February 02, 2006

Thank you for the Feedback

Mr. Lord has suggested that I make changes in my website of the style from Mies van der Rohe. I wish to explain why I cannot do this.

In our office we have a strong friendship with the modernist philosophy. But to understand modernism in our way, you must also have a romantic character. The modernism fought against the tyranny of historicism. It found new forms of expression to rival the classical forms of the Romans and Greeks. But it risked sterility, and van der Rohe was not escaping from this trap.

Some thing is lacking in this man, even if you look just at his face. It is not the face of a man of passion who struggles against bonds imposed by the system of a tyranny. It is not the face of a courageous inventor. It is the face of a, how do you say, hack.

This is how OMA is different. This man van der Rohe's Seagram Building is a symbol of the nullification power of absolute authority:

The image “http://www.thecityreview.com/seagram9.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

It is, how you say, priapic?

You can then compare this with OMA's playful yet functional and passionate Seattle Library, which embodies our founder's motto, "fuck context":

The image “http://www.akbrian.net/pics/2004/Seattle/seattle_library.jpg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

I hope will understand this is why I cannot change my web site in this way.

Thank you.

6 Comments:

Blogger JAB said...

Whimsical angularity is a mere flourish upon rigorous modernist principles, neither a counter-revolution nor a rehabilitation of grace and decoration. As such, it lacks conviction.

Your site, I am afraid, is cluttered.

February 2, 2006 at 9:38 PM  
Blogger VMM said...

Further, to compare van der Rohe's masterpiece to this provincial branch library is -- it is like comparing Wilt Chamberlain (tall, priapic in stature and deed) with, say, Kurt Rambis (appealing, yeomanlike, but ultimately, cannot touch Wilt's jock).

(Also, there is something about Rambis' face that I find disingenuous, a 'put on' of countenance.)

February 2, 2006 at 11:33 PM  
Blogger Latouche at Large said...

The article of the Wikipedia says Mr. Chamberlain won 2 championships, but Mr. Rambis won 4.

Like Mr. Chamberlain's fans, those who praise the Seagram Building confuse altitude and promiscuity with real achievement.

I am glad you mentioned Mr. Rambis. I know little from the American sport, but I look at his picture I can tell he is a great spirit.

February 3, 2006 at 7:23 AM  
Blogger VMM said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

February 3, 2006 at 1:28 PM  
Blogger VMM said...

I must give you credit, Latouche. There are few men who would take up Rambis' side in a comparison against Chamberlain. Very, very few. Only one, I would have said, until very recently.

February 3, 2006 at 1:31 PM  
Blogger Latouche at Large said...

Thank you Mr. Madrona, I am glad have an open mind, and not the typical American obsession with size.

February 3, 2006 at 7:10 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home