BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
david west <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
The listserv troubled by a bad conscience and a good memory.
Date:
Thu, 10 Jan 2002 07:26:50 +1100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines)
][<en

> Reminding me of access and, what I assume to be,
> technical difficulties of various campaigns in the
> maintenance of the uptown NY Guggenheim. Though the
> building looks neat the shape presents scaffolding
> problems in an urban setting,

Form may follow Function, but the question is ...
which function is it following? Clearly the architects
of many modern buildings (not necessarily Modern
buildings - but not being an architectural historian
or theoretician, I sometimes struggle with my 'isms)
have failed to think about the need for maintenance
access.  Though come to think of it, I consistently
have problems with access to 19thC buildings with
large overhanging cornices and domed roofs ...

> ... it is equally striking that Form rarely
> follows Maintenance.

I think the problem comes because most people fail to
understand the need for maintenance of buildings.  We
buy cars, and (reluctantly?) accept the need to take
them in for regular services, but maintaining our
homes is a chore that we put off as long as we can,
and as for spending money on our investment properties
- only if we can't get new tenants.

Several weeks ago I had an interesting conversation
with a young member of the building industry where
this person told me that the collapse of the World
Trade Center buildings was 'wonderful' because it
illustrated the temporary nature of our buildings, and
showed people that what they thought were massive
permanent structures incapable of being damaged were
actually flimsy constructions that under the wrong
loading conditions would collapse like the proverbial
house of cards.  I found this to be one of my first
experiences of the painfully candid insight of the
young (and naive) not worrying about the
preconceptions or baggage of the audience in stating
what they think.  But the observation is valid in the
maintenance context as well.

> As to Gehry, I've thought his work interesting from
> back when he was designing beach houses in CA,
> though I would hesitate in my mind to ever compare
> him with Gaudi.

Yeah - I did too when I reread my email, but too late
at that stage.  Nevertheless, there are clearly
relationships due to the use of sculptural forms, and
the future benefit of hindsight might show the
comparison to be valid.

david

http://my.yahoo.com.au - My Yahoo!
- It's My Yahoo! Get your own!

ATOM RSS1 RSS2