Gwatter06, 9/20

This past week we had to cover Habermas and Jencks, and I have to say they were quite the pair to endure. I did enjoy both of the readings and feel like I was able to gain and comprehend most of the work the men incorporated in their pieces. I was also able to continue to observe and piece together the coincidences between these authors and previous ones we have covered which has been helping me a great deal in keeping up with and comprehending the information. In our first meeting of the week we covered Habermas and his aspects and concepts on traditionalism and conservatism and how they relate to postmodernism. One of the more basic and preliminary things we covered from Habermas’ is he believes that the basic tenant of modernism is that we are making progress, the world is always getting brighter and better. On another note, one of the more interesting things that we went over in class was Habermas’ notion stated by this quote, “Culture in its modern form stirs up hatred against the conventions and virtues of everyday life” (101). This quote signifies a notion that I have come to realize is prominent within multiple authors we have covered. What I understood from this quote and what we went over in class is that we are in an era where conformity should no longer be permitted and is not wanted by our modern culture. What I also enjoyed from class this week was going over Jencks and his explanations on architectures. We looked over numerous pictures of different styles and buildings and went over which styles Jencks expressed and how it’s incorporated with postmodernism. There were so many different styles and I was intrigued by how some carried similarities and others carried extreme differences but all at the same time had underlying significances.

Teets, 9/20

Habermas discusses both traditionalism and avant-gardism in his piece. Avant-gardism is linked to postmodernism while traditionalism is linked classicism. I think this juxtaposition of concepts tied in very nicely with our class discussion on Thursday regarding Jencks. In class we looked at architecture using some of Jencks’ eleven canons. We looked at canons such as disharmonious harmony, anthropomorphism, radical eclecticism, urbane urbanism, anamnesis and divergent signification. I’ve always noticed differences in certain architecture, but never to the extent we covered in class. To me the concepts were all avant-garde because they go against the norms we have created in society. A normal building is one with four walls, windows and doors. To me the most radically different concept was divergent signification. It takes the traditional building and literally reverses it inside out. It is a bit of an eyesore, but people can appreciate the idea behind it. Instead of hiding the plumbing and other hidden features, it exposes them. We primarily covered architecture in class, but I think that Jencks’ insight can be applied to many facets of society.

Specifically I want to compare the concepts of urbane urbanism and radical eclecticism to our society. In class we mentioned that these concepts are essentially complete opposites in architecture. Radical eclecticism seeks to contrast two or more pieces of architecture in close proximity in a drastic way. One of the examples we discussed was the Louvre. The old Louvre is a rather plainly designed European building. However, a new entrance was built with a large Pyramid as the focus. These two forms of architecture were extremely contrasting, hence radical eclecticism. Urbane urbanism is essentially creating a new building that looks like it fits in with old architecture. In society, traditional people seek to fit in with the crowd, move seamlessly along with the norms of society. However, radical people seek to stand out, make themselves noticeable. It is often the radically eclectic people that have an influence in the world, not the traditionalist people who try to fit in everywhere they go. Standing out can often be a negative thing, but many times over it can be an excellent way to live your life. Instead of hanging in the background with everyone else, why not make yourself the focus of the foreground?

BiegieGo, 9/20

First off I didn’t mean to send the past blank post. Sorry.
I found that the readings for this week were a little difficult to understand but by no surprise Dr. Rog managed to explain them in to terms that were more understandable  thanks. Another thing I noticed in the last class was in some of the photo’s he showed that class I had been to some of the places. I thought that was awesome!
In the Habermas reading, the quote that stayed with me the most, and I could relate to is the “the cult of the new.” Meaning that it’s the “newest modern,” that if its new its better and that our society needs it and goes and gets it when it comes out on the market. For example the iphone or the newest iPod or pretty much anything apple related, our society seems to want it and has to get the latest style or technology. It almost seems as we are somewhat robotic. We hear about some new style or invention coming out, we go stand in lined for hours to get it and then when it gets old we do it all over again like robots.
In the Jencks reading, I found it very helpful to think of all terms in a building kind of way. I thought that multi-valence was interesting because it is looking at how to make as many sides as possible out of one thing, I think that was cool how frank gray used a cube to build apartment houses.

