 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
4.235.204.17
In Reply to: Sketches Of Gehry posted by dave c on October 7, 2006 at 23:33:26:
Pollack ain't.
I got no sense of Gehry's buildings from the cinematography, either, nor any insights into HOW the buildings are done.
In other words, a superficial picture thrown together with no new ideas and which sheds no new light for anyone with a cursory knowledge (and at this point who doesn't know a bit about Frankie G?) of the current architecture darling.
You want to see how it's done?
See "My Architect," a brilliant film about Herbert Kahn, done by... his son.
Follow Ups:
tinear,I haven't seen the documentary of Frank Gehry- which may be a satisfying look at him and his work, but having been in four of his buildings, watched his career, heard lectures and met him, I find his work to be rather lifeless and static as well as conceptually being among the thinnest architecture in history.
The forms are fun and at first appear dynamic, but as Gehry purposely is anti-architecture- trying to subvert the rules as often as possible. I find it childish and unrefined- whimsical and merely attention grabbing. The interior spaces are either accidental and a scaleless mess- the result of the collision of the forms seen from the inside- or purposely subverted as shells within shells so that the outside and inside forms are different and the relationships obscured. The deliberate "anti-architecture" of deconstructivism to me is like a person spouting personally contrived jargon to try and obscure a point while sounding a genius. Gehry sets up a game that only he undertands, that only he can play, plays it well, and thereby sets up a signature, distinctive style.
It's art, and many love the forms, but it's like a child's game. If you look at Gehry's sketches for his buildings, he scribbles the outside in elevation- almost like a skyline, and then the forms eventually are collided to conform to that moment's whim. These two minute scribbled sketches are framed and treated as the instant art of a genius- sold in galleries.
In my view, Gehry's work seems like amazingly impulsive and two-dimensional thinking which is then "fleshed out" (by others) and the functional spaces, materials and structure an afterthought.
There are successes like Bilbao (I haven't been there but friends have) where the forms in the setting have a kind of energy, but the interiors are more important than the art and to me are distracting and careless. I've been to the Disney Hall three times and while the forms are interesting, they're not cohesive or memorable, I find the acoustics terrible, the space in the hall is cramped to allow for all the contrived architecture around it, and the inside and outside forms are unrelated. It sits on the street as a deliberate subversion of context and if any argmument was to be made for completely self-indulgent, but thin architecture, there is the poster child. It looks ridiculous as an urban solution and in it's forms suggests Los Angeles is not worth Gehry responding to- the Disney Hall could be plopped down equally anywhere.
Personally, I think Gehry's work will be seen in the future as playful and interesting experimentation with form that happened for a period of transistion when architects didn't know how to move pass Post-Moderism, but conceptually deconstructivism is a one-trick pony and mostly artistic indulgence- an abberation like Gaudi, but with the fun, intensity, and humour sucked out.
Louis Kahn was mentioned in this thread- and there is a study in contrasts. Kahn had deep concepts of hierachical space and structural expression- a conceptual integrity that ties all aspects together in context- and is therefore nearly antithetical to Gehry. The two standing side by side would see Kahn as the calm adult and Gehry as the naughty child with a short attention span.
Architecture can also be art, but I believe when it tries to be purely Art it's only a dodge to larger respsonsibilities of history, humanity, context, and meaningfully articulate space.
I think the Gehry documentary would be interesting to see, but in my view it should be titled "But, the Emperor has no Clothes!".
Cheers,Bambi B
Its funny, you and I have almost exactly the same view of Gehry.
What do you think of stuff like the binoiculars?
I think it defines him as more of a sculptor... a stylist prhaps and certainly a conceptualist. I found it odd that the Disney Concert Hall was so praised by musicians... But I do have to say that the Ice rink does look good to me even if I have no idea how it functions.
Is Gehry just another manifestation of the cult(ure) of celebrity? The Paris Hilton of architecture?
In the film he comments that during the 80s (his comment although it could only be very early 80s at most), post-modernists decided to re-work Grek temples (ok I will accept that as a shorthand description) whereas he thought that if you went back through history looking for inspiration you could/should go back through evolution and that was how he came up with the various "fish"-things.
Sounds to me like he has never really gone beyond post-modernism.
Now with a successful practice and pesumably lafgre(ish) staff payroll its possibly too late to turn the juggarnaut.
Whatever happened to Michael Graves?
What would a Frank Gehry Alessi coffee set loot like? Crumpled plastic cups cast in silver?
