Interesting talk, seems like there are few architects nowadays tackling the theme of architectural morphology and even fewer doing so as part of their theory.
He is getting to emergent properties of urban design from a very difficult, obtuse angle. Architects need to learn more about the concept of emergent properties. Cities will surpass the beauty of any city we have today.
A marketing strategy for an architectural style by claiming that the style represents an almost scientific discipline. In fact, the organic masses style (which is what it is after all the jargon is removed) may lend itself to some unique functionality when a patron wants to advertise his building with a dominant, unusual look, and is willing to pay the astronomical cost for it. There are very few successful examples that are highly artistic and people respond positively to them. However, at most, any integrated urban fabric of any city will not comfortably accommodate more than one building of this style. In addition, this style quickly loses its lustre with repetition, especially when it is crammed into an urban environment without any justification, and what is worse is when it is practice without any artistic sense.
oh, yea? Tell me about his innovations. I don't think Patrik is remotely close to being an Avantgardist. Rather an opportunistic conservative who thinks parametricism and BIM is the solution to everything
He's full of words that don't mean much. I saw a lecture where Zaha, Foster and this guy were in, somewhere in Spain. Zaha and Foster were of course razor sharp in their ideas. This guy spoke from time to time and you literally fell sleep instantly. Doesn't really say anything meaningful!....annoyingly people like this that can talk confusingly can get to the top, architecture is full of these tools. I would hate it if I had to attend his lectures. Theorists that don't do much. I listened to about 20 % of this whilst at work (architect) ,.... switching off before I need to slap myself awake. Watch one of Fosters, or Renzo Piano videos (proper architects) as an antidote to this nonsense, and you will actually learn something.
I like Patrick but sometimes he is wrong . I think he needs to reevaluate and rethink who and where he builds. The prospera project is a frud to Honduras only for the rich . Privatization of roatan is something I’m against
@@newlin83 I disagree architecture is and we always be for the people yes some unethical architects that have been down with the establishment have and continue to build for right wing regimes and continue the hellish cycle of privatization. I read Patrick’s books and he has gone to the dark side by defending capitalism and Austrian right wing neoliberal techno feudalist free market economic systems. He wasn’t always like this Patrick was a communist. The 2008 crisis was caused by the free market capitalist Austrian economics system which caused him to defend capitalism which is a contradiction . Funny enough Patrick has built the majority of his work in China a Communist socialist country. Which he claims is a capitalist country which is not because in China capital doesn’t hold enshrined rights in China capital is not above the Political power . So Patrick is a walking contradiction Oscar Niemeyer was a communist and e build beautiful architecture . I study social communication systems and I have to say Patrick now days contradicts himself idk what happened to him but i assume he started to hang out with the wrong crowd in London and so did Zaha Zaha ‘s dad was a Marxist revolutionary economist. The apple fell far from the tree . Cause Zaha unfortunately was a bit ignorant to This but I don’t take anything away from her architectural brilliance.
![ลองสุ่มไอโฟน 990 โกงมั้ย? [ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.101 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/bfsWe0j492k/mqdefault.jpg)
This is the sort of conversation architecture schools should be holding … thank you for doing this interview, much appreciated x
I second that motion.
Interesting talk, seems like there are few architects nowadays tackling the theme of architectural morphology and even fewer doing so as part of their theory.
He is getting to emergent properties of urban design from a very difficult, obtuse angle. Architects need to learn more about the concept of emergent properties. Cities will surpass the beauty of any city we have today.
Its hilarious how he just does the ABC of the architecture canon at 2:00
Brilliant, Bruce's series is the architecture equivalent of Lex Fridman's podcasts
Thanks Daniel! High praise indeed!
Thank you kindly for your work!
Could you please help me find the book and author you mentioned at 07:34?
Thank you so much sir ,plz make more vdeoz for buding architects ,m frm india
24:11
46:21
46:29
57:13
ztazen What does he mean by crackery?
