well

well, the design presentation is long over, but i think i'll still check in on this blog, read two books by richard coyne, well, just skimmed thru them today in the morning in the starbucks on granville, interesting stuff

aftermath # 1.wmv

hmmm

pondering

pondering if this blog is now obsolete, NOW that the presentation is way over

all 3 essays

i just finished writing the summaries of the essays, one being about colonialism, one about female versus masculine interpretation of architecture, one being about installation art as tool for discourse about architecture. all these essays have the discourses of the built environment as subject, each with a specific slant. in my presentation I will talk about film and architecture, because i think that that has to do with the subject at hand. especially i want to ask the question about how much language can be helpful in deciphering a problem and is this a typical female way of handling things, so to speak? is writing about architecture a lesser way of engaging with architecture, a science at the periphery of the real thing: building, assembling structures in concrete, glass, metal. this kind of ties in with elizabeth grosz' assertion that architecture is masculine, landscape architecture is feminine. how would she categorize writing about architecture?

new animation or old ones

am kind of debating whether i should just stick to uploading old animations or whether i should produce new ones especially cattering to this verry presentation, but because i am now @ home and have to make my way thru the rain down to granville island to shoot a movie notwithstanding that there are so many people who want to use the animationlab @ this time- so i am kind of forced to recycle the content again and again, ad infinitum-if that makes sense.

northbuilding # 71

some filme # 2

theory and practice

in discussing whether some fields are masculine and some are feminine i think a lot about whether theory is more on the feminine side versus practice being more on the mascuiline side. i am pondering whether thinking about animation theory and architecture theory is something more feminine, you just stand in one corner and bullshit about what others really do with their elbow grease, by getting in there and getting their hands dirty and doing it. i myself am @ this time writing about animation and architecture, i just developed a prototype of a magazine called "on animation and architecture". so how does this tie in with the discussion of whether some fields are more feminine, whether some are more masculine. in the class, it was conceded that landscape architecture is more feminine and the architecture of buiding, the part that has to do with concrete, metal and the prospect of erecting steelstructures is more masculine. debatable as this may be there is still an undeniable ring of truth to this position, further cemented by the fact that there are more male architects than female architects and more female landscape architects than male architects ( i think, then again i might be wrong). anyways, i think there are more female architectural theorists and i kind of think that this is a field that attracts more females. so this is where the discussion of my mgazine comes in. i will elaborate on this in my presentation on tuesday trying to clarify what i mean.

an image- the original was pink

a sTaB @ desigNiNg a pretTy ImAgE

playing around with the font

@ this time i am still trying to figure out how to work this, but anyways i think that making a blog will help me gather my thoughts vis-a-vis the subjectmatter, later on i will read the texts one more time- IN DEPTH

dEsIgn

it is friday, better start accumulating data

sitting here in the richmond library counting the days until tuesday's presentation, kind of in a state of suspended procrastination meets eleventh hour- the soundtrack of high noon lingers somewhere in the background, ever so slightly audible