Talk:Futurist architecture
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten. |
| Start | This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale. |
| Top | This article has been rated as top-importance on the assessment scale. |
I am not finding any solid references for the term Futurist architecture, so I am concerned that this article may be offering an unconventional description of the term... --Mysidia 09:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Vote on vfd was for keep per Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Futurist_architecture. --Woohookitty 07:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
The wording in this article is pretty awkward. I suspect that English is not the author's native tongue. Any knowledgeable Wikipedians care to revise it? Greenie2600 22:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
- At the time of my last edit, it made sense to me. I'll try and revise it again. DVD+ R/W 22:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Those citations
great page, but it is missing those all important citations.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scotty schweiz (talk • contribs) .
[edit] Oscar Niemeyer a futurist?!?
I would like to ask where is a reference on Oscar Niemeyer being a futurist, even Wikipedia doesn't refer him as so, and I also don't remember him as such. His buildings may seem futuristic, but for entirely other reasons than futurist theorists speaked about.
If Oscar, as well as Hadid or Gehry is included here because they have "striking shapes, dynamic lines, strong contrasts and use of advanced materials", we're in bad shape fellows! Futurism should be regarded as an architectural style, and not an attitude. For example, futurism relied greatly in the high hopes of the future machine world and science. It has a somewhat Fascist scent in it. Post-modernists as Peter Eisenmann are in fact in the OPPOSITE direction of this "attitude", as his own style, Deconstructivism is rooted at an attitude of mistrust and skepticism over reality, so I really don't understand this article. It deserves a cleansweep.
Badly.
[edit] Oakley Stores?!?
Why on earth?
[edit] still weak
Good beginning, but there is a lot more to Futurism than this article lets on. what about the manifestoes, members, politics, attitudes to war etc. etc. I will add a link to Futurism(art) which, by way of contrast is very good. Three is too much emphasis here on futurism today. Frank Gehry a futurist? you must be kidding?. I will try to improve it, but it might be a long hawl. Why this is rated top importance is beyond me.Brosi 14:35, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
