Re: Supplanting Singing?

On Wed, 1 May 1996, David Sucher wrote:
> I'm sure that Daniel Libeskind is a very nice fellow and he means well but
> if his work can foster criticism that is so lacking in meaning to the lay
> person (who will, after all, be the one who experience his work) then
> perhaps it is a sign of the work's own dryness.

Dave,

Of the proposals for Alexanderplatz, in Berlin, Libeskind was the only
architect to not get boo'd off the stage during a public presentation of
the work by the architects!! Hans Kollhof, the winner, however is
proposing a nostalgic, historical re-working of the Rockefeller Center.
His scheme could be said according to your critic to be accessible to the
lay public by its obvious bow to popular imagery and pastiche. I am
critical of such work that enters into kitsch so that it may appeal to
the uniformed public you describe.
A friend asked me today if the novelist should write DOWN to the people
or should write their best and let the people develop their own meaning
within this. Meaning is a slippery issue. In architecture there has been
a long discourse about its ability, intention to communicate rather than
to manifest.
Would you say that Venturi is more able to convey meaning to his audience
because that is his intention?
I would argue that while there is a disturbing inconsistency to the form
and writing of many architects, Libeskind's Jewish Museum, under
construction right now, will prove his ability to translate into material
his project in general.

I am only reacting so strongly to your point about lack of meaning
because I feel you underestimate the ability of lay persons to perceive
their environment. With any masterful project there should be levels of
meaning as well. So that upon further study deeper of more rich notions,
feelings can be acheived. Consider any great building and this is the
case. Mies or Corbu are so often reconsidered due to their work having
this layering and openness to constant reinterpretation. Meaning is only
something that the architect can provide opportunity for and not specific
meaning itself, following the post-structural critic.

Also, it is our position also to be expressive beings. Within any work we
do is an implicit manifestation of our view of the world. This can be
made explicit in our work, such as the Italian fellow with the triangle.

scott