Oh, I hope he didn't do one of that series...
dave c,Yes, I'd classify Gehry as a sculptor who makes buildings. Unfortunately, architecture is so rigourous, in my view it's indecisive and iimpulsive thereby resulting in neither great sculpture nor great architecture. He is certianly a "name brand" and a celebrity among architects, and certainly light years more useful and creative than tv fluff like Paris Hilton.
As for comments on Post moderism, Gehry had to show disdain for cohesive architectural concepts, and especially history- to be able to justify his floppy, impulsive style. There's been this strange insistence that post-moderism is dead and his work is the next thing- nbut to me it's a revolution of fashionability and is so personally arcane it will not survive him. His justifications for the fish shapes are meaningless- they're merely anti-architectural and distinctive to his design.
Cheers,
Bambi B
Yes we seems fairly in accord over Gehry.
Of course you always have to admire someone who has carved a career... but...
I just read your posts here and it suddenly came to me that Gehry reminded me of those SITE people... Wines? The guy with the beard? I met them in London and was talking to them about the BEST stores they did to which their reply was basically that no one really cared what they did beyond its publicity value because the things were pulled down and rebuilt every 18 months.
Can I assume you are or at least were an architect?
As a small scale developer, I come at the whole thing from a sometimes diametrically opposed direction, but as a designer I do like to have some input into the buildings, although knowing how impossible it is to do good work with someone staring over your shoulder, I try to at least initially limit this to handing over a pile of maybe 50 photographs of elements I think might be relevent and leaving the architect to use them in the way of Brian Eno's Oblique Strategies cards... when you encounter a dilemna, select a card and follow its instructions as a way of manouvering round the problem.
As an architect I would have to agree with most of your thoughts and observations.In todays world where there is more importance placed on superficiality and less on content I can see why Geary gets so much attention. I have always been a great admirer of Louis I. Kahns work and had him teach briefly when I was in architecture school. Also have seen many of his buildings around the world.
and you apparently don't like Gehry either....are there any contemporary architects whose work you are fond of? BTW, I went recently to the Getty Center for the first time and enjoyed the atmosphere immensely. I wish I had more opportunity to explore the grounds but that will be an excuse to go back in the near future...
TWB,I probably sound more negative about the Getty Center than it deserves. Individually, Meier is adept and makes neat solutions, but, as an ensemble I've thought the Getty was a completely souless collection of discarded office building designs. I knew the landscape architect for the Malibu Getty "The Villa" and this friend had done the first lacdscape designs for the Brentwood Getty. He talked of Meier as a rigid, egotistical maniac living in a universe of his own design- alone. I heard Meier once went through the cafeteria and creamed at emplyees, shouting that the chairs were not the distance away from the tables he had specified. The Getty Center is not terrible, but it is one of the greatest missed opportunity of the the entire 20th Century to do something amazing. The art collection is grade B- and they had $1 Billion so in context it seems a comparative failure. I wished the Getty had been done by Barragan- who probably would have introduced a poetic serenity and cohesion instead of coliding corporate offices. It feels like an expensive medical clinic and i always expect someone is going to tell me to "open wide".
Likewise Disney Hall has turned into another missed opportunity as it produced a hall of spotty functionality- I find the sound just terrible, and though I'm not terribly tall- 6'2", I sit in those expensive seats ($64 each for a piano recital and $15 parking) with my arms pulled in and my kness pressed against the seat in front. I'm all for exciting and interesting architecture, but Gehry makes his art musuems about his art with the real art as an afterthought that gets fit in later. Apparently the concert halls are all about his art too. I've been to a number of concerts at the Concertgebouw (Amsterdam) the Dismal Hall is supposed to be moldelled after and I can tell you Gehry must've spent all that time in the wrong hall- the two places have nothing in common. It's self-conscious and in my view, Gehry's reputation for being so sypmathetic to artists is akin to referring to George Bush as the Prince of Peace.
As an aside, I might mention I used to get in trouble when I had a radio programme for calling it "Dismal Hall". I also used to call the "Dorothy Chandler Pavilion" the "Dorky Chandalier". If you've been there you'll know what this refers to. In Los Angeles, no one is allowed to criticize the Disney or Getty on any level- vorboten in order to maintain civic pride.
There have been many architects I've admired in the 20th Centurry, but most of my heroes were working at the turn of the 19th to 20th Century: Voysey, Gaudi, Lutyens, Olbrich, FL Wright, CR Makintosh, Greene and Greene- I think the James House in Carmel Highlands is one of the greatest houses anywhere-, and then on to Corbusier- yes there is poetry in Corbu- Kahn, Venturi, Hollein, Barragan and so on. I knew Hadid, Liebskind, and Koolhaus too from school days but esp with Hadid who is an arrogant brat,a m not too excited with any of their work. The new Denver art mauseum by Liebskind is another example of 'desparate' architecture.
