【24h】

Peter Cook

机译:彼得·库克

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

There are two routes into discussing architecture: the first involves the statement of values and the construction of theories (usually linked together). The second involves the dissection of buildings and projects in order to glean the sequences of cause and effect (which may well involve a myriad of values and responses).rnThe former approach is presumed to be intellectually tougher and is certainly the more preferred and fashionable amongst those who wish to influence our minds. Indeed, it can be pursued by those who are very little interested in buildings per se but who would prefer to erect a structure of polemics than to get inside the architecture. The latter approach (easily dismissed as trainspotting) is difficult for those who did not have an architectural training - who make up an increasingly large portion of the family of critics. For them, the discussion of architecture in relation to politics, gender, art movements,rnrhetoric or what makes something iconic is safer territory than getting inside the building or its author.
机译:讨论体系结构有两种途径:第一种涉及价值的陈述和理论的构建(通常是相互联系的)。第二种方法是对建筑物和项目进行解剖,以收集因果关系的序列(可能涉及无数的价值和响应)。那些希望影响我们思想的人。的确,那些对建筑物本身几乎不感兴趣,但是宁愿架起辩论结构而不是进入建筑物的人也可以追求它。对于那些没有接受建筑培训的人来说,后一种方法(很容易被当成火车头)很困难-他们在评论家中所占比例越来越大。对他们来说,与政治,性别,艺术运动,言辞或标志性事物有关的建筑讨论比进入建筑物或其作者更安全。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Architectural review》 |2009年第1345期|32-33|共2页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号