By : Daniel Libeskind
The art world has always been prone to infiltration by fast-talking talentless frauds skilled only in persuading others of their supposed "brilliance". We've seen the guys selling the blank canvases, and the so-called musicians proposing that the sound of a cast-iron bathtub being smashed with sledgehammers is the "new music". It is precisely the fuzzy logic of culture that means that what these people say cannot be scientifically proved wrong. And so they continue to get away with it. To disagree is seen as a sign of cultural ignorance. And there are enough wannabe intellectuals buying into this rubbish that the fraud is effortlessly perpetuated on behalf of the faker.
Daniel Libeskind is architecture's version of such a fast-talking con artist. Against all logic, he's persuaded museums to waste hundreds of millions of dollars on buildings that barely function, that leak extensively and that are hated by the public. It is the role of the self-annointed tastemakers like Libeskind to sneer at the philistine reaction of people who don't know as much as he does, that just don't "get it". His patronizing and condescending attitude comes across in every frame of this incredibly asinine presentation.
But the work remains undeniably crude and unrefined, even revolting. No amount of pretentious jargon can conceal ignorance on this grand scale. No amount of free thinking can ignore the desecration of historical buildings that Libeskind's lesser and unworthy work unneccessarily engenders. And no amount of childish rhetoric can equate with the honest and sincere approach to architectural design that characterised the oeuvres of Gaudi, Brunelleschi, Wright, and a host of other talented professionals.
Libeskind of all people should know that chutzpah is not the same as genius. Only a total schmuck would make that mistake.
Sumber : http://www.ted.com
"Being a designer of breathtaking and sometimes confounding buildings
seems almost a footnote to the amazing life of architect"
---
Daniel Libeskind builds on very big ideas. Here, he shares 17 words that underlie his vision for architecture raw, risky, emotional, radical -- and that offer inspiration for any bold creative pursuit.
Being a designer of breathtaking and sometimes confounding buildings seems almost a footnote to the amazing life of architect---
The art world has always been prone to infiltration by fast-talking talentless frauds skilled only in persuading others of their supposed "brilliance". We've seen the guys selling the blank canvases, and the so-called musicians proposing that the sound of a cast-iron bathtub being smashed with sledgehammers is the "new music". It is precisely the fuzzy logic of culture that means that what these people say cannot be scientifically proved wrong. And so they continue to get away with it. To disagree is seen as a sign of cultural ignorance. And there are enough wannabe intellectuals buying into this rubbish that the fraud is effortlessly perpetuated on behalf of the faker.
Daniel Libeskind is architecture's version of such a fast-talking con artist. Against all logic, he's persuaded museums to waste hundreds of millions of dollars on buildings that barely function, that leak extensively and that are hated by the public. It is the role of the self-annointed tastemakers like Libeskind to sneer at the philistine reaction of people who don't know as much as he does, that just don't "get it". His patronizing and condescending attitude comes across in every frame of this incredibly asinine presentation.
But the work remains undeniably crude and unrefined, even revolting. No amount of pretentious jargon can conceal ignorance on this grand scale. No amount of free thinking can ignore the desecration of historical buildings that Libeskind's lesser and unworthy work unneccessarily engenders. And no amount of childish rhetoric can equate with the honest and sincere approach to architectural design that characterised the oeuvres of Gaudi, Brunelleschi, Wright, and a host of other talented professionals.
Libeskind of all people should know that chutzpah is not the same as genius. Only a total schmuck would make that mistake.
Sumber : http://www.ted.com
No comments:
Post a Comment