tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1892545703905534779.post5778554730356621032..comments2011-12-02T19:19:43.663-05:00Comments on diplomacy_12: Musialowski- Territory1: Olympic ParkAncahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12747523386555346144noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1892545703905534779.post-75962936854376872242011-10-28T15:20:21.475-04:002011-10-28T15:20:21.475-04:00Monica: I think I was a little flip the other day ...Monica: I think I was a little flip the other day when speaking to you about your "territory"... sorry.<br /><br />This is an interesting topic, there are so many juicy subjects buried here! I’m not sure which direction is most appealing to you, so I’ll list the ones I can think of and see your response:<br /><br />- Are you most interested in the ways in which buildings get reused or are designed for a multiplicity of use? This is a long-standing subject in architecture with polarized positions being played out (some say blankness is the most flexible – Mies; some say excess is the most flexible – Koolhaas; some say intricacy is the most flexible – Hertzberger) Misuse is a difficult one to handle by architects… <br />- Are you interested in the ways in which meaning gets appropriated and re-appropriated – like in the Eiffel Tower? For this you could look at the ways in which icons convey meaning in the first place and how context (physical, historical… plays a role) the article by David Harvey about Sacre Coeur “Myth and Monument” could be of interest here.<br />- Are you interested in the ways in which a building may be dismantled – literally?<br />One of the difficult issues with the Olympic park is that it consists of only symbolic buildings, but ones that have highly defined/specific uses. A stadium, for example, pretty much stays a stadium. Some of the issues you discuss may be better looked at through the program of the World Expo…???Ancahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12747523386555346144noreply@blogger.com