My particular favourite among contemporary architects is Charles Moore, who I think had the most integrated concepts and forms- and was endlessly inventive. He wrote extensively and intelligently and was a truly humane, socially conscious artist. I worked on a house with Moore in Singapore and he was one of the three or four smartest people I've ever spent time with- creative to the nth degree and friendly and accessible.
Cheers,
Bambi B
one agrees 100%. I too found the Getty completely unimpressive... and I visited soon after it's opening when it was being universally raved upon.
A month ago, I visited the arts center desinged by Gehry at Bard College. It looked cookie-cutterish, Bilbao-lite.
I believe the Phoenix AZ library is Koolhaas's work? I liked it very much.
Meier's art museum in Atlanta is nice, though enough with the white, already.
Graves has an enchanting building in Portland OR but it's impossible to see much of the interior spaces, they're private.
On a trip to Ft. Worth, I visited the Tadao Ando "addition" to the Kahn museum. Spectacular from the outside but it has those massive interior spaces, lit with huge glass walls, which are rather uninteresting. Good for the my-sculpture-is-bigger-than-your's artists, however.
You also neglected another current darling... Piano. And that Italian chap who built, in Milwaukee I believe, that building with the piercing roofline?
FLW continues to be my favorite "modern" architect: his interior spaces are so quiet, tranquil... and on a human scale.
calling Louis I.Kahn ...Herbert. What a dumb f***.
what a bunch of clechei comments.
post drunk!
Maybe you should take your own advice.
If you Google the British Museum you will find the extraordinary conversion/adaptatiojn Richard Rogers has done to this wonderful space in London. It involved the demolition of nearly an entire block of sheds surrounding the original byuilding which stopped anyone seeing the library. I seem to remember that the glass roof covers several acres...Its spectacular.
or did you mean 5'2".... as 6'2" IS tall!!! Sorry to hear the seating at Disney Hall isn't better or the sound (which is FAR more important). I have only driven by and observed from the exterior...I am a fan of Gehry's work...I've been to the museum in Seattle and do plan to attend a function @ Disney someday when there is an event that I think warrants the ridiculous prices they charge for admission. I'm very sorry that I missed hearing Linda Eder (who I'm a fan of) sing there...and have been watching for one of my favorite conductors to lead there on a visit (Jansons or Zinman). THEN, I'll pay...Maybe if Ms. Streisand performed there...I agree with you on the Dorothy Chandler....that place needs a remodel!!! I did see some good shows there over the years....(the ORIGINAL Chicago with Gwen Verdon and Chita Rivera and The Act with Ms. Minnelli. I actually prefer the Ahmanson to DCP...Like you I too am a huge fan of FLW's work as well...when I used to travel in my job, I'd stay at The Biltmore in Scottsdale (even though he only ghost designed it) the rooms there are huge and the grounds I love....I'm not by any stretch of the imagination an expert on architecture...I only know what I like...as to Charles Moore...didn't the Pasadena Showcase House do one of his homes in recent years? Not sure though...I do plan to make it to the Malibu Getty someday as well...when I went to the Getty Center I asked one of the docents about it and she said it is far and away better than it ever was....
TWB,Yes, 6'2". Actually, the Dutch are currently the tallest people in the World, the average Dutch Woman is 6'1" and men 6'3". When I'm in Amsterdam, I feel delightfully petite!
The Sound at Disney Hall: In my only three visits- a small sample, I did hear good sound and have legroom on one occasion, and that's when I sat right in front of the stage and was hearing the sound very directly. -This cost almost $90. On the sides and too far back, the sound to me is atrocious and for a particular reassn: I hear a lot of detail, but it's all from the audience: coughing, programme rattling and someone taking something out of a wrapper. I can hear these noises from completely across the hall and it's far too distractingly powerful. The sound heard from the performers may still be quite refined, but if it's penetrated and overwhelmed by coughing and wrapppers- it's not much use. And after probably 2000+ live performances in my lifetime and playing three instruments, I'm quite good at concentrating on music while cutting out extraneous noises.
The Getty Malibu: The Malibu Getty Roman villa copy is so delightfully goofy in concept, I really liked it. The amusing part is that it was orignally placed backwards with the entry facing into the hill and the "back garden" facing the Pacific. You entered by parking in a dim, industrial underground car park with the air conditioning ducts and suddenly rose into the back of a mosaicced and muralled topiary garden and went back suddenly 20 centuries. It was so shocking a contrast, I used to think it was deliberate Post-Modern irony. So, you came in the back door could see the Getty's famous multi-million Dollar fake Kouros.
