|
charlesnsiegel (August 25, 2008 at 7:25 pm)
He has a hard time expressing his ideas in words because he doesn't really have any ideas. The only idea behind this style of architecture is to attract attention to yourself by doing something weird and different. But the architects have to justify it, so they invent theories so arcane that no one can see they are not really saying anything. The plaza of this building is the bleakest public space I have seen: whenever the wind blows, it fills up with a whirlwind of dust and trash.
danielsarch (July 28, 2008 at 1:47 am)
There is never a wrong or right approach in architecture. I know this phrase is corny, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder...
ccaioc (June 26, 2008 at 4:10 am)
I would definitely love to have something of his in downtown São Paulo. It would be a fantastic rupture with that ugly, grey and unimaginative district.
Hroark7 (June 2, 2008 at 12:52 pm)
Utter crap...the work is boring,like scrao yards.As to the intellectual wanking ,it is reflective of the baby boomer rhetoric of Bullshit over Real content,character,and truth.Nature --doesn't exist!!!Great Architecture contects us with Freedom,Nature and the Universe...what we could and should be .Only Fake Intellectuals swallow this garbage.Want great Architecture ..check out the like of Lautner,Kellog.
eman3310169 (April 25, 2008 at 8:27 am)
Such a genious...yet so damn confusing. He really is the next level of architects--Sustainability, creativity, and functionality. I hope i can someday reach his level of architectural ability, he truly is an inspiration for me and many others.
supakoogangsta (April 16, 2008 at 3:52 pm)
Thom Mayne lectured at my college. I agree that he has a hard time conveying his thought process in words, but I do admire that he was still in awe of his work and was very modest. I didn't agree with one of his comments that hand drawings have become obsolete, but I did like his humor.
danno1111 (January 4, 2008 at 10:47 pm)
One of those guys who is obviously quite intelligent and talented, yet lacks any ability to convey his ideas in words.It would have been interesting to be introduced to any of the design concepts he put forth, but he goes over them without clarity or depth.
vman11 (November 1, 2007 at 2:21 am)
I second this, it is practicly impossible to take most of what he has said and get something out of it. there were a few mentions of his principles, but really it seemed more confusing than informative.
17783 (October 27, 2007 at 8:16 am)
archibabble?
g9us (September 17, 2007 at 11:19 pm)
great post |
