Covers That Made It (partially by me) September-November ‘09

Miraculously, despite my lack of real Photoshop/ Illustrator/ Indesign skills, I have been involved with all three covers of our faculty’s monthly this year. The September issue, the October issue, and as of now, the November issue as well. Working for a magazine actually de-mystifies the whole experience, and making covers does the same. While it does take skill and time (I’m not that skillful and very impatient), I think that the covers have turned out quite well.

The first one is the September issue cover. I have actually have that in my mind for quite some time. We wanted to make more “interactive” cover art. I proposed that we should make a coloring picture. This was more appropriate to do in September, as one of the first thins you learn in the first year is drawing and coloring in. I had made a photograph of our faculty, which we traced in Illustrator. Then we redistributed the headlines in a way that would compromise the “wholeness” of the image. I added the blue spot to bring in extra color, which was needed as the cover would be very blank and bland otherwise (the roof actually has that dark-blue-grey color, so it was OK). The Color sequence was made by Daan de Leeuw, who insisted we follow it. He also sorted out the headlines…

September 2009 cover

This was actually OK. We knew what we wanted and went for it. It was a bit of a joke, but it was well-meant and didn’t get any complaints.

Things were tougher for the October issue. We had a big piece about Pieterskerk, a church in Leiden, that was restored with the help of good folks from RMiT (one of the departments of the faculty). We had a great photograph of the organ, which would be a departure from the traditional covers that usually depict either something modern, something abstract or something fun. Unfortunately, the picture wasn’t sharp enough, so we got rid of that and had another one of our big stories, Bob Allies (from Morrison & Allies) interview about his upcoming lecture about “cultivating the city”. He sent us some pictures in the hope that we will use them for the article. We did, but we also chose it for the cover. However, we had a dilemma. How do you put in the headlines without disrupting the image. After some time, we decided to place them vertically rather than horizontally. I put down the basic structure, Marcello Soeleman than changed the color of the letters (from grey to light-green) which turned out really nicely. Because our “interference” was so minimal, the cover art was credited to Bob Allies.

October 2009 cover

For the November issue, well, you can read all about it here. We then decided to use a picture by Anna Ghijs, my colleague who was covering all things Biennale (IABR). It was from the Parallel Cases @ RDM, which will be reviewed in the magazine this month. The photo is one of the winning proposals of the student exhibition (which is what Parallel Cases is). We wanted to keep the cover quite minimal, and the image was not large enough by itself, so I cut out the competition entry model, which we placed in the middle of the page. First, we had the headlines running through the image, but Anna did not like it, so we tried to see what would happen if we put the text above the image. This worked well. Since the headlines are actually a flowing paragraph of text, we differentiated these by changing the size of the font, and we used an “old school” font just to keep things classy. This was really more Anna’s work (intellectually, that is) than mine, but I guess since I did the dirty work, I guess I deserve some credit. So this is a collaboration with Anna Ghijs, and Marcello also changed one or two things (as the end-editor of that issue).

November 2009 cover

 

Peter S.

November…

It’s been 20 years.

20 years since my freedom has been fought for. 20 years since people in Czechoslovakia freed themselves from the Communist regime. While I don’t remember it at all (would you, if you were 7 months old), I guess it has a powerful message. A child. All the Eastern European children of ‘89 were given a chance to grow up in a democratic society. Where they could write what they want to write. Say what they want to say. Go where they want to go. We weren’t revolutionaries. Our parents, uncles, their friends, and students were. They risked their lives to give us and themselves a better one. One with choice. One with freedom of speech. One where you did not need to stand in line for oranges. Or bananas. Or anything.

They had ideals back then. Do they have them now? How many things did not turn out the way they wanted them to? How many people are still poor? How many others are richer still due to corruption, crime, backhand politics. No, things are not ideal.

