Thom Mayne: Architecture is a new way to connect to the world

The work done by morphosis is evocative, architectonic, and forward thinking in terms of integrated technology and construction processes. I have always held Thom Mayne high in my books. I'm a little disappointed when i heard him speak in this video though.. unfortunate. typical flakey architecture speak. but anyways, still a fan of his (or at least his talented, under paid, slave driven employees) work. I'm a graduate architecture student btw..

His buildings are beautiful and interesting both as concept and as object . Go Thom !

The majority is not always right. A wise man once said, "When you find yourself in the majority, it's time to stop and reflect."

I ask you: Do you think potato-sack dresses are attractive?

Thom Mayne is a visionary architect who unfortunately suffers from what many great architects suffer from: the ability to convey his ideas to non-architects. They're perfectly able to communicate to clients, but in an environment like TED they rely on their portfolios to speak for them. And they end up doing what Mayne has done: explain the images on the screen, rather than expose us to their ideas about architecture as a field. A manifesto-style would have been more appropriate here.

I wouldn't say this is a mere bullshit. There exists a whole area of architecture theory which master architects of the past such as Le Corbusier fully engaged in. It's  a hard concept to understand unless you've endured years of architecture school but it proves that architecture indeed is a very demanding field, beyond just creating stable or nice looking buildings.

This presentation tells us nothing about the skills if the architect. A truly great Architect should never need to justify his/her work. Happy occupiers, happy maintenance staff, happy builders - the true test of an architect is the opinion of the people who experience their buildings and there is no evidence of that here. Just lots of pictures with as little people in them as possible. Soon many high profile architects will be seen to have no clothes when we hit energy stress.

well i wouldn't say he was bullshitting, his personal approach to architectural investigation tends to be very conceptual and intellectual. Of course, translating his complicated ideas into built form must be very difficult given the constraints of the real world. I would say that his approach is overly analytical, convoluted and is ineffectively expressed both verbally in his presenation and his designs. Architecture, I think, should come mainly from the gut rather than the brain.

I think architecture should come from both brain and gut in a nice healthy balance. You need the brain to logically analyze how, when and where the structure shall be built. But you also need to incorporate that special intuitive factor that makes the building worth experiencing. It is that intuitive factor that binds us all together and makes us gaze at unbelievable beauty. But that alone will not things get "done". Were all bullshitters to some point ;)

The Eiffel tower is an example of something that our culture teaches us is beautiful. Angelina jolie is beautiful because she has characteristics that evolution has caused us to favour. Beauty is both culturally and genetically determined. Some things, like enjoyment of a good view, are universal, hence usually biological, while the awe for architectural simplicity is cultural. For the cultural i agree: Beauty is in the eye of the beholder or culture. Not for the hard-wired biological.

hehehe don't tell me your one of those critics that dance around the question with fancy words but never answer it directly? I simply said that the Effiel Tower was hated around its time of erection and in our modern time its the very icon of Paris. you barely responded as to why the Effiel Tower turned from hideous to the essence of Paris...if you say culture made society see it as beauty so quickly, then i guess anything can turn beautiful over night pretty much hehehe