One day, when you least expect it, I will make you pay for that image.
Thank you! I found it, maybe here.
At the time I was working on a thesis project about cardiac genetics and it really reflected the major theme of my life.
I’ve noticed in the movies that creepy psycho killer intellectual super criminals have copies of Nietzsche laying about the house. The camera loves to linger over his name with an uneasy drone in the soundtrack – which ponderous tome of philosophy by Nietzsche are we looking at? It doesn’t matter. Don’t read the Nietzsche, people, it’s gonna mess you up like this guy with too much white at the top of his eyes.
So when is Hollywood going to swap out the Nietzsche and drop in a weighty, unnameable Rand tome? Hasten the day.
And architecture, for that matter.
The problem is that while is it entirely believable that the intellectual super criminal reads Nietzsche, it’s a little far fetched that they read Rand. Now if it was a movie that focused on a creepy loser who shouts about libertarianism on the internet, a tome of Rand would make a lot of sense.
One of these days I want to see a Venn Diagram showing the intersection of those who legitimately subscribe to Ayn Rand’s values and those who legitmately subscribe to the values of Fight Club.
You got me there. The best take down of Ayn Rand I’ve ever seen is a (possibly) defunct website that presented you with a series of quotes and you were supposed to determine whether the source was Ayn Rand or Marquis De Sade. I think the only real way to tell them apart is that Rand was largely silent on the subject of poop eating.
Ever heard the expression “your right to swing your fist stops an inch before you hit my face”? There are building codes for a reason. Sometimes architects have to do things that don’t fit their precious design ideals because it’s necessary for building stability, etc.
Edited because when you change a subject from singular to plural you have to change the darned verb to match. English is so picky!
If I remember the book right Howard Roark did adhere to the building codes (until he blew up a low-income housing project for bastardizing the purity of his Visionary Design), but the idea of “designing buildings his own way irregardless of what other people think of them” is silly. All architecture ultimately succeeds or fails based on how the people who use said buildings relate to them.
Doesn’t take much in the way of enlightenment to see that a poor person enjoying Ayn Rand is only slightly less weird than a Jew enjoying Mein Kampf.
You’re right, of course, but there are highly-paid architects who will disagree with you.
Since she didn’t actually say it, it seems reasonable to just remove the attribution and carry on.
There are buildings that win architecture prizes. There are buildings that are loved by their inhabitants. These categories have negligible overlap.
(I don’t remember who said this. Possibly even some architect.)
It’s been so long, I didn’t remember any detail. Thanks!
After having lived in a housing complex that won awards for the (already famous) architects, I decided that every architectural school should have an annual symposium in which they invite people who work and/or live in buildings designed by famous architects to form a panel to discuss exactly what it’s like to live/work in those spaces. I know I would have given them an earful!
Aside from rarely passing at a chance to piss on the Fountainhead, how did I get involved in that?
a little bit of that, a little bit of THIS:
Java coders protest.
It took me a while to catch that.
Probably because the VM was launching.
Wait for it…