emphasized the automobile. The more I thought about it, however, the more I wondered if WaterColor is only an "ideal"—no more than a theme park of sorts? Does it only represent a particular version of one narrow aspect of local design?
It is a valid thing to seek and understand regional themes in design and to keep local flavor alive, and it is equally valid to promote walkable, well-organized communities. It is most important, however, to have an overriding design framework that can accommodate and thrive on diversity. This diversity is what seemed to be lacking in WaterColor, and is what Mr. Sorkin warned against in the future redevelopment of Gulf coast communities. Thank you for the reminder! —Scott J. Newland, AIA Minneapolis
I just read Robert Ivy's January edi torial, "Reconstructing Kuwait" [page 19]. With all the doom and rubble we see in Baghdad, it was inspiring to hear about a city nearby that is recreating itself. It must have been quite a sight. —Hansa Bergwall New York City
Robert Campbell's January Critique [page 57] brilliantly identifies the major fault line in current design— namely, our failure to create memorable architecture possessing common appeal. Similar fault lines exist in much contemporary art and music where self-expression has achieved supremacy over craftsmanship and common sense. Our inability to communicate with the larger public is exemplified by the arcane architectural babble so current in the profession today. If we concerned ourselves more with building well, not with current fashion or specious theories, we may, finally, discover a universal audience. —James A. Gresham, FAIA Tucson, Ariz.
Robert Campbell [January, page 57] might be accurate about the nature of the arguments on both sides of the UVA campus architecture discussion. However, he may have missed a critical point with respect to the setting and the implication of campus architectural design guidelines. With strict subscription to a uniform architectural style, the campus environment is perpetuating the concept of conformity to the students and faculties, depriving them of the most important privileges of university life: the freedom of thinking and discourse, and the courage of exploration and expression.
For years, conformity was the principle of campus architecture, as it was the principle of learning. With the rapid pace of change in modern society, it is critical that the campus reflect the real world, as the place where knowledge and experience are transferred not just from an institution to the students. There is a total new way of learning. Our younger generation is continuously teaching us with their actions.
Take a look at the great cities in the world. With diversity and heterogeneous architecture, they are the campuses of the future generations. —Henry Chao, AIA Columbus, Ohio
In the February issue, the distributor of the Shades and Screens textile collection [page 182] was omitted. The line is now distributed nationwide through Nysan for Hunter Douglas Shading Systems' network. In addition, three of the fabrics included in the image that ran are, in fact, Nysan's Greenscreen products. Two images in February's multifamily housing Building Types Study [page 120] should have been credited to Jim Wasserman.
Send letters to [email protected]
A Steelcase Company
Was this article helpful?