|
Not Ranked
:
+0 / -0
0 score
Re: Is civilization natural?
So, are our artificial structures more or less successful replications of natural archetypes? Is it that success or failure that informs our aesthetic?
I've seen this aesthetic most often in architecture and urban planning. I've had to research awards being given to architects who were thought innovative because they chose to violate this aesthetic. That was difficult for me, because in that aesthetic violation, the architects also violated structural engineering concepts. Fortunately, many of the projects were never realized. Those that were caused problems.
So, do we need to make civilization natural for more than aesthetic reasons? (If we don't, I'll need to move this thread--not a bad idea anyway.)
If we don't follow the concepts of planners like, for example, Lewis Mumford, are we just building slimmer and slimmer limbs on which to nest?
Just wondering
--lemit
----------------
The only second chance we get in life is a chance to make the same mistake twice. --David Mamet
A mind is a terrible thing to close.
Entropy is just nature's way of telling us it's time to slow down.
|
