Okay here I go with my first blog, hopefully at least 50% of
this will make sense, if it doesn't ....oh well!! First of all, let me clear up
the title of this post because this interview was less about what Zaha Hadid
said and was more about Meades’ interpretation about who she is. Meades isn't
exactly sugar coating his responses to Hadid's more vague answers. His tone
through the piece is constantly critical and at times almost insulting. However
there is also an admiration if not for her, for her creativeness and her
knowledge. He mocks her by saying that "I rather suspect that Zaha has the
ancient, habitual, superstitious fear that to discover how her processes work
would be to jeopardise them". Her fear has no real merits, no scientific
basics but his tone suggests to me that he believes that her
"processes" are real, her creativity and talent is tangible, her
works are not mere flukes.
Some people have even questioned: what qualifies him (or any
other person for that matter) to comment on an architect’s work? I believe that
the answer is that anyone has that qualification. Sure we are artists, we
create, sculpt and shape spaces and skylines, but our work affects others. We
design not for ourselves but for the client and end user, and perhaps we should
also add to that list, the passer-by. Architecture is art with rules, our
creativity must always co-exist with functionality. While Zaha may pride herself
on creating wonderfully chaotic and disturbing forms, the truth is if she had not
added function, she would still be sitting behind her desk, sketching away and
spending daddy’s money without any of her buildings being constructed.
No comments:
Post a Comment