anatomyofcriticism (andrewunger) wrote in theartyoucrew,
anatomyofcriticism
andrewunger
theartyoucrew

application

no order here

"Robie House" F.L. Wright
"Office at Night" Edward Hopper
"Sunset (Brothers)" Caspar David Friedrich
"Red Plastic" Alberto Burri
"L'Age D'Or" Bunuel and Dali
"For Marliyn" Stan Brakhage
"Operations" Christian Schad
"Barcelona" chair - Mies van der Rohe
"Artist's Shit" Piero Manzoni
"The Effects of Good Government on Town and Country" Ambrogio Lorenzetti
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic
  • 10 comments
no
Why that house by Frank Lloyd Wright over any other residence by any othe architect?

I will admit the man is brilliant but he's really become one of the most overrated architects today.

I don't think he's overrated, just over-popular. I mean, to really rate something, you have to actually know something and most of the people who like him and who flock to his shrines in Oak Park, know nothing. But it's like saying the Beatles are overrated...

So, why the Robie House? Well, it clearly stands out as Wright's most significant contribution to architecture. So I won't get into that, (unless you want me to), but the real question then becomes, why did I choose Wright and not Voysey or Morris, or I.M. Pei for that matter. Wright's work is not better than those, per se, but he's my "Beatles" pick. At a time when most residences are mass produced (you order your design from a book), Wright's work reminds us (the masses) that where you live should not be generic, it should represent who you are, it should be art.
First of all good answer. True, the Robie House is certainly a designed house. Most houses designed by architects for individual clients will reflect the client's personality as well as that of the architect.

What you said about a house being art is true as well. The Robie House was desgined at the tail end of the Art Nouveau movement when an entire house as a work of art was a developing concept. One of the residences i chose on my own list the Palais Stoclet by Josef Hoffmann is a prime example of this.

On thing i have to say though is that even in Wright's day houses were mass produced and floor plans were readily available from a multidude of builder's catalogues. A look at most streetcar suburbs surrounding major city centers will attest to this. The difference between the McMansion of yesterday versus today was its lack of wasted square footage, use of plaster instead of drywall and leaded glass over double glazing.

So for that answer I'll give you a yes for giving me the oppertunity to think about nice houses and diverting my attention from being depressed about the current election results.
well, I'm Canadian, so I'm probably less depressed than you are about the election. Here's my question. I hear a lot about cuts to the arts in the US. In Canada, the arts are even more heavily funded than the US. Most of our film, for example, is made by the government. But I think that it's prevented us from producing anything (not anything, but close to it) of real worth, or at least anything that's recognized internationally. (There are a few token artists that are paraded around the CBC, but really it's desperate nationalism in the guise of art appreciation) When's the last time you've seen an exhibit of Canadian art (notwithstanding Aborigianl art) in an American museum? There are countires like Norway, for exmaple, with much smaller populations that Canada, that are internationally recognized. (not that recognistion is everything, either). My point is this: I've heard a little bit about funding to the arts as an election issue. But do you believe it would help? I don't think it's done much here.
well, I'm Canadian, so I'm probably less depressed than you are about the election. Here's my question. I hear a lot about cuts to the arts in the US. In Canada, the arts are even more heavily funded than the US. Most of our film, for example, is made by the government. But I think that it's prevented us from producing anything (not anything, but close to it) of real worth, or at least anything that's recognized internationally. (There are a few token artists that are paraded around the CBC, but really it's desperate nationalism in the guise of art appreciation). When's the last time you've seen an exhibit of Canadian art (notwithstanding Aboriginal or Inuit art) in an American museum? There are countires like Norway, for example, with much smaller populations that Canada, that are internationally recognized. (not that recognition is everything, either). My point is this: I've heard a little bit about funding to the arts as an election issue. But do you believe it would help? I don't think it's done much here.
what is with this thing. It always erases my password when I press enter. and now it posts my message twice.
Its taken me far too long but here you go...
...Now go tell all your art loving friends about the community...we NEED more memebers.
wait, I see two no votes and one accepted vote.
Well his application was just kind of sitting there for a while with only 3 votes. Short of posting on the pages of other members and nagging them to vote I don't know how to get more people involved. The choices on here may not be to everyone's taste but I liked the discourse back and forth. Being able to speak intellegently is a big part of my own criteria of a good art critic. A simple yes or no without rhyme or reason is not.