U S of A

Dos Passos describes an America which I am not familiar with... not 'American pie' or 'Friends'. It is one when Americans were building their foundation to dominate the world. It is one where all the hard work was being done to create the super power they are now.

Dos Passos's USA describes the characters of Henry Ford, Thorstein Veblen and Frank Lloyd Wright as men that saw the opportunity that the machine revolution provided them. Rather than accepting the farming life of their family and home town, they all felt that they belong to a different place. Given their background, they made financial progress despite their origin. Coming from a family of immigrants, they all had the idea of hard work instilled in their blood.

Based on these characters, it is evident that the machine revolution changed the lives of many people. Some clever enough took the chance and made themselves mega rich. In present day, I can only think of one thing which had such a drastic effect on people. That is the computers and the internet revolution. Is it fair to say that Bill Gates or Michael Dell are modern versions of Henry Ford? These men had major impacts on people's lives. They had the vision to see what people was in need of and they went to do that.

The Heroic Architect

The Fountain Head demonstrates many aspects of the profession. It is one of constant set backs and frustration before eventually succeeding. It is one of heroism and sacrifice.

The image of the architect portrayed in the film is one where the profession plays an important role in politics of the city. He is involved with key people. He is also constantly in the papers and people have an increased architectural awareness. Architecture were a glamorous field in these times. However, just like Howard Roark found out, it is easy to go from genius to the most hated person. Public opinion changes quickly.

In the film, the main character Howard Roark, has very strong ideas about what modern architecture should be. But unfortunately it is not one shared by the majority . He is unable to express his genius ideas. Most people don't get him. He is a person who will not compromise his design for money or fame. He is stubborn and determined. It is a life of sacrifice where he would rather not build anything than build something that did not belong to his ideals. It is an ongoing fight from beginning to end to actually convince people that architecture is about the truth.

On the other hand, there is also the sacrifice which an architect has to make in his personal life. The architect has to accept that love will have to wait and thus needs to fulfil his purpose. Domique Francon, Howard Roark's love interest is one of the few that understands his genius.

The contract which Howard gets into with Gail Wynand, the man who hated his building, is quite similar to making a pact with devil in order for him to succeed.

Close to the end, the court room shot, is reminiscent of the idea of individualism against collectivism. He stands alone arguing and defending his beliefs. It is quite the reflection of the architectural profession in one scene. We are condemned to suffer on our own. We can only hope there is light at the end of the tunnel. Architecture is not for the faint hearted. It is rather made for heroes. People who will not give up... who will not settle for any thing less.

Modernity. at what cost?

Reading Goethe's Faust: the tragedy of development provided me with an unusual insight into the dark world of modernity. Faust craves for a development of himself as well as society. By doing so, he frees other from their own subdued mind. Thus, meaning that for development to materialize, there must be liberation of thoughts and actions. But this freedom of life comes at a cost, one with 'dark and fearful' thoughts. Mephistopheles is Faust mentor in his quest to change the world.

With confidence from Mephistopheles, Faust makes the leap to 'the lover' where he meets Gretchen. She is a girl from a small town with all the purity in the world. On meeting her, Faust takes her innocence and naivety away. She is infected by modernity. In the company of Faust, Gretchen changes to become somebody else. She experiences modernity and all that comes with it. This development lead her to her own destruction. Modernisation has found another victim.

The final metamorphosis, the developer, sees Faust overgrowing his mentor to take charge. However, in his enthusiast and commitment to development, he destroys the medieval house of an old couple and then had them killed to build his tower. Faust completes his transformation to the dark side of modernity. He is blinded by his greed and stubbornness. The author writes further “once the developer had destroyed the pre-modern world, he had destroyed his whole reason for being in the modern world” It is hence true that for the modernity, there can be no future without past.

It is obvious that the author sees development as part of a give and take process. There cannot be development without sacrifice of some some sort. Furthermore, the development that is created has its own termination date where it has to make place for new developments to happen. For some reason, there seem to be an association between evil and modernity.

