dreamer, The Lover and The Developer and through this explains how the Faust tradgedy of Development comes to pass. From his desire for knowledge to his unexpected encounter with love and eventually his
unstoppable thirst for development, it is clear why Berman sees this as the original tale of modernity.
1926 German Expresionist Film 'Faust' by F.W. Murnau:
Berman goes on to describe the most original idea in Goethes Faust as that of the two modes of development in Faust as both self-development and economic-development and that these must be fused to achieve either. He analyses the story in its three parts, The Dreamer, The Lover and The Developer and through this explains how the Faust tradgedy of Development comes to pass. From his desire for knowledge to his unexpected encounter with love and eventually his
unstoppable thirst for development, it is clear why Berman sees this as the original tale of modernity.
1926 German Expresionist Film 'Faust' by F.W. Murnau:
Monday, 14 December 2009
The Fountainhead - Ayn Rand - King Vidor
Finally managed to watch this last night, brilliant movie, really enjoyed it in many respects, especially as it is relevant to my dissertation.
So first of all the story (and I havent read the book even though I've been meaning to for years) is interesting because it not only represents the attitude of the time but also romanticizes the architect and his profession. The character Howard Roark is obviously based on Frank Lloyd Wright and whilst the societal attitude conveyed in the movie is one of anti modernity it is clearly pro modernism or at least change and progression as our hero Roark wins in the end despite ridiculously getting away with blowing up a huge development. What is interesting is that the way this romantisization brings the game into the public forum. Hollywood was just getting into full flow at the time and tried and tested narrative constructs were being established.
I would say that The Fountainhead falls into the genre of Film Noir, which interestingly enough was a particularly architecturaly relevant genre. Film Noir was a movement between the early forties and late fifties and was generally hollywood crime dramas, but not specifically and the style drew alot from German Expressionism. Expressionism wasnt solely film based, we all know Munch's The Scream, do I need to mention that this was about distorting reality in order to induce emotional reaction? Anyway the movement gained alot of strength in the film industry with the likes of Lang (Metropolis video in earlier post) whos films used alot of mise on scene and narrative based around the dark fringes of society to create more engaging and moody films as they didnt have the resources of Hollywood. Filmakers like Lang and Siodmak later moved to Hollywood where these techniques and styles went on to form the foundations of Film Noir.
I could go on, but the point is that these movies, Metropolis, The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, numerous others and even Blade Runner(a sort of NeoNoir) are the most architecturally relevant movies around. This is not neccessarily because they are about cities or buildings, but because they are about modernism and the societal shift towards modernity. This is why The Fountainhead is an important film and relevant to this course, because it is a statement on these things, Modernity and The Machine, albeit with a little more Hollywood sheen than its Noir contemporaries.
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Evelyn Waugh - Decline and Fall
I cant pretend to know enough about literature to say that Waugh was a modernist, but if you read up about him you'll find out that he was. However reading this book wouldnt necessarily make you think that. It was his first book and is entirely, except for a few cockney sort ere an there, written in the most terribly old school tie manner. I think thats the the point though, that hes taking the piss, and it is funny. Im not finished yet, but right now Paul Pennyfeather is in Jail for prostitute trafficking, although for Paul this is not the real Fall (which was his expulsion from Oxford), and hes being punished for being an introvert and enjoying solitary confinement! His punishment is to spend time chatting to other prisoners in the yard, one of whom thinks he is the Lion of the Lord and was sent to kill all the philistines!
I laughed out loud on the tube earlier while reading this, which was a bit embarassing.
The relevance to the course though? I think its firstly relevant in that it is about the decline of the bourgouisie and the interwar period - we talked about this when we looked at Lefebvre and Marxism. Secondly it pokes of fun at Corbusier and modernism with his brilliantly named characters Professor Silenus and Lord Tangent Circumference. My favorite names however, and only because theyre ridiculous, are Beste-Chetwynde and Digby-Vaine-Trumpington!
I had to scan these in, theyre such a good representation of the book and the times and I think Waugh drew them.
I laughed out loud on the tube earlier while reading this, which was a bit embarassing.