But we’re here. A new generation. We are just coming of age. I can’t speak for others, but I try to use the opportunities given to me. I write, I speak, I shop and I travel. I think. I want to make their time and effort worthwhile. I want them to see that they created opportunities for a better world for all their countrymen, past, present and future. And eventually, I also want to be able to inspire and fight for the freedom of others. So that they will receive that gift, just as I did, and they can do with it as they please. Just as I did.

I can’t remember November 1989. But I can’t forget about it. I’ve had opportunities, met people, and experienced things that I might never have had otherwise. And for that, above all, I want to thank them.

Peter S.

How to debate anonymously or The Wizard of Oz

Hey, y’all.

First of all, I need to clear the air of few things. Let us assume that I am me, and not who I work for, what I do in my free time, what political systems I prefer, or any of that really irrelevant nonsense. Let my person be dematerialized, until only my name (Peter S.) and my thoughts (and writings remain). As Rem Koolhaas would say: fuck context!!!

Let us assume that I need to construct a tale, in order to get my point across, for anyone who reads this is neither so finely attuned to my thoughts as to get my subtle hints and place them in a context relevant for him/her, and people generally empathise with the human experience.

Now, let us assume there is a school. A faculty at a university, if you will. Now, it’s not such a bad school, but it’s not all that great either. Let us say that this faculty has been experiencing some financial problems lately, problems whose source is irrelevant for the solution that I shall propose.

Now let us also imagine that there is a group of people, its size, composition and identity are irrelevant, who believe that they can find the ones who are to blame for the situation the faculty is in. They form an anonymous group, let us call them PURSE (I know, what a thinly veiled reference), hang up posters and write a manifesto against those who are to blame for the unhappy financial situation at the faculty.

So, PURSE wants to remain anonymous, in order to face those who are to blame to address the whole student body, and in order to prevent the debate from getting personal. The fact is that while people do voice their support, there is really not much of a debate. There seems to be no-one who is capable of taking the daunting task of actually debating and solving problems together with those that are to blame (according to PURSE).

How to solve this? I believe that PURSE should debate with those who they believe are to blame. But how can one enter on that stage and remain anonymous? Enter the Wizard of Oz.

Anyone who has seen the classic tale, will know that the Wizard, is just like anyone, except he hides in a big box, in order to keep his identity secret. Yet, he manages to talk to people head-to-head. A perfect solution!!!

Please take what you’ve just read with a grain of salt. I am a-political. Politics is far too dirty for me to concern myself with it. All I want is that people use their heads. So far, humanity has shown me plenty low-points, and some high points. If PURSE do not like the Wizard of Oz approach, let someone come forward, who will debate and ask, but have their mind not only clear of the neo-liberal agenda of those who are to blame (according to PURSE), but also be clear of the neo-marxist agenda of PURSE. We need someone ho thinks for themselves, and does not let philosophers (who are already dead) do it for them. We need someone… Or else Imma gonna have to do this shit myself. Again.

Protected: Covers That Didn’t Make It

This post is password protected. To view it please enter your password below:

Password:

Hint-Hint?

Every time I read a horror-scope (misspelling intended), I am amazed by how well they fit with the reality. But of course, those things are kept so vague that they could apply to anyone. Yes, every single day, every one of us is either having problems with our partners, or looking for one. We have done some work well, while some work was done, well, less well. Therefore, you’ll either get on well, or less well with your colleagues at work.

And then there’s English Lit. How much analysis does can one use on someone else’s writing, or any way they express their thoughts and feelings. How deep can you dig, and twist, and search, until everything seems to fit your purpose, just like horoscopes. Can subtle hints even exist today, can they be picked up, or are all hints (apart from shameless flirting), just wishful thinking. Are we so desperate, as to twist, reinterpret and believe that what our friends, media or the government say, and they actually say it in a literal way, into something that we want to believe, into something we can believe.

What am I trying to say. It’s crystal-clear to me, but I guess I’m just hinting it to you.

Peter S.

A Self-fulfilling Prophecy (or Why we love Lady Gaga)

So I momentarily return to my celebrity musing, though this will not last too long, so bear with me (or click it away, bitch).