Le Corbusier in the 21st Century

Le Corbusier was obsessed with a series of beliefs over the course of his life . As a result this influence was heavily seen in his work. Around the 1920s, he was introduced to Purism during which he studied a particular type of objects he called 'objet types'. They are objects that had evolved into the most economical and efficient of forms. Being a perfectionist, he thought that certain objects using basic geometries had the ability to evoke emotions. He also saw man as a geometrical animal and had a strong need for order.The image and technological change that machines had brought in those days was of great aspiration to him. He described them as disciplined and displayed a natural evotion into the most obvious of forms. They were practical. This lead to 'Machines for living' which had his five points or new architecture. Later on , his interest took quite a different direction when he began to draw and paint sensual forms of landscape, nature and women. He had a personal language of symbols. He understood the complex relationship between elements of nature, its importance to men. One of his most distinguished work is the Chapel at Ronchamp in which he seemed to have brought together his experience of paintings and scultpting. Le Corbusier's work never stopped changing. He believed that in order to stay ahead of his rivals, he had to reinvent himsef. He had to burn his past for a new beginning to happen.

Often I ask myself, what would have been the architecture of Le Corbusier in the 21^st century if he was living in our times. The time of computers and internet at its peak. The amount of influence that information technology has brought into our lives, let alone architecture. How would the design of Ronchamp change if it was first drawn on cad. His adoration for nature would have certainly kept him going into the sustainable architecture. Would global warming have been a complete surprise to him? As much as machines have contributed to the evolution of humanity, it has also brought this world almost to its knees. He would have probably found it hard to impose his utopian ideas. Still, he would have enjoyed how architecture and the construction techniques have changed over time. What would have been his symbolism? Computers, mobile phones, ipod, online shopping or perhaps it would have been the quite the same as before, nature and the cosmos.

Us against them.

Skynet has taken over the world... nobody saw it coming

The resistance is our only hope of fighting back the machines.

They are everywhere. The Metals are everywhere.

We have paid the price for our ignorance, our laziness, our refusal to accept the truth

The resistance is your last chance!!!

[message left at : 13:17 11 Novemeber 2045]

Strange to think that this could be our future. our beloved machine is our best friend, our brother, our sister, mum and dad. We tell them everything. We are no more in need of socializing with other humans. We have found one thing that truly listens to us without complaining. They are faithful and honest. They make no mistake. They do their jobs. They see and hear everything. They know everything, what we like, what we don't like. They are always in a good mood. They are always on time. Ocassionally, the get sick but then they have brand new readily available replacements. They are the objects of our desires. We can only dream of being as good looking, as precise, fast, efficient and expensive as them. They are perfection. They are what we have failed to be!

But we have fallen for their charm and their shiny plastic. We have tasted the forbidden fruit, opened pandora's box. The machines have won, they have infiltrated our lives. They know our every move. They have been to all our parties. They have turned us into their slaves. They have become our drug...our addiction, 24/7 information... connectivity...we crave the need for an emotional connection not with fellow humans but with a mother... a motherboard, We have changed our own habits to suit them. We have accomodated their needs. We have been used and abused. They have swallowed our soul, our identity. Our planet has been consumed for their benefits, for their own welbeing. They have sucked all our energy. Skynet has arrived.

Las Vegas without time!

I have never been to Las Vegas and yet I could feel the adrenaline rush through the words of the authors. It is a shame that both writings did not come with images. That would have been it for me. My eyes were begging for them. The neon lights, the music, the heat, the sun, the girls, the limo and the glamour...my imagination takes me to scenes of Ocean's Eleven and 21, my only only experience of Vegas for now.

The first thing that struck me when going through Tom Wolfe 's piece was the absence of the notion of time among the characters. Yes, Wolfe mentions the time and day on several occasions but the feeling I get is that in Las Vegas, time does not equal money. Money is simply money or perhaps being high on adrenaline 24/7 equals money. They have no responsibility towards time. What they do on a Monday at 7am is probably what they would be doing at 3am on Saturday. Las Vegas is heaven. There at least they have more than 24 hours in a day.

On the other hand, Dave Hickey picks on Las Vegas on a slightly bigger scale. I can certainly identify with the idea of escaping home town for Las Vegas. Although, London might not be anywhere close to Vegas but the very idea of leaving home for a better life is not always true. What could be true is the excitement of living in a thrilling city. May be that is why it is the destination of the heart. Everything is possible in Vegas and it gives the average American hope. Interesting to note that the grass is always greener somewhere else even for Americans let alone immigrants. While Vegas provides not much option to progress in the social ladder, it makes almost no difference between societal classes. What you see is what you get.

Social Space

No I will not deny that Last fridays session on Henri Lefevbre's social space left me in complete shock. I had just witnessed the most bizarre and yet complex discussion for a very long time. The ideas and theories that were discussed were out of my realm.

