[log in to unmask] wrote:

> Well... my thesis is about the work of John Nolen, early 20th century
> planner, and (I'm quoting Bruce Stephenson here) "While the New
> Urbanists have revived Nolen's planning principles, they use history
> primarily to score polemical points. If Kunstler...

Heidi,

I don't know John Nolan, I do know of Kunstler and have enjoyed his
books -- particularly on some of my road walks in the unHamptons having
to dodge traffic between the 7-11 and the mason's yard. From what you
say of Nolan I'd like to know more. What gets me in particular w/ the
New Discourse - New Urbanists, Duany in particular, is that they seem to
be trying to change architecture through language and that they are not
very good at literate skills. They do not read or write very well, and
they are not particularly observant of life around them. They exude a
great deal of hyperbole and loose ends. I suspect that they mean well
but it makes them look, to me at least, rather sloppy and feeble
brained. There is a time for everything and I enjoy being sloppy and
feeble brained in my own way (my grandfather told me to always keep it
at home in private) but they seem to be holding it up as high art.
Neither do I expect my sloppiness and feeble brained ways to to charge
out to the cutting edge of redesign of the future of humanity boxed in
shining new communities on a grassy hill, formerly prime farmland.

As to editing, I can tell you honestly from personal experience that
Ralph is an incredible editor, and my wife of 25 years, an editor told
me so, lest I might not notice. Now me... I don't edit very well. I only
make up fibs and lies.

][<

--
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>