首页> 外文期刊>Building >The dismal profession
【24h】

The dismal profession

机译:惨淡的职业

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Twenty-five years ago last month I attended - the only time in my life I have done so - the RIBA's annual conference. It was striking for three reasons, all of them regrettable. The first was the remarkably flimsy, intellectually fraudulent, historically ignorant "keynote" address by Tom Wolfe, which he would subsequently expand into his captious polemic From Bauhaus to Our House. The second was the alarming passivity of the audience, which either didn't realise that it was being collectively insulted or was, by then, so inured to deprecations of architecture that it could not stir itself to respond by, say, walking out. The third was the sartorial dreariness of that almost entirely male audience, which was almost entirely dressed in the drab suits of high street tailoring. Was I in the presence of some sect that worshipped at John Collier - "the window to watch" - or at Hepworths, or Burtons? No, this was architecture's rank and file. And although it may be foolish to judge by appearances it is even more foolish not to judge by them.
机译:二十五年前的上个月,我参加了RIBA年度会议,这是我一生中唯一一次参加。令人震惊的原因有三个,所有这些都令人遗憾。第一个是汤姆·沃尔夫(Tom Wolfe)明显脆弱,从理论上讲是欺诈性的,历史上无知的“基调”演说,随后他将其扩大为他的挑衅性辩论,从《包豪斯到我们的家》。第二个问题是观众的震惊和消极情绪,他们要么没有意识到自己受到了集体侮辱,要么到那时就已经对建筑的贬低产生了厌倦,以至于无法动摇自己做出回应,例如走出去。第三个是几乎全是男性观众的服装服饰,几乎全是穿着高街裁缝的单调西装。我是在约翰·科利尔(John Collier)或“赫普沃斯(Hepworths)”或伯顿(Burtons)崇拜的某个教派面前吗?不,这是体系结构的基础。而且,尽管通过表象来判断可能是愚蠢的,但不通过表象来判断甚至更为愚蠢。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Building》 |2005年第8363期|p.29|共1页
  • 作者

  • 作者单位
  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 建筑科学;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号