Subscribe to

The writers over at Architecture + Morality have decided to experiment with podcasting. So for the first time ever, I listened to a podcast.

I enjoyed it more than I thought I would. They certainly pulled off the format far better than I would have. I think that it does me good to hear intelligent people talk about things that I have only read about. For one thing, I heard names pronounced out loud that I never heard pronounced before. That is no small thing when you are self-educated. (Though I am invincibly ignorant when it come to proper pronunciation, so I am not sure how much good that is going to do me.)

Having said that, I would still prefer to read an essay to hearing a podcast. I find it harder to think about what people are saying when their ideas come to me in spoken form.

But that is neither here nor there. I will take a podcast over nothing. The best part about a podcast is that it can clear the air of a lot of little things that are not deep enough to warrant an essay but still interest the fans.

For example, I have long wondered why Corbusier calls himself “Corbusier” when his philosophy seems to have very little in common with his namesake. The podcast sort of cleared that up. At least I now know that it is in large part self-consciously ironic. But I still don’t fully understand.

I mean Corbusier clearly has the same negative reaction to much of modern architecture that I do. He basically comes out and says that most architects should not do modern architecture. Yet there is still something that he seems to think that modern architecture can do that the classical forms cannot. Given that I seem share of a lot of his aesthetic sense, I wonder if I am missing something.

I make no secret out of my intense dislike for modern architecture, but it must be admitted that I do not have a very deep education in the field. There is only one building designed according to the tenets of modern architecture that I am personally familiar with. All the rest of my knowledge of modern architecture comes from things that I have read or passing by buildings that I hope never to have to deal with.

But the one building I am familiar with I know pretty well. And it just seems like I can see repeats of what I hate about that building in all the so called “great” modern architecture.

Also, Corbusier says that a designer should strive to create beauty and then admits that much of what New Urbanism creates looks fake. I am curious as to what Corbusier thinks makes something beautiful and how his conception of beauty could improve New Urbanism. (I am presuming he shares my view that the fake is not beautiful. That is not always a safe assumption in the post-modern world).

Anyway, if you are just surfing the web and you enjoy hearing an educated person make articulate small talk, by all means play their podcast in the background.

But not withstanding the title of my post, those who listen to it just because I am mentioned will be disappointed. It is only the briefest of mentions. But I could not think of a better title for this random collection of thoughts.

3 Responses to “In which I am mentioned in a Podcast…”

  1. on 16 Nov 2007 at 4:42 pmcorbusier

    Thank you for kind comments about the podcast. It was my partner’s (Relievedebtor) idea, and I agreed to it since it’s a useful way to elaborate on subjects I had neither the time nor space for on the written blog. It’s true that written material is more to the point and is also my preferred means of digesting information, so I haven’t cultivated a habit of listening to podcasts like Relievedebtor has. Still, podcasts are are an additional way to generate content for some of our loyal readers while waiting for the next essay. As you can tell, chatting on a podcast is whole lot easier than writing out your ideas, but at least we can keep the content of our conversations somewhat interesting.

    Maybe one day you could join in on the podcast and incite a more dynamic interaction…?

  2. on 16 Nov 2007 at 7:07 pmChimp

    Hm. Ape Man will no doubt profess a great deal of modesty and aversion to coming out of his cave for a podcast. It is always interesting to see what one can get the Ape Man to do, but I might throw in a note of caution about discoursing.

    There is not very much modesty at all in Ape Man’s profession that he is “invincibly ignorant” of “proper pronunciation.” Indeed, we who are close to Ape Man averr that he knows much, and saves brain space by reducing all nouns to a few generic forms. “Thing,” “stuff,” and “guy” are some usuals.

    Much like his writing, if you have a litte patience with the presentation, the content is always interesting.

  3. on 17 Nov 2007 at 10:41 amApe Man

    “Chimp” has stolen most of my thunder. I can no longer profess a great deal of modesty or proclaim my love for my cave. And as he notes, I have certain problems that render me a less then stellar conversationalist.

    Some day I may do a post on my peculiar problems. But for now, it is sufficient to say they play are large part in why this blog is entitled Ape Man.

    But if your last sentence was a serious question and not just a hypothetical statement of what might be, then I would have to say it depends on the details.

Leave a Reply