Response to Eisenman`s six point plan by Vado Retro
Regarding Point 1: Go outside today and it seems that everyone is shouting into a cellphone or listening to their ipod. Who are they talking to and what arethey listening to that is so important that they must detach themselvesfrom the physical world that surrounds them? Don’t feel slighted Peter.These automatons are merely talking to their family or friends orlistening to the music they pefer as opposed to maybe being stuck in anelevator or on the subway with borish old men who insist on complainingabout society nowadays. {insert Andy Rooney eyebrows here…} Perhaps the real issue is that by not being “ tuned in” {a phrase fromthe 60’s} is that you are faced with your own marginalization. Forexample, you Peter, are “somewhat” famous and may occasionally benoticed while out bowtie shopping, but if those around you are actuallyinvolved in their own reality {provided by the virtual} your truemeaningless is reinforced. By not being in tune with the availabletechnology you become the other and your only recourse to becomemeaningful to yourself is through criticizing those who do not act in amanner you prefer. Or perhaps they are texting their friends about you.You can always hope. As the other, the outsider, in this scenario you are unseen. Before theadvent of all this digital escapism, people were forced to communicateand interact; whether they wanted to or not.Think of all thoseattractive young women on the train who can simply ignore the advancesof those greasy haired acne scarred cocommuters, just by turning up thevolume. So, everyone is involved in their own world and talk on theirphones rather than {fill in the blank} does it matter? Really ourphysical environment is so violated why should anyone spend anymoretime in it that is necessary. If I`m having a phone conversation, orsurfing the net, or texting I have an extra oar to help me in myupstream swim through the mediocrity and experiental banality that ismodern america. Two things are at play here. The issue of privacy in apublic realm and the battle against insignificance. You see those whoare tied to their phones, ipods, laptops etc are fighting their ownbattle against insignificance and you by judging them are fighting yourown battle as well. Except the battle they wage against insignificanceactually serves to underscore your own feeling of insignificance.The virtual is real Peter and you can’t ignore the techno..Regarding Point 2:I can’t disagree with you here. I mean who else but passive lemmingswould sit still for ThIsShIt! Back in ’68 {the revolution is onYoutube!} we would have bitch slapped your ass.Point 3: Why settle on Palladio why not draw Ricchino? Or if one is to drawPalladio couldn’t one just read Palladio and react to “ beauty willresult from the beautiful and from the correspondence of the whole tothe parts, of the parts amongst themselves, and of these again to thewhole; so that the structures may appear an entire and complete body,wherein each member agrees with the other and all members are necessaryfor the accomplishment of the building.” However how does one resolvethat 500 year old sentiment with the reality of today? And if onecannot why draw like Palladio? In an attempt to understand whatexactly? Geometry, Mathematics, Virtue? And if one is to draw likePalladio should one also use period drawing instruments, ink andparchment? You complain that students argue “if it won’t get me a job,I don’t want to do it.” This is, I think, an unintended irony, as noRenaissance artist, architect, saddlemaker, etc would have done a goddamned thing without being paid. Point 4:The Instant Shiny Icon With A Hole In It Artistically Considered. Thespectacle is the Decorated Duck. Buildings need not carry any moremeaning than getting one’s picture taken in front of it. If
archinect.com/news/article.php?id=75371_0_24_0_C