Archive for June, 2010
An event celebrating AD’s 80 years (part of the London Festival of Architecture) will be held tomorrow (June 29) at The Jarvis Suite, RIBA, 66 Portland Place, London. It’s quite exciting that our AD Territory issue is just out at this time, and coincides with this event.
Details about the event (snatched from the Sesquipedalist) below:
“For eight decades, Architectural Design (AD) has consistently been at the forefront of cultural thought and design. Provocative and inspirational, it has stimulated theoretical debate and technological advances internationally.
To celebrate its 80th anniversary, AD is gathering together significant architectural commentators and designers, and some of the greatest creative minds from its illustrious past and present, to bring you a day of fascinating architectural insights.
John Wiley & Sons, publisher of the AD titles, invite you to celebrate 80 Years of AD (1930-2010) on Tuesday 29 June, between 10am and 4.30pm at The Jarvis Suite RIBA, 66 Portland Place, London.
Helen Castle, editor of Architectural Design, said: ‘The event on 29th June is a wonderful opportunity to celebrate AD’s heritage and highlight the pivotal place that AD has had in the dissemination of ideas and cutting-edge design over the last 80 years.
“It has proved just as influential in the digital era as in the 60s with Archigram and the 70s and 80s with Post-Modernism. I am absolutely delighted by the calibre of speakers who have agreed to talk: Beatriz Colomina, Peter Murray, Sir Peter Cook, Charles Jencks, Neil Spiller, Mike Weinstock and Patrik Schumacher. We are, however, very much looking back in order to look forward – in true AD style. We are closing the afternoon with Professor Mark Burry on the future of ideas.”
Speakers at the event include:
The 60s, 70s and 80s
• Beatriz Colomina, Professor of Architecture and Founding Director of the Program in Media and Modernity at Princeton University: on the influence of AD and the small magazine in the 60s and 70s.
• Peter Murray, Chairman of Wordsearch, Chairman of the New London Architecture Centre and Founder Director of the London Festival of Architecture: Monica Pidgeon and AD in the 60s and 70s.
• Sir Peter Cook, architect and academic: Archigram and AD.
• Charles Jencks, architectural critic, author and landscape architect: AD, the Post-Modern Proponent.
The 90s, 00s and beyond
• Neil Spiller, Professor of Architecture and Digital Theory and the Vice-Dean at the Bartlett School of Architecture, University College London: Cyberspace and Hypersurface, AD in the 90s
• Michael Weinstock, Director of Research and Development and Director of the Emergent Technologies and Design programme at the Graduate School of the Architectural Association School of Architecture, London: Emergence, AD in the 2000s.
• Patrik Schumacher, partner at Zaha Hadid Architects, founding director at the AA Design Research Lab and Professor at the Institute for Experimental Architecture, Innsbruck University: the Parametric.
• Mark Burry, Innovation Professor of Architecture at RMIT University, Melbourne, and Executive Architect and Researcher for the Temple Sagrada Família in Barcelona: the future and the continuing importance of the dissemination of architectural ideas”
An image above of the ‘Clone’ chair ( Julian Mayor, 2005) next to an English side chair.
The chair was featured in the exhibition “Telling Tales” at the V&A; curator’s description below:
“The shape of this chair is broadly that of a mid 18th-century Dutch or English side chair. Using software, Julian Mayor mapped the shape to create a computerised design, and this controlled the saw that cut the layers of plywood. The result is an 18th-century form rendered using 21st-century means. Below is a comparison with an English chair of about 1740 (Museum no. 680:1-1890).”
My short essay on dankness from a recent issue of Domus is included in the “Essay” section at right. It’s essentially a super-condensed version of the chapter of the same name from Subnature. If this essay spurs someone’s interest, I would be most curious to see any visual reactions you may have to the “historical” proposal at the end of this particular version of the essay. It’s something I have been thinking about, but not necessarily sure what it would look like.