Yeah, I’m done now. That was good fun, really.
Drop on by my own blog if you haven’t had enough punishment already.
http://blog.wired.com/sterling/
Bruce S.
PS: Write if you get honest work!
I faithfully read Design Observer — specifically BECAUSE they talk like public intellectuals instead of moaning into their beer about serifs.
No sooner did I post that link to an old METROPOLIS piece than I showed
up in the new METROPOLIS.
I dote on those guys.
http://www.metropolismag.com/cda/story.php?artid=1843
Now there’s some top-end sci-fi architecture criticism. About Modernism, no less, and by no less a man than the legendary J. G. Ballard.
http://arts.guardian.co.uk/features/story/0,,1734913,00.html
“All of us have our dreams to reassure us. Architecture is a stage set where we need to be at ease in order to perform. Fearing ourselves, we need our illusions to protect us, even if the protection takes the form of finials and cartouches, corinthian columns and acanthus leaves. Modernism lacked mystery and emotion, was a little too frank about the limits of human nature and never prepared us for our eventual end.”
It’s entirely possible to write “architecture fiction” instead of “science fiction.” Like, say, Archigram did in the 60s.
“Plug-in City”, “Living Pod”, “Instant City” and “Ad Hoc”. “Manzak”, “Suitaloon”, “Cushicle”, “Blow out Village”, “Gasket Homes” and the “Walking City.”
You read this wayout Archigram stuff nowadays and it’s surprising how thoughtful, humane and sensible it seems.
http://www.arcspace.com/architects/archigram/
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/critic/feature/0,1169,662929,00.html
http://www.designboom.com/eng/interview/cook.html
I even wrote some architecture fiction myself, once.
I don’t know who this guy is. He doesn’t say much about himself.
Nobody’s ever told me anything about him.
But man, he can blog like nobody’s business. I think maybe he
lives about seven months in the future and is posting via
time-machine.
People who websurf constantly and like art sites would likely like
this well-established techie art site.
As for me, I’m liking this Regine Debatty site. Man she’s good.
The first time I came across “we-make-money-not-art” I thought
that Regine had to be at least 30 or 40 people.
I reviewed a film of that Rirkrit installation, once. If you can call
this screed a “film review,” that is.
http://www.artnet.com/Galleries/Exhibitions.asp?gid=140527&cid=73378
I’m way too Technorati-able to require much of a worship site.
The best thing about being named “Rirkrit” is that there aren’t a whole
lot of guys on the net named “Rirkrit.” So, even though Rirkrit’s not blogging
his head off the way Xeni and I do, you can Google Image-search
“Rirkrit” and you can witness the guy’s haircut literally zooming around
on his head with the passage of the years. It’s a kind of instant,
machine-generated Rirkrit retrospective.
This puppet Rirkrit’s not half-shabby, either.
Hanging around with people tagged with handles like “Rirkrit,”
“Xeni,” “Jasmina” “Cory” and “Frauenfelder” makes me want
to change my name to “Broos Strrling.” Think of the search-hits
I’d pick up!