What is worth knowing 1 Newsletter from the Hotel Architecture 7.3.05

It's been a week since arrival on the big bird from Atlanta, tight spaces,
sitting next to a computer game fanatic who was returning
from meeting his 'girlfriend' - fellow 'quest?' gaming member -
in Oklahoma. Colder than usual here in the Hotel Architecture,
so the open log fire has been in use, outside it has even snowed
and the winds come down from Siberia, eastwards across
Scandinavia. The writing goes well, the new book is called
'Architecture or Life' (what a choice huh?) and I must complete an
initial draft/ outline scheme for the publishers by first week April,
ready to work on it in Autumn for publication next
spring 2006.
In the meantime I have been looking around at all the books
here in the cottage and thinking of something Esther said
about the notion of a 'lost' or partial education. What exactly do
we mean by this? Why are some names, references appearing
now and how have they (suddenly) gained currency at SOA?
Is it the introduction through new faculty? Is it a representation
of what has happened eslewhere and the 'tickle down effect'
as it comes into the SOA? Why, if modern/conemporary
philosophy is more talked about, should we attend to this?
And how would we attend to it? By a reading list, by a chance
route, by intense investment in things we at first do not
understand, or by attempting to understanding for example
Robert Smithson's work? Do you sometimes feel you
have to graduate to realise we wish no longer to question or engage
deeply with knowledge as experience but accept learning
as 'example' (and become professionals: remember the US army
recruiting slogan - learn, lead, succeed!!)? Or do you graduate
to realise you only just begin engaging with knowledge
and experience when you begin questioning it?
Which are you? And is it either-or?
I think not; the world is both-and, and the difficulty is oscillating
and sailing between the two. How many of us are comfortable with
uncertainty?
A good friend of mine, the architect Volker Giencke, teaches in
Innsbruck and believes that architecture students, first year, must also
begin with a course on art...not Renaissance art or Greek Art, but art
today, art tomorrow in all its messiness and 'incomprehension'.
He believes the first grapple with 'incoherence' and 'incongruities'
becomes the first step into the potential world in architecture that has not been
scripted, not already existing. And the references the artists use are those
very same that you have suddenly found appearing in your various
seminars and studios!!
What is your take on this? Is it a 'lost education' or a late-education?
Take a look at the following: "An Ideal Syllabus" (Artists, Critics &
Curators choose the books we need to read) edited by Jerry Saltz,
Frieze, London 1998.
Early morning greetings from the Hotel Architecture.
Frank.

(I will post this on the seld-education blog as well).