The relevance to the course though? I think its firstly relevant in that it is about the decline of the bourgouisie and the interwar period - we talked about this when we looked at Lefebvre and Marxism. Secondly it pokes of fun at Corbusier and modernism with his brilliantly named characters Professor Silenus and Lord Tangent Circumference. My favorite names however, and only because theyre ridiculous, are Beste-Chetwynde and Digby-Vaine-Trumpington!
I had to scan these in, theyre such a good representation of the book and the times and I think Waugh drew them.
Thursday, 12 November 2009
Howl by Allen Ginsberg
More beatnik, love it. I have of course read On the Road, which actually I liked alot, but that was about ten years ago. Ive also read Queer and Naked Lunch by Burroughs. Naked Lunch is supposed to be the classic but I found it pretty much unintelligable, I think most of the stuff in that book is written while Burroughs is out of his tree on smack. However Queer is a great book, better than any other beatnik stuff Ive read. I must read Junkie, which is also supposed to be very good.
Before this Id never read any Ginsberg and Ive got to say its brilliant. I dont know much about poetry at all and cant say Ive read much, but this just unfolds, its dynamic and you feel yourself rolling along with it.
The discussion about industrialisation and the machine (society) is I think why the beat generation became so famous, not just because of that initself but because of the liberative reaction to it, which I guess in no small part brought about the social changes in the sixties.
I was interested to read that Ginsberg studied in great detail early classical writers and from that was able to create his style, for example using parataxis to engage the reader or listener.
Anyway so I guess the link to Archigram is the MACHINE, weve been talking about the societal machine, but something that the world has been obsessed with ever since the industrial revolution is technology, the future and the machine. Archigram heavily drew on technology to imagine future living growing cities and I guess this will tie in with Corb who must have been one of the first architects to start directly relating architecture to the functionality of machines and industry.
Now my videos are becoming a bit more relevant so Im gonna put another one up..
these guys have to be the only band to succesfully infuse heavy metal with rap, except maybe Cypress Hill, but unfortunatley spawned years of shite music from people like Limp Bizkit
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
this album was released 17 years ago yesterday! I couldnt find the original video so this will have to do. The images are a little on the anarchic side but at least theyre fairly provocative.
Before this Id never read any Ginsberg and Ive got to say its brilliant. I dont know much about poetry at all and cant say Ive read much, but this just unfolds, its dynamic and you feel yourself rolling along with it.
The discussion about industrialisation and the machine (society) is I think why the beat generation became so famous, not just because of that initself but because of the liberative reaction to it, which I guess in no small part brought about the social changes in the sixties.
I was interested to read that Ginsberg studied in great detail early classical writers and from that was able to create his style, for example using parataxis to engage the reader or listener.
Anyway so I guess the link to Archigram is the MACHINE, weve been talking about the societal machine, but something that the world has been obsessed with ever since the industrial revolution is technology, the future and the machine. Archigram heavily drew on technology to imagine future living growing cities and I guess this will tie in with Corb who must have been one of the first architects to start directly relating architecture to the functionality of machines and industry.
Now my videos are becoming a bit more relevant so Im gonna put another one up..
these guys have to be the only band to succesfully infuse heavy metal with rap, except maybe Cypress Hill, but unfortunatley spawned years of shite music from people like Limp Bizkit
RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE
this album was released 17 years ago yesterday! I couldnt find the original video so this will have to do. The images are a little on the anarchic side but at least theyre fairly provocative.
Moloch & Metropolis
Im loving the blogging as part of the course, hence my various random posts that arent necessarily tied to theroy2, but this should not be confused with the abomination that is Twitter, which is clearly for twits, Ive tried all the other social networking crap, but twitter really is a step too far :)
These past two however are related to my dissertation on architecture and film and this one is related to the next piece by Allen Ginsberg as he did say that the Moloch section in Howl was partly influenced by the character Moloch in Metropolis, even if he was off his tits on cactus when he thought of it!
More on Howl next...
Thursday, 5 November 2009
Man With A Movie Camera
Awesome Cinematic Orchestra song, that everyone probably knows, but the vid is an edited version of Dziga Vertov's 1929 movie, the original can be watched on google:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2809965914189244913#
Oh and by the way Cinematic Orchestra are playing at the roundhouse on friday night - I cant go damn it but it will be awesome they are doing a full live orchestral show of their man with a movie camera album - tickets are 25quid - pricey but well worth it.
