Liz Diller: Architecture is a special effects machine

http://www.ted.com In this engrossing EG talk, architect Liz Diller shares her firm DS+R's more unusual work, including the Blur Building, whose walls are made of fog, and the revamped Alice Tully Hall, which is wrapped in glowing wooden skin.

Category:

Howto & Style

Tags:

• Liz
• Diller
• TED
• TEDtalks
• talks
• Architecture
• Art
• Arts
• Design
• Theater

[SaintCog]

The um's and ah's are just her brain buffering the prepared talk. I'm sure in front of 500+ people you would have the same mental loading/spinning circle, sy1234.

[guitarguy93]

Haha, Fog Nozzles

I dont know why that was funny

But good speech, interesting and the like.

[kimado]

please um and er as much as you like i am listening intently.

[kimado]

Words or utterances have no meaning which transcend it's sign 'Un ciel' for example. You sir, who collides with any and all the utterances and sounds with your phemenological experience of the world have to apply meaning to them; that is what i believe Diller Scofidio + Renfro consistantly investigate; they give you your subjectivity on a plate. Please be aware of the difference between essence and meaning alot of people seem to wish that we were still living in the classical age.

[rr7firefly1]

In the end, treating architecture as a semiotic exercise is denying its essential truth. Architecture is a sensorially based experience that takes place in a spatial sequence, and all the words that one throws at that phenomenon are at best secondary.

[jajajah86]

The "fog pavilon" is a great idea. It has no practical aplications but art doesn't need to. Later on however an architectural problem may occure that could be solved by this concept. Experimenting is always exciting...

[fordieform]

hot

-hero

[FuckRequiringSignUps]

The more boring the architecture, the higher the need for a smart educated story, right? Her revolutionary stuff mostly looks the same all the time.

[iceifrit]

Maybe your just trying to say that the meaning cannot be found through "language" atleast none we know of, but that does not mean that it has no meaning, if it has purpose it must also have some "meaning" attributed to it.

Perhaps you believe that I have used an argument of Circular Reasoning and I see where you might find that, However, I have simply used a Hypothetical Syllogism to prove that the point is valid.

[iceifrit]

I think the "fallacy" that your talking about would be more of "circular reasoning" than a fallacy of "equivalence"

is there such a thing as a fallacy of equivalence? because as long as I have been in school I have encountered no such thing... perhaps if you could explain where this fallacy is i might be able to either find a better argument for the point im making, or dare i say... accept the point your trying to make?

[iceifrit]

Equivalencies are not logical fallacies, if i tell you that 1 + 1 = 2 you won't argue that point right? You would accept that 1 + 1 is in fact 2, not because i said it but because it is true.

Yes i understand where you are comming from on this, she should not use words like "um" and "yeah" because they convey no meaning to US.

Someone, somewhere could hear her "umm's" and "yeahs" and find some value in them, others apparently have, and by that alone it has meaning.