Talk:Blobitecture

Guggenheim and EMP
I think the Experience Music Project is blobbier than the Guggenheim. The article says that the Guggenheim is the epitome of this, I'm not sure. We need to read the Safire article, cite it and get more info as to what he was talking about. We also need the Greg Lynn book that talks about this. DVD+ R/W 20:26, 10 October 2006 (UTC)


 * To clarify, I was talking about this statement, "Blobitecture originated in the buildings of Frank Gehry, and is epytomised by the Guggenheim Museum Bilbao" which makes sense in many ways. But, I bring up the EMP to compare because of it has fewer folded planes and delineated or cut edges than the Guggenheim Bilbao and others by Gehry. The EMP and Kunsthaus Graz both have highly smoothed and fluid surfaces (except the spouts on the top of Graz and a couple of cut planes around some openings of the EMP), and seem to me to be more gelatinous and liquid than most. Selfridges and Allianz Arena, though both good examples formally, seem to have panels which to me detract from blob architecure criteria(?) at the level of façade detail. DVD+ R/W 23:05, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I've added Folds, Bodies & Blobs by Greg Lynn to the biblio (though I haven't read it yet), I know it is pertinent to this. DVD+ R/W 02:07, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

I added 1 EMP pic to the article. I'll go there and take more (esp. interiors). Here are two to consider from the EMP article. DVD+ R/W 02:19, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Some quick notes

 * Reyner Banham The Environment Bubble.
 * Frei Otto


 * Palm House


 * Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum


 * James R. Thompson Center
 * Sony Center


 * 30 St Mary Axe
 * Willis Building (Ipswich)


 * Allianz Arena
 * University of Phoenix Stadium

Some rounded buildings or designs, or architects of such.  dvd  rw  22:43, 20 October 2006


 * Buckminster Fuller - Geodesic dome
 * Eden Project - I've added a picture to the gallery.

I wonder if the literature postulates an evolution from Bucky Fuller's geodesic dome through the Eden Project (essentially combining the geometric simplicity of a geodesic dome with more forms to create structurally efficient structures analogous to soap bubbles) to the freer forms of the later blobitecture, selfridges, kunsthaus etc. but perhaps this is WP:OR? I'm also a little uncomfortable with "Blobitecture has been made by many architects who were a part of deconstructivism," Other than Gehry - who else? - is this citable? On another tack, I wonder if Frei Otto's and Günter Behnisch's tensile structures might be a contributing influence on the free forms (although, again, like geodesic domes there's much more structural rationale here) - Some thoughts to chew on anyway. --Mcginnly | Natter 14:25, 21 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok I removed that sentence about decon, might bring something like that back later though ;-) I think those tensile structures and domes are influences. I'll look more for more sources. DVD+ R/W 18:12, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * About that sentence though- Eisenman, Koolhaas, Hadid, Himmelb(l)au, and Tschumi, have all proposed or designed buildings that seem (to me) to be blobs or have blob sections. And, I'm pretty sure Greg Lynn was a project architect for Eisenman during Wexner Center's design so he might be considered decon as well (at least early on). Some newer groups such as Asymptote, FOA, and others should be considered in this article, though I don't know if their earlier work was decon or not. Also, it won't be easy to find direct sources for much of this article since it is a new phenomenon or at least a new term for an older one, though they are out there, but you're right that we need them. DVD+ R/W 19:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

BLOB and Blob
I clarified the important distinction between BLOB and blob architetcure more generally. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Brosi (talk • contribs) 02:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

"for some"
I put the "for some" back in: "For some, Blobitecture evokes the curves of the baroque and rococo, as well as those of art nouveau" since this is a supposition that is not true for all. There are some who would disagree.Brosi 16:31, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Brossi yes of course anyone can disagree with anything but we don't introduce uncertainty into every statement or supposition. DVD+ R/W 16:37, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I wonder whether we should perhaps take the sentence out - how is it helping the article? People have said that the Robie House looks like a battleship and the Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral looks like (variously) a wigwam, a funnel etc.etc.etc. I don't think anyone has suggested that the architects intention was to evoke the rococco and baroque - if anything they're seeking something entirely new. I think Jencks is just talking through his hat on this one. --Mcginnly | Natter 16:51, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I agree!Brosi 17:07, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

blobismus?
I have no real problem with blobismus (even very funny), but is the German term current in the US? I have never heard it sued by US speakers.Brosi 02:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * A quick google trawl gives    - the last one reviews Curl's dictionary which I've used to cite the first sentence - his entry uses the term. These are all UK articles - I've no idea what they call it in the US. BloMo probably :-) ?--Mcginnly | Natter 09:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I love these linguistic circles. My guess is that blobismus is a major put down term, even worse than blobism, that gives it mistakenly a German cast. Greg Lynn would find this amusing. But since he taught in Vienna,--- maybe that is where the term got its Germanic tinge. Anyway,some thoughtsBrosi 21:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think you're right. Curl is pretty, shall we say sceptical, about most of the architectural developments since the bauhaus - his entry for blobism reads:- "Blobismus, Blobism Late C20-early C21 fashion for anti-urban, anti-contextual buildings resembling large blobs with reptile-like carapaces; they may have scales, but sometimes lack scale." ho ho ho. --Mcginnly | Natter 23:39, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

blobs and BLOBs redux
As someone with lots of experience with both blobs (as an architect) and BLOBs (as a software engineer), I think that the characterization of BLOBs in the article is incorrect and that references to BLOBs should be removed. BLOBs are a specific type of data structure used in certain relational databases for the storage of large chunks of binary (unencoded) data; they are not a type of software application, and are not used in nurbs-based 3D modeling software of the sort commonly used by architects like Lynn.

Having now read Defenestration, I see that this comes from the Safire column, which attributes the BLOB-to-blob connection to Lynn. Lynn, however, is probaby being disingenuous here; I suspect he is not admitting that the term is most used because of what it sounds like it means, rather than because of any actual relationship between BLOB datastructures and advanced geometric modeling. The similarity between the two is just coincidence, but one that Lynn is taking opportunity to use in promoting his argument; take it with a grain of salt.

Help
The intro image needs to be rotated 90 degrees counterclockwise. Dru of Id (talk) 00:54, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * According to the message at commons:File:Birmingham Selfridges building.jpg, the image has been placed in the queue of images waiting for this fix. -- John of Reading (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2011 (UTC)