Las Vegas - Tom Wolfe & Dave Hickey
Both pieces are very pro Vegas, particularly in relation to democratisation. Indeed Hickey sees Vegas as the last democratic stage in America and as a result calls it home. I think this comes from the total freedom that Vegas offers its users. Something that America is supposed to be and in turn exactly where Wolfes beatnik style comes from.
The same applies to the architecture of Vegas, total freedom from history, to the point where buildings are no longer the architecture but signs and light are. Having spent some time in America and been travelling alot I can identify with the beat philosophy and the liberation that is tangible in America so the idea that Vegas is this and more just makes me want to go there!
http://amazingdata.com/old-las-vegas-neon-signs/
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=buttocks%20d%C3%A9colletage
Friday, 23 October 2009
Henri Lefebvre
Best bit yet and although I feel Im becoming a bit like Stephen Fry and arrogantly talking to myself as if loads of people really want to read my thoughts, I cant help it! At least this module gives me a reason to do so.
Ive read this piece three times now and although I love the beatnik nature of Tom Wolfes piece Ive spent alot more time thinking about Lefebvres philosophy.
I think its generally about our concept, as players of the current cultural theory, of 'reality', in particular and in direct relation to our understanding of Space. We all know about Marxism and its conotations toward communism, but I certainly dont know the details, which I think is the reason I feel the need to understand it.
So to what degree is social space a product? To answer that question we have to ask what is a product, and what is social space. The issue of social space, certainly in Lefebvres mind, is intertwined with the human concept of product and reading this shit is fascinating, it challenges the things that everyone plays along with every day!
His discussions revolve around Marxist thinking, use value and exchange value. I see that as monetry (current political and economic) value and real, personal, natural value and that these are the very basic building blocks of a system that allows our current capitalist world to work.
As a result of this we discuss the difference between A product and A work and the more you get into it the more you realise that whilst both have their own distinction, they are, in current society, difficult to seperate and have been since at least Roman society.
Im rambling cos Ive drunk several bottles of wine and Ive had a mental week, but I think that the answer is that social space is a product, it may be far removed from the basic idea of a product, but it is a result of societal work, which is in turn a product of the political and economical world that weve all been living in for a long time!
Thursday, 22 October 2009
'The Politics of Amnesia' by Terry Eagleton
A departure from the last two pieces, this is first of all a book, not an article and has a stronger constitution. As Paul pointed out, the other two pieces are like mutations of theory, this however is more serious. Eagletons approach is immediatley more philosophical, he talks about ideas and ways of thinking rather than general happenings and occurences in modern day life. Indeed this chapter is about that very thing. The state of theory today, how we got here and where we are going.
Theory obviously develops with time as we learn from our predecessors, what Eagleton is saying is that currently we arent really making the leaps and bounds in cultural theory and thinking that have been made up until recently and that current theoretical thinking has strayed to popular and philisophically thin subject matters. I tend to agree with him, not that I know that much about the great theorists before us, but the world does seem to be a quagmire of consumerism and indulgence more than ever before. On the other hand he argues that never before have we been so liberated in our cultural theory and I think thats the point where are we and where are we going.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13652422/Politics-of-Amnesia-Terry-Eagleton
Theory obviously develops with time as we learn from our predecessors, what Eagleton is saying is that currently we arent really making the leaps and bounds in cultural theory and thinking that have been made up until recently and that current theoretical thinking has strayed to popular and philisophically thin subject matters. I tend to agree with him, not that I know that much about the great theorists before us, but the world does seem to be a quagmire of consumerism and indulgence more than ever before. On the other hand he argues that never before have we been so liberated in our cultural theory and I think thats the point where are we and where are we going.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13652422/Politics-of-Amnesia-Terry-Eagleton
Monday, 12 October 2009
Mike Davis - Fear and Money in Dubai
Fear and Money in Dubai - what a fascinating article, fascinating in part because my oldest and best friend has lived in the middle east since I first met him at boarding school and now lives in Abu Dhabi, where I will be heading to be his best man in 6 months time!
