Syncophants Arise

I can hear their shrieks now: Libeskind's Denver Art Museum Expansion

Now calm down. It's not that I am immune to the spectacular. I like the Rockettes and I like Liberace and I like the movie theaters of the 1920s. And I even like this Libeskind design, as much of its interior as is shown anyway. But as an advancement of culture it's so irrelevant...so nothing-to-do with the daily texture of life...so striving, so arty. But I grant him an A for intention: Libeskind would like to be relevant. In fact he writes about the importance of architecture:

It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the machine that produces the universe which produces the gods. It does so not fully through theories or reflections, but in the ever non-repeatable and optimistic act of construction. The qualities of its resistance, which are as pragmatic as the materials from which it is built, form an irascible and volatile field whose smile is not that of Buddha.

The only problem is that his words are too unclear to have any real substance. It would be nice if a (probably) talented fellow like Libeskind could get down from his high horse and just talk plain English.

via Modern Art Notes

Comments

[Chris Burd]

I think the plain English version of the Liebeskind quote you provided is... total silence.

Read the following six sentences:

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the machine that produces the universe which produces the gods."

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the universe that produces the machine which produces the gods."

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the god that produces the universe which produces the machine."

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the machine that produces the gods which produce the universe."

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the god that produces the machine which produces the universe."

"It seems to me that architecture is, in fact, the universe that produces the gods which produce the machine."

Are they not all about equally plausible, or meaningless?

[Adam Villani]

Well, it looks pretty cool, for what that's worth. Of course, that has absolutely zilch to do with whether the building functions well. But if you want to make a building that's spectacular to look at, well, there you go. How many buildings by world-renowned architects succeed both as functional buildings and works of art/spectacle? It seems so many of them are either so obsessed with function that they deliberately make the buildings ugly, or they're so obsessed with making something spectacular that function becomes an afterthought.

[Justin]

Well, what would you change in the design?

And how? :)

[Joel Akin (heart)]

Thou art full of hottish air. But perhaps there is a machination of delight which begat itself into an archin or arkin type system. For example an ark of the heart or an ark of the convent. I could say the con vent is the hot hair or hot air of the proverbial spewing system. Mayhaps thou wouldn't reply with falsity or the lack there of. I challenge thee to a financial debate asap.