“Concept”, to explain the meaning of concept, one would require the use of words and context. Because words on their own do not reflect context. Words have no backdrop but only meaning. I believe a concept is an idea that has been thought before hand.

The difference between price and value. According to the class discussion, value is what society requires to produce something while price is what will that cost when sold on the market. I think that value has a completely different meaning to me. Value has no quantity and it cannot be counted. Price is based on a figure and has a quantity. Moreover, value is a personal thing. It changes from people to people,

Product is something that is standard and can be mass produced while work has a uniqueness and is usually a one off. At that point I just wonder where do people in the entertainment industry sit? Is acting not an art for instance. Are all arts not meant to be unique in one way or another?

Nostalgia was definitely my favourite topic. I think nostalgia is a trick of the mind. It is the bending of time to create what was there before. the replay culture is the result of our nostalgia. Nostalgia is biased. It only remembers what is good.

Politics of Amnesia

I believe that we are still relying on past theories because this generation is still too young and has not come to terms yet with what is happening around. Thus, limiting our understanding of this era. We are currently living in a passive period of time. Information is flowing way too quick for us to actually sit down and really reflect on them.

On the other hand, I find it rather refreshing that we are now able to mix work and pleasure or should I say serious academic work with fun. I come originally from a society where work is work and fun is fun. The two should not be mixed if one is to succeed. I would be thrilled to be able to explain to people back home that you can actually do both at the same time. I strongly do believe that it is through pleasure and working hard at the same time that master pieces are produced. Why would I bother reading about Flaubert when I am having a laugh watching Friends. There seem to be a belief that theory or in fact studying should be a sacrificial thing that is difficult and complex. We need to be able to torture ourselves so that we can believe we have achieve something. Besides, writing about everyday life allows one to basically analyse himself. We are currently living in the times of realty shows like Big Brother. It still amazes me to find out how many people are obsessed with Big Brother. Have we reached such a low point in humanity that we now believe watching 10 people living together in a house on a daily basis is interesting? Yeah I am sure somebody somewhere is doing a whole PHD on Big brother....now that must be sad!

Fear, Money, Greed and Slavery in Dubai

Dubai...

Hallucination/ phantasmagoria seem to be the kind of words one would experience while under the influence of drugs.Not that I am talking of experience but is Dubai the place where we go to get high and to live in an imaginary realm. If not drugs then is it Peter Pan’s Neverland we shall never age but we could fly? Funny enough that I wouldn’t be surprised if this becomes reality in the near future because we are talking about Dubai!!!

For a man like Sheik MO, nothing is too big, nothing is too tall. He is all architects’ dream client. He is the Santa Clause of the Architectural world. His greed to be number one can only be a good thing for the architectural profession.

It sickens me to read about the kind of treatment that the workers experience there. They have built the whole place with oil, money and cheap labour. The title of the article should really be: Fear, Money and Slavery in Dubai. At the beginning of the article I was really excited about the prospect of visiting Dubai and maybe one day working there. However, by the time I was done reading, I am now not even sure I want to set foot in this place even though I have nothing to fear. Still, as long as there are people available to work for cheap, things will never change.

My Comments on Zaha Hadid's discussion

If Zaha Hadid’s office feels more like a factory than an office, it remains difficult for me to imagine it as a happy working experience. I would be bored to death if there were no talking at all. As a student doing my year out, it was through constant questions that allowed me to progress. Hence, in Zaha’s office there is probably no exchange of knowledge but only orders from the dictator herself. Besides, if architecture is about bringing people together for social interaction, then Zaha Office is not doing that.

I think she is right in saying that the computer is not a tool because it contributes to the whole creation of the design. Computers influence heavily on the way designers even think about their project apart from being just a ‘pencil’.

Meades also comments on the fact that Zaha Hadid lives in “neglected pockets of the mid 20th century utopianism” while her office in Clerkenwell is compared to "scents of Dickens”. Similarly, Le Corbusier preferred to work in an old office rather than in his modernist buildings. He believed that only his clients should have the exclusivity and privilege of his own designs and not him. Zaha probably expresses the same kind of branding exclusivity which her design has become over time.

I think a good mixture of old and new buildings definitely creates a unique architectural experience in a city. However, to constantly design buildings that glorifies the past is ridiculous and probably a bad influence for society. Zaha’s ambition to a new style will only help to influence society to look forward and embrace progress.