The age-old dilemma: Is beauty really in the eye of the beholder, or, as Mr. Alexander thinks, an objective reality.The dangerous architect reveals his astounding ego in the new manifesto, going so far as to say that modern architects have "ruined" civilization, placing ego above organic building.
I must ask, then:
Seeing as this volume is so full of absolutes, who exactly has the largest ego?
2 comments:
"space and light and order, these are the things that men need as much as bread, or a place to sleep." (le corbusier)
your article made me think of this, whether it's true or not...
Beauty as proven by a scientific formula? I don't think so. This book is filled with very dangerous ideas. egotistical and elitist. But there is also a good side to their theory - the idea of organic growth. Piecemeal. Sometimes the creation of a whole neighborhood (or city) by a single developer in a short amount of time could create sterile environments and potential unforeseen situations. Vancouver bc and its manicured vertical suburbs (thanx Kristi) and possibly the south water front in ptown. We grow into our bodies and minds over time and so should a city. Things change and there needs to be room for adaptability, innovations.
not-so-anonymous marcus
Post a Comment