I tried to visit for the first time since the reopening for this past weekend, but it's all booked up. I understand the entry is redone to enter from the proper front of the villa and towards the Ocean. The restaraunt has been removed to make this entry more open, and I think there's an impressive new amphitheatre round the back. I'm anxious to see it- from descriptions, the docents yuo spoke to are accurate- it must have resolved all the strange aspects of the old layout.
My late friend Dennis Kurutz was the original landscape designer for Emmet Wimpole and even in it's goofy original form, because of the setting and landscape, it was always a treat to visit- very serene. I am frankly not overly interested in Classical sculpture and ceramics, but I am with Egyptian stuff and those are the nearest Phaoronic objects to me. I live at the mouth of Topanga Canyon and can zip over the hill to the Getty in about 20 minutes. -See you there!
Cheers,
Bambi B
I too have been very bothered by the wrappers and coughs and program rattling (for lack of a better term) but I find them a lot less intrusive since switching my seats to the front row of the Orchestra West and I also think that during the last half of last season and the one concert I've seen so far this season there was far less of that type of noise then in the past.I used to imagine the day when they would finally either write in the program (in bold 24 point type) or announce before the concert master comes out that people need to be particularly aware of the effect those things can have on ones fellow concert goers.
I am very happy that it's gotten (or at least seems to have gotten) better.
"Except for the point, the still point, there would be no dance, and there is only the dance. " T.S. Eliot
That's certainly not true for everybody. I'm 6'1" with pretty broad shoulders, have probably been 65-70 times since it opened and I have no problem sitting very comfortably in all but one section (the Terrace section -- and that's perfectly tolerable). I don't know if this is related to being comfortable but I also have no problem sitting still for two hours.I find the sound to occasionaly tilt towards the bright side a touch but mostly it's a visceral aural experience for me with great detail, nuance, balance and tone. And that's not because I'm somehow afraid of saying otherwise (nor is it for the many other people I know who feel similarly).
I find the Orchestra East and West seats, from the stage edge out and from rows A-E to have the best sound -- that's we're my subscription seats are now.
Check it out. I think you'll like it.
I also think the hall itself is one of the most beautiful I've ever been in. I wouldn;t know where to start in comparing it sound wise to the Concertgebouw but I've thoroughly enjoyed seeing and hearing concerts in both places.
"Except for the point, the still point, there would be no dance, and there is only the dance. " T.S. Eliot
I had the opportunity to study briefly with him in school .He is a much greater and important architect then Geary could ever hope to be.
genius, Herman Kahn and I didn't even make a "correct" mistake!
Ah, old age...
You studied with LOUIS Kahn?
C'mon, that would make you 100 years old.
when he taught at my university in 1965, If you can do math that makes me 64.not over a 100.You really don't know anything about architects and architecture do you!
I do know how to get a guy to reveal his age.
Careful typing, I've heard of old guys getting finger stress fractures :--)
If not your stereotyping is dumb. I am in great physical shape.(6'-1", 180 lbs, swim every day, work out at gym 3 times a week, do trail biking on weekends, practice martial arts and am in excellent health.Probably better shape then you .
The way you phrased your relationship with Kahn, btw, implies you were a contemporary, not a student.
maybe it is because I see you as a total phony.
bullshit any integrity I will no longer have any respect for anyone on this forum.You are a very uninformed total joke.
nt.
physical conditioning. But why no pictures? You do seem so proud you must be a very fine specimen. MY!
nt.
a
...right that got your attention!
It might be time ti take a breath and get back to talking about the film.
I kinow I am not neccessarily the best to say that, but then again perhaps I am...
Gehry is undoubtedly one of the group of archjtects who gets invited to piych for those high profile jobs especially from cities trying to boost toourism.
Whether his popularity turns him into The Beatles or The Partridge Family remains to be seen.
Personally I think he merely took postmodernism in a different dirction and is fast becoming a one trick pony but then a lot of people are... and that's still one trick more than most of us pit ponies have!
He's also at least as much a stylist as an architect as judging from the film footage, discussion of the external appearance seems detached from concerns about the interior although some comments about The Disney Concert Hall seemed to contradict that.
I thought the Disney Ice building, which I had not seen before, was quite lovely.
Perhaps like Michael Graves, Disney is his true calling.
I too was totally moved by "My Architect". Kahn's creations were breathtaking and the film help educate so I could appreciate his work even more.
... seprised by the vigour of your dslike.
Although there were an abnormal number of (prceived) architectur students, I didn;t think the reaction anything butpositive.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