I have always been a bit perplexed by the existence of the UAE and how such a monstrous place could have been created from the nothing that it was all of roughly 60 years ago. This article has definately offered a better understanding of how and why all this happened.
The edifice complex of bigger is better rules over all and its interesting how this has been created through the running of Sheikh Al Maktoums country like a business and the global marketing of that business which in turn feeds the gigantisism. If you look up Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum you will find some pretty wild facts, for example he has 19 children, a senior and junior wife and in 2008 was estimated to have amassed a fortune of 28,000,000,000 us dollars!
The problem with all this however is that the world pays for it and oil is where it all started, Saudi just next door owns 13.9% of the worlds oil reserves by contrast the UAE only owns 3.2% of the worlds oil. However the UAE is only 4% the size of Saudi so by land mass is far richer in oil. I always find statitistics difficult to accept because they only pertain to one single number relating to one single relationship. Anyway its clear that UAE has loads of dosh! The question now is not why but how do they have so much dosh and I was interested to read how Al Maktoum has created these low tax incentives to draw in business from the rest of the world so that it isnt just oil that keeps the economy ticking.
Finally the question of ethics arises and clearly ethics are not a gigantic factor in this world of biggism, no matter how you look at it its pretty clear that work forces are drawn in from poor countries to build the place. The BBC ran a Panorama documentry on it earlier this year:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7985361.stm
and what pisses me off more than anything is the rich bastards who dont seem to be doing anything about it. Architects moreover like Zaha who head out there to produce their wild and wonderful concotions should be at the front of the opposition.
http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2635
I have always been a bit perplexed by the existence of the UAE and how such a monstrous place could have been created from the nothing that it was all of roughly 60 years ago. This article has definately offered a better understanding of how and why all this happened.
The edifice complex of bigger is better rules over all and its interesting how this has been created through the running of Sheikh Al Maktoums country like a business and the global marketing of that business which in turn feeds the gigantisism. If you look up Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum you will find some pretty wild facts, for example he has 19 children, a senior and junior wife and in 2008 was estimated to have amassed a fortune of 28,000,000,000 us dollars!
The problem with all this however is that the world pays for it and oil is where it all started, Saudi just next door owns 13.9% of the worlds oil reserves by contrast the UAE only owns 3.2% of the worlds oil. However the UAE is only 4% the size of Saudi so by land mass is far richer in oil. I always find statitistics difficult to accept because they only pertain to one single number relating to one single relationship. Anyway its clear that UAE has loads of dosh! The question now is not why but how do they have so much dosh and I was interested to read how Al Maktoum has created these low tax incentives to draw in business from the rest of the world so that it isnt just oil that keeps the economy ticking.
Finally the question of ethics arises and clearly ethics are not a gigantic factor in this world of biggism, no matter how you look at it its pretty clear that work forces are drawn in from poor countries to build the place. The BBC ran a Panorama documentry on it earlier this year:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7985361.stm
and what pisses me off more than anything is the rich bastards who dont seem to be doing anything about it. Architects moreover like Zaha who head out there to produce their wild and wonderful concotions should be at the front of the opposition.
http://www.newleftreview.org/?view=2635
Sunday, 4 October 2009
ZAHA HADID: THE FIRST GREAT FEMALE ARCHITECT - by Johnathan Meades
Johnathan Meade’s excellent article is a sort of intellectual dissection of Zaha Hadid. He does this, as discussed, through the examination of a number of agendas that contribute to the zaha amalgam.Context seems to me to be the most interesting and important question, whether it’s the physical environment into which her buildings are dropped, the social context of the architectural world, or the places where she lives and works. Her designs are so outrageously extreme I think this is a valid subject to address.
This render of a competition entry she did for the Centre for Islamic Art in the Cour Visconti at the Louvre is a prime example, the shape of the intervention is so far removed from the existing courtyard that it isn’t easy to see how it was born. However, her buildings are, as Meades says, sensitive to their surroundings. She is not drawing forms directly from the surrounding landscape rather making an intervention into the existing space to make a better and more exciting use of that space. There is further context in this design in the geometrical patterns of the cladding, an acknowledgment of what lies within. So she may appear to be ‘anti-contextual’, but in reality the designs still need to come from somewhere.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
