EFFECTIVE 14 Nov. 2012 PRIVATE MESSAGING HAS BEEN RE-ENABLED. IF YOU RECEIVE A SUSPICIOUS DO NOT CLICK ON ANY LINKS AND PLEASE REPORT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION.
This is the Frank Lloyd Wright Building Conservancy's Message Board. Wright enthusiasts can post questions and comments, and other people visiting the site can respond.
You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, *-oriented or any other material that may violate any applicable laws. Doing so may lead to you being immediately and permanently banned (and your service provider being informed). The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. You agree that the webmaster, administrator and moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time they see fit.
I had seen the Siza building but didn't know it was an entire complex.
There are a lot of buildings here. The MAP might be the best place to access them.
One has to "work" this website to find everything.
Architecture characterized as "walk-in sculpture." Or does the characterization necessarily render the word "architecture" inappropriate---or worse ?
Thanks for introducing Hans van der Laan; his furniture is especially exciting. More images: https://www.google.com/search?q=Hans+va ... 16&bih=952
The student experiment with 36 stones in this paper is kinda cool, so is the comparison between his proportional system and the Golden Mean:
https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/B ... 425c020421
Then wonder at work like Mondrian who one would suppose did the same thing, but not at all.
Mondrian compositions were stirckly intuitive - no mathematics.
Is it because we trust neither intuition on the one hand, nor function-based design decisions on the other ? Are they a devine gift of the gods ? Are they a crutch ? Do the designers---and we---find pre-determined "design rules" somehow more satisfying that either of the aforementioned design methods ?
Note that, while Mr Wright favored the use of a design grid, he did not as far as we know also rely on a set of rules governing proportion. He apparently trusted his eye to make decisions about "how wide, how high, how long," beyond fitting his parts and pieces to a the chosen grid. That does not in itself make him a better---or a worse---designer than one who uses no grid, no system of proportion. What if anything does it mean ?
But there is a strong tradition here especially in pre-scientific historical architecture.
Alberti, Palladio, Vitruvius, ... Corbusier - ask them.
Attempting to read Voet's article on Laan's is not totally incomprehensible.
I certainly learned something from it.
... and certainly for Laan's the evidence of God in nature and the human relation
to it is an issue.
At least that is what Voet decribes.
I was thinking along similar lines yesterday while watching the interesting, though frustrating (yelling at the TV screen does no good) Robert Lawrence Kuhn show, "Closer to Truth: Cosmos. Consciousness. God." The show tries to find absolute connections between religion and science, in last night's case, "Why Philosophy of Art?" to which there is only one answer, "Why Not?" Philosophy, in the end, if it has an end, is a pastime. Kuhn and the several persons he talked to, including only one artist, who had the most intelligent response, couldn't get closer to truth. There is no final 'truth.'
I believe that if one wants to determine FLW's approach to design, it is probably the fact that he was, basically, a geometer. Math may be a useful tool in defining for oneself what art should be, but it isn't really anything to hang your hat on, generally speaking. When it came to geometry in ancient Greece, they relied on the Golden Mean.
God in nature is something, I suppose, but as with Kuhn's show, the more I hear theology intellectualized, the sillier it seems.
I am a bit surprised that both van der Laan and Voet proceed without defining or explaining the term "plastic number." Hence:
"Unlike the names of the golden ratio and silver ratio, the word plastic was not intended by van der Laan to refer to a specific substance, but rather in its adjectival sense, meaning something that can be given a three-dimensional shape."
From Voet I get: The work of an architect like van der Laan is to make the simple complex; to introduce an artificial or unnecessary complexity and mystery to the subject---reflecting, apparently, the complexity and mystery of God---from which after much thought is derived an answer to a question no one asked: "How do you measure space ?" Answer: by counting. "What are the maximum and the minimum dimensions of an object which can be perceived or discriminated by the human observer ?" Answer: a plastic number, a number "that can be given a three-dimensional shape."
In Acquinas' readng of Aristotle's "Metaphysics" van der Laan is said to have found lifelong inspiration, in the form of a "definition of a yardstick indivisible and relative to scale." The passage itself could not be more vague in its presentation of this "yardstick"---as I read it: "[a] thing from which, as far as our perception goes, nothing can be added or subtracted . . ." Pardon me ?
Credit to Ms Voet, for diving into a land where angels might fear to tread: following the tortuous path blazed by architect van der Laan wherever it might lead, and fearing not to point out a basic flaw in the work of her subject, making it clear that he arrived at the "plastic number ratio" 4:3 without showing how it could be, as he claimed, the only possible answer to his question. Whereupon the author rolls up her figurative sleeves and proceeds to "define this design tool without the mystifying framework that van der Laan created for it."
In any event, the man created some handsome sober and spare spaces enclosed by masonry, and for their interiors a collection of inspired furniture made of boards of wood. For that at least I thank him . . .
Here is a lengthy illustrated account of time spent at the Abbey at Vaals:
https://www.locusiste.org/blog/2012/11/ ... y-at-vaals
He does have some good shots of the place posted.
The exterior elevations of Van der Laan's work sometimes strikes me as bad.
His system I think is intended to smooth out transitions but some of those
punched hole elevations are just ugly - could have used some intuition I think.