This discussion with Katie Wallace lead to a re-understanding of the iconic adaptive reuse:
Architecture: Built, Thing, for People
If one is to reuse an existing iconic relic and reuse it 'for people', it needs to be about just that, for people. Just as grain was once transported from the boats-->pier-->silos, with both quantifiable and unquantifiable attributes, then 'people' need to be perceived as with the same results. People now become both observing and observed.
Ex.
How does that grain (people) get up there?
So, the grain (people) move through the pier into the bridge?
1.10.07
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Back to your definition of the icon (previous post). If the icon is to serve as a constant reminder of function, does that then dictate that the your "redefinition" of the icon must preserve this function (as you said)? If so, how do you prevent your adaptation of the signified without disrupting the signifier (ie your icon)? This seems to dictate the literal adaptation you have suggested, but the function of grain, and therefore the grain elevator is transformed with the substitution of people for grain and therefore the icon as well since its function was the root of its iconic value according to your earlier defintion, no?
It is a give and take situation. If one is to adapt an icon to the current, then the icon's meaning changes. Furthermore, and icon's meaning changes through time regardless, one of its inherent properties about the rememberance of those who come in contact with it. There for each generation may see the icon differently. Adapting the icon to a different functional use allows for a slightly different memory by the new generation then might have been if nothing was to "change". However, if the icon can still evoke the same qualities as its original intentions were, then the icon value is preserved, right?
Post a Comment