mercredi 4 décembre 2013

Fondamentalisme géométrique, suite...

"In the end, neither Le Corbusier's architecture nor his urbanism bear any relation to Classical solutions. The buildings Le Corbusier fostered might as well have been razor blades, slicing the world to shreds. Though many critics have attacked them as ugly, their fundamental fault is not an aesthetic poverty so much as a structural poverty: a lack of organized complexity, a toxic disconnectedness. Our civilization's task of replacing its architecture and urbanism of disconnectedness with a newly adaptive architecture of connectivity cannot even begin before Le Corbusier's pervasive influence ceases.
There are those who argue that contemporary architecture and urban planning have sinced moved on to new - and even more horrific - typologies. In fact, Le Corbusier's legacy, and that of other early modernists, is everywhere still today. Architectural academia deified him, and continues to present him to impressionable architecture students as a supreme role model: an architectural legend. His ideas have spread into our society's collective mind, distorting and confusing the message of Classical architecture. He bears the responsability of initiating an inhuman approach to the built environment, where adaptation and responsiveness are unneccesary, even contemptible. That provided the fertile ground for present-day architectural and urban insanities."

Nikos Salingaros, "A Theory of architecture", pp. 184-185

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire