« Is there really any doubt? Or is posing it as a question simply a bureaucratic device? | Main | The Turner Prize 2004 »

May 19, 2004

I don't think so.

That Brutal Joint's Response to Salingaros's Response

We have to live with the laws of physics, too; that doesn't mean we should all be conversant in string theory. We listen to music, but we're not all expected to perform Schenkerian analysis. It is wrong to suggest that just because everyone uses buildings, architectural theory should be dumbed-down to the level of those who have had no architectural instruction.

By the same logic we should do away with voting and leave politics to political scientists. No.

UPDATE: Contrary, I don't think we in fact let cede politics to politicians. And anyway, there is -- thank god and the founding fathers -- no specvvial qualifications for being a politician except convincing at least a plurality of one's fellow citizens. The very notion that we should leave discussions of urban form to architects is odd. One could argue -- just as wrongly -- that urban form should be left to real estate developers.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/1645/756208

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference I don't think so.:

» back and forth from no, 2 self
It seems this one just doesn't want to lie down. Salingaros posted a response to the criticism of his paper on Tschumi and Brutal Joint followed it with a response to the response. City Comforts just filed a response to the response to the response. It [Read More]

Comments

I have to agree on David Sucher´s point. Understanding a disease or instruments of mass destruction doesn´t make them more appealing!

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear on this weblog until the author has approved them.

Three Rules of Urban Design

Buy the book

The essence of "city-ness"

Search five years of this blog


My own favorite posts