Since I discovered Patrick was a libertarian I love him much more. I started reading his papers back in 2015.
Thank you
Plz make vdeoz for tranii architecture students also ,there is lack of vdeoz on that sir
Interesting man to say the least.
A marketing strategy for an architectural style by claiming that the style represents an almost scientific discipline. In fact, the organic masses style (which is what it is after all the jargon is removed) may lend itself to some unique functionality when a patron wants to advertise his building with a dominant, unusual look, and is willing to pay the astronomical cost for it. There are very few successful examples that are highly artistic and people respond positively to them. However, at most, any integrated urban fabric of any city will not comfortably accommodate more than one building of this style. In addition, this style quickly loses its lustre with repetition, especially when it is crammed into an urban environment without any justification, and what is worse is when it is practice without any artistic sense.
This dude is an anarcho capitalist. Lmao
curves are more expensive to build
it doesn' mean we have to stuck on 90 degree
repertoire
Not sure, I see lots of great building being built….. perhaps he’d over thinking it …..
Why the Architecture society still don't see Patrik...he is the le Corbusier of our time
oh, yea? Tell me about his innovations. I don't think Patrik is remotely close to being an Avantgardist. Rather an opportunistic conservative who thinks parametricism and BIM is the solution to everything
@@kognitiveresonanz3562 yes, they are the solution
@@FahadKhan-cz6cd You really believe Patrik Schumacher is the Le Corbusier of today?? And that BIM will safe and heal the world? lol
@@kognitiveresonanz3562 there is room due everyone and every form of architecture.
@@lexaneli no theres not room for everyone and every architecture. People are homeless/roomless and ressources are finite
dude just contradicted himself at the end
He's full of words that don't mean much. I saw a lecture where Zaha, Foster and this guy were in, somewhere in Spain. Zaha and Foster were of course razor sharp in their ideas. This guy spoke from time to time and you literally fell sleep instantly. Doesn't really say anything meaningful!....annoyingly people like this that can talk confusingly can get to the top, architecture is full of these tools. I would hate it if I had to attend his lectures. Theorists that don't do much. I listened to about 20 % of this whilst at work (architect) ,.... switching off before I need to slap myself awake. Watch one of Fosters, or Renzo Piano videos (proper architects) as an antidote to this nonsense, and you will actually learn something.
So fuck prospera
Not so good influence on Zaha, hes a bureaucrat and banal, she called him the potato
I want him to stop talking, forever...
I like Patrick but sometimes he is wrong . I think he needs to reevaluate and rethink who and where he builds.
The prospera project is a frud to Honduras only for the rich .
Privatization of roatan is something I’m against
@@newlin83 I disagree architecture is and we always be for the people yes some unethical architects that have been down with the establishment have and continue to build for right wing regimes and continue the hellish cycle of privatization.
I read Patrick’s books and he has gone to the dark side by defending capitalism and Austrian right wing neoliberal techno feudalist free market economic systems.
He wasn’t always like this Patrick was a communist. The 2008 crisis was caused by the free market capitalist Austrian economics system which caused him to defend capitalism which is a contradiction .
Funny enough Patrick has built the majority of his work in China a Communist socialist country.
Which he claims is a capitalist country which is not because in China capital doesn’t hold enshrined rights in China capital is not above the Political power .
So Patrick is a walking contradiction
Oscar Niemeyer was a communist and e build beautiful architecture .
I study social communication systems and I have to say Patrick now days contradicts himself idk what happened to him but i assume he started to hang out with the wrong crowd in London and so did Zaha
Zaha ‘s dad was a Marxist revolutionary economist.
The apple fell far from the tree .
Cause Zaha unfortunately was a bit ignorant to This but I don’t take anything away from her architectural brilliance.
Great listen but please stop humming after agreeing with his points, so frustrating to hear a 'hmmm' every minute or so!
this guy doesnt know what architecture is.. time to put him in the bin with the parametrics
You don't know what architecture is. He knows
Please, give a common lecture in Indonesia🇮🇩