BiegieGo, 9/20

Captain Planet 09/20/09

I loved looking at all the different pictures of architecture in class on Thursday. By looking at the different types of architecture on the overhead, the concepts that Jencks discussed in the reading were clarified. Even though Jencks was an easier reading to get through that Habermas, I was still a bit confused about some of the key terms that were discussed. By actually seeing types of buildings and talking about the meanings of the terms, I was able to understand exactly what Jencks was talking about. Prior to the Jencks reading we have been talking about postmodernism in terms of media. I never realized that postmodernism also applied to architecture. Architecture follows the trend, just like media. Styles are repeated throughout history; ex: classical becomes neo-classical. I hadn’t been to any of the buildings that we looked at in class, yet I knew of most of the buildings. I realized that many of the buildings we looked at were famous because of they’re architecture. The Louvre in Paris is an easily recognizable building, and yet I never looked at the architecture as something uniquely different. Once we placed the term “radical eclecticism” to the type of architecture that The Louvre represents, I was able to clearly understand the definition of the term. This goes for the rest of the terms as well. I also loved looking at the anamnesis buildings. As soon as the ‘birds nest’ was shown I immediately knew that it was the swimming pool building from the Olympics and knew that it was called the ‘birds nest.’ Like The Louvre, I never thought to assign a certain type of architecture to the building. Now that I understand how many different types of architecture there are, I have already begun to look critically at buildings when I look at magazines pictures, or watch a commercial, or drive down the highway.

Daisy, 9/20

Last class I really enjoyed looking at the architect visuals. It was helpful to associate the meaning of a word with a picture. In my pre-class post I had talked about Frank Lloyd Wright’s architecture and that I thought it could be applied to Jencks’s article, I was really excited when Dr. Rog used it in class as an example.
A comment that I received on my pre-post blog was to think about how Jencks’s definitions could apply to more than just art, but society. If you think about it, just like art, our society has progressed along the same way. During the Greek and Roman times when the Parthenon was built, society was very symmetrical like the architecture. The men worked and the women took care of the home, children, and their husbands. As architecture became more ornate, so did society. The women’s rights movement allowed women to do more than just be stay-at-home moms. Society became more diverse as revolutions happened and people going against what was consider the norm. Now thinking of our society in the modernism era, technology plays a large part in both art and other aspects. I-phones, Blackberry’s, and computers dominate our lives. Everyone today is connected, and if you’re not than you are not keeping up with the times. Jencks’s applies the term disharmonious harmony to an architectural building that has many different aspects but they all fit together. I think many people today have different aspects that make up their lives but somehow they all fit together. For example, a woman might be a lawyer, participate on her child’s school board, be an active member on her local hospital’s women’s board, and also be a triathelete. While the woman has a main occupation, she also has many aspects of her life that all go together to make her unique, like many people in our society. Just like multivalence architecture, people have many different sides to them. Like Habermas talked about, we live in a hyperstimulated modern culture where everyone specializes in multi-tasking.

ESPN12, 9/17

I never quite realized that in this post modern era that along with media, art, and our thoughts being affected, architecture is involved to. I really enjoyed studying the buildings in class. It was quite interesting to see how they are different and how buildings have evolved over the years. It has opened my eyes to the way I view architecture. I was introduced to so many new terms I had never heard before and there were so many things I had never seen or paid attention to before. I have been to Paris before but prior to class I simply looked at such things as the Luv in a primitive way. I had always appreciated the beauty instilled in the buildings but now I see there is so much more. I am now able to see the difference in them and how the other buildings around are affected. For instance, when I now look back at my pictures I am able to classify buildings such as the Luv in Radical eclecticism. I have also been to China and if I would have not known the name of the birds nest prior to visiting; I would have surly been able to guess what it was. I certainly then took part in the notion of anamnesis as I connected it in my subconscious. Another building that I saw while in china was the world finical building in Shanghai. It was no on the slide show in class. However, If I understood the definition right, I now realize that it is in the category of Anthropomorphism because it looks exactly like a beer bottle opener and it is commonly referred to as so. I also used anamnesis when I first looked this building to as I immediately associated it with a beer opener. It is remarkable how far architecture has come since the days of simple classicism, for me it is exciting as more buildings arise because I am now able to look at them more critically in this postmodern world.