Bonus Blog #4

          I had forgot about this event that I had attended towards the beginning of the quarter. But it was pretty cool. Plastic Musik is a group of 5 guys that have created a percussion show that includes the use of plastic tubes (of various sizes), laundry tubs, and of course regular musical instruments. The entire show is full of energy. These guys cover all sorts of genres of music...all the way from classical to today's hits. I have added two videos of their performances for your viewing pleasure. It's amazing to see how these guys can literally take "trash" and use it to create pretty awesome sounds. I guess it goes to show that "one man's trash, is another man's treasure.

 

Bonus Blog #3

          The third lecture that was held for the school of architecture this quarter came from an architect from the firm Archimania. Todd Walker, one of the founders of the Memphis firm, was possibly one of my favorite speakers so far. He isn't one of those hot shot "starchitects" and I sure he doesn't want to label himself within that category. He seemed like a down to earth guy that only cared about pleasing people with his work. The thing that I like the most about him and his firm is that even though they work hard, they actually make their work it fun. It seems that their firm feels more of a family rather than some dictatorship (like in a major "starchitect" firm). Everyone works together rather than having one "big-guy" and a shit load of cad monkeys. They are located in not too big o a city and they mainly care about improving their "home area". The one thing that amused me was when Mr. Walker was telling us about the first question that he asks to a potential employee. "Are you an asshole?" Hopefully that potential employee knows the correct response to that question if he/she really want the job.
          

Bonus Blog #2

The second lecture that was offered to us architecture students this quarter came from a representative of the Nation Council of Architectural Registration Board (NCARB). I'll be the first to say that it wasn't the most exciting lecture that I've been to but this guy presented us a lot of information that ultimately affects our future as architects. I really appreciated how he walked us through the Architectural Registration Exam (ARE). After checking out NCARB's website, I was able to find numerous study guides and practice tests to help prepare for the test (which will obviously help, come study time). Another thing that was talked about, was the Intern Development Program (IDP). IDP pretty much is a training program that was created so that interns (within the architecture profession) are able to gain the knowledge and skills that are required for independent practice. I was stunned by the total amount of hours that must be logged, in order to receive an architectural license. 5,600 total hours...WHAT THE HELL!!!!! But I must look at it within a good perspective range....it only helps me become a better me.

Hidden Architecture

          After going through this week’s readings, the one that interested me the most was the one talking about “hidden architecture” from the Superstudio guys. Since it was a short read, I started looking for more information to grasp a better understanding of this project. Apparently, there is not a dam thing that I could find on this particular project. So, I decided to go back to the reading to try and pick it apart. I can’t seem to understand the significance of designing something, then never show it to people. Why design it? And the fact that they burned the original drawings and preserved the copies!?!?

I personally do not see this as architecture. It’s more of an art installation, creating a statement that I can’t seem to figure out. If I had to guess, I'm sure technology plays a role within the overall concept of this project. For example, the internet is a system of interlinked hypertext documents that can be accessed via the World Wide Web (WWW). The WWW itself (and the way it works) cannot physically be seen. It's a working system that is "HIDDEN". The guys at Superstudio created a system and "hid" it within its own space. But what is the significance of burning the drawings once they were drawn? Maybe I'm just not grasping the big picture. I wish there was more of an explanation of why this project was done.

 On another note, I'm also fascinated with Archigram's "Instant City" project. It's an interesting idea of how a mobile city could drift itself into some part of the world. It would invade a "sleeping city" and sort-of bring it to life. A series of blimps or balloons drop into areas, providing entertainment, food, art, and other ways of life. Talk about a major cultural experience. It makes me wonder what the hell kind of drugs were Peter Cook and David Greene taking to come up with these crazy ideas.

The Good, the Bad, and the STARchitecture

          When I think about the values of the star system, I really don't know what side to support. I'm stuck in the middle. I wouldn't say I'm "pro-". Nor would I say that I am "anti-". But there are different issues that I address with the star system.

Frank Gehry

          The "pro-" side of me says that the star system is valuable in the field of architecture. It's usually the "starchitects" that design the iconic buildings. Their buildings usually attract the visitors. And it's their buildings that always stand out. Most importantly, it's the "starchitects" that we as students usually look to for precedent when we take on a new studio project.
          The  "anti-" side of me says that the star system is corrupt. These architects that were lucky enough to make it to celebrity status only care about one thing...MONEY. They create their "signature building" and repeatedly design the same building all throughout their career. And of course the worse thing is, (because they are famous) these "starchitects" charge bookoo money for these buildings. Take for instance Frank Gehry. When he designed his Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, each square foot cost $300 for a grand total of $100 million dollars. His Disney Concert Hall cost $215 million dollars. $215 million dollars for a piece of shit building? Really? How can Frank Gehry call himself an architect when all he does is crumple up a piece of trash, then calls it architecture. Does that allow us to call his architecture trashy?  But apparently people like his work. Obviously he's doing something right. And I'm not going to deny the fact that his Guggenheim Museum did a lot for the city of Bilbao. Today that city is known all because of that one building, or ICON.
          On a side note, I've been thinking about the actual classification of a "starchitect". Do the architects that WE classify as "STARchitects", actually classify themselves as "starchitects". In one article that I came across, an interviewer asked Frank Gehry about the star system. Gehry replied, "I don't know who invented that fucking word "starchitect". In fact a journalist invented it, I think. I am not a "star-chitect", I am an ar-chitect". I think it's funny that one of the most talked about architects can't stand the classification of "STARchitect". I guess it all depends on the overall ego of the specific architect...(a.k.a. Rem Koolhaas).

Works Cited:

 http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/architecture/frank-gehry-dont-call-me-a-starchitect-1842870.html