I'm not sure who I am responding to here... but whomever disagrees with
Social Contract -- Zoning law is a manifestation of the social contract.
"Social contract" is a concept, not a document or a specific covenant.
The social contract, as a political science term is the root of
cooperative, and not always explicitly stated, human relationships in
community. It is a social contract that initiates the political process,
and is as simple as the general "social" acceptance of the US
Constitution as a viable set of rules. In geographic/social areas where
there is a much different set of perspectives than ours as to real
estate investments, even to the extent of differences of approach to
capital (and I do not mean revolutionary/reactionary anti-capitalism but
a more basic and simple difference of world view) then there may very
well not be Zoning law as a regulator to alteration of the built
environment. Yet there may be a nascent awareness of a desire for
architects, leastways, the specialization of those who have a talent for
spatial design of structures. How do we tell a Doctor from a Shaman or
either of them from a Chiropractor? Another manifestation of the social
contract is professional licencing and the ethical implications that
accompany licenses is greatly connected to the social contract that
exists by which there are architects who remain in good standing and
stay out of trouble, and there are those, albeit a minority, who do not.
In this case is it NOT the architects themselves, through the AIA in
particular, that determine who is or is not an architect? Though it may
appear highly GRAY and ambiguous and arbitrary who gets selected to be
an architect-- as per the ice castle example, though it is my
understanding that you can become an architect without attending
college, just as one can become a lawyer solely by passing the bar, that
it is the social contract by which we, who are not architects, accept
architecture as a profession separate and distinct from any other vocation.
Which brings up, for me, another topic, which is that an essential
quality of a Master (as in Master Builder, Master Mason, Master Buddha:
as opposed to Journey or Apprentice) is in self-definition. The
definition of mastery is in part defined by the example of the Master
themselves. You know them, or you think that you know them, when you see
them.
][<
creighton wrote:
> Also, we require an architect for a bedroom addition in 2004 because
> we have created social contracts to protect our real estate
> investments ---------- I don't agree I see zoning law filling that
> role. The building code places very few limits on what you can build,
> just on how you build things. Granted that cool old back stair steep
> and narrow is no longer possible, but how many buildings from 1700
> have survived? We only think all the old stuff was great because only
> the well built and maintained made it. All the lemons fell down.
>
> ----- the creative streaks of our neighbors -------------- also
> don't agree A close look at any neighborhood pre 1850s will reveal
> rules that are followed past that imposed by standard lot size and
> streets. Geometric rules govern entire neighborhoods. These rules
> were imposed by the builders themselfs, not government. The
> passing of this balance came along with mass manufacturing (=
> higher productivity, live past 30, masons no longer handle 2000
> bricks a day ect.)
> It seems to me that architecture has passed from exterior
> view driven to interior
>
> Now what are your 10 favorite structures? How many had architects?
> EiffelTower, Hell Gate Bridge,
>
> I look out now on a stonehenge type ice block structure Ezra and
> Willa made, I don't know which was the art a choke
> been wondering exactly where these postings are going as I don't
> see them on the list any more
> creighton
>
--
To terminate puerile preservation prattling among pals and the
uncoffee-ed, or to change your settings, go to:
<http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/bullamanka-pinheads.html>
|