I can remember that this january, a friend of my was commissioned by someone to paint a picture of Lady Gaga, Carl Lagerfeld and Kanye West in a jacuzzi, with their clothes on. While the commission did not work out as planned, it did introduce me to Lady Gaga. Not really, I read about Lady Gaga in that Playboy my uncle gave to me for Christmas (as a joke, I’m giving him one this time around, the one with Marge Simpson). But still, Lady Gaga wasn’t all that huge back then, but she was being hailed as the next big thing.

I still remember when Avril was the next big thing, and it was rather disappointing. All that’s left now are a couple of old ties in girls’ wardrobes and a couple of overproduced pop-rock albums (plus that perfume-advertisement, which was atrocious). Sorry for being a culture snob, but even pop can be done well.

Now for Lady Gaga. I truly think she’s awesome. I don’t care if she’s overproduced, overmarketed, sounds like  man etc… With Lady Gaga, the conscious, the behind-the-scenes, the overproduced, the plastic and  all the hoo-hah becomes irrelevant as soon as the product is revealed. Very Warhol-esque. Following the formula Modern Ar t= I could do that + but you didn’t, Gaga (or whoever is lurking in the background) mystifies the world. No one cares about her person, only her persona. The woman becomes dematerialized in her Kermit-the-Frog costumes, her red drapes and whatever she wears. We don’t really care who she’s doing, what she’s eating or anything. We wait until Gaga throws another piece of media fodder from behind her plastic mask and we chase it rather than the perpetrator.

By creating a strange consumer product, a self-fulfilling prophecy (a song such as “Paparazzi” would have been ‘appropriate’ for someone who actually spent some time in the media’s spotlight, not on a debut album of a hopeful star), the Haus of Gaga created a myth that’s hard to bust. As soon as Lady Gaga becomes human, we’ll tear her to shreds (in the media), because that’s what we do. While Gaga’s strategy is paying off for now, it would be interesting to see how long she can keep this up, and when her current myth is all gone, she’ll have to really put in some thought on new artistic direction. Get the PR department ready.

Peter S

House Concepts Continued…

Apart from enormous pressure from all the things I have to do in my time (emails, work, school- the vicious circle), I would still like to share some things I’ve been working on. After the rather horrible sketch model, we decided it was time to make more models. I’ll only post mine, although Ceciel did a fantastic job as well, we really came up with some great things.

Double Helix House

Here I’ve taken tried to interweave two separate dwellings into a single entity. The idea didn’t really catch on, even though I insisted that the shared patio in the middle of the two houses could lead to social interaction between the two different (sets of) inhabitants. (It would also create a feeling of a very large house, simply because of the distances one would have to walk to get from point A to point B (entrance to the bedroom, for example).

Then I followed with this one…

House 1

I’m very much for roof terraces. From this view, you almost can’t see it, though its there on the left. The Spiral structure is still being maintained. We eventually agreed to work this model out, because, being the contextless thing it is, we can later impose our own limits, rather than being limited from the very start.

Then, Ceciel and I once again reshuffled the cardboard pieces to form prototype 1.01, again, with a roof terrace, though here it’s rather different and the spiral logic is somewhat warped.

Prototype 1.01

All photos by Ceciel van Rinsum.

That’s all folks!

Peter S.

One Last Collage

This is the last collage from the Formstudy series of 2009. Basically, it is the three other collages “collaged” digitally. It was meant to provide us with insight, though I would hardly claim it gave me any insight at all. The rest of the posts on this subject will involve photos of models of chairs. How fascinating, right? Well, it might be.

House of the Future collage 4

Peter S.

Huis Sonneveld, Rotterdam

During our Formstudy project, in which we have to design a chair, we went to Rotterdam, to see Huis Sonneveld, a Modernist masterpiece by Brinkman and Van Der Vlught (or so we’ve been told). It is not as cool as Villa Savoye, but hey, it’s the closest the Dutch have (if we don’t count the Schroder/ Rietveld house, which I