Tuesday, February 10, 2009
What about pure and simple over analysis? It is one thing to be inquisitive and question ourselves and the world from ourselves or around ourselves and another to over analyze and fixate to point of complete retraction. This is to say that we must be careful when analyzing or dissecting our environments, bodies, and relationships. We lose sight of the beauty and abstraction in our world when we become over analytical. The more we literate our world it seems the more we blind ourselves of the tensions and idiosyncrasies of place and body, we dissolve our curiosities into sciences, and we make literate events that are only perceptible during a fleeting moment. This may seem simple, but simple can be interesting and informative, while retaining complexity. How can we be inquisitive and specific without destroying the very reason most of us love architecture and design. Why do we love architecture and film? Is film specific? So often film is jam packed with audio (music and dialogue), visual (material and place), and emotional interaction it is difficult to imagine a film as explicit? Do we forget that at the root of our interests and passions for film is its preoccupation with entertainment? In many ways it would be exciting to see a bit of return to haphazard entertainment within the arts and architecture. Is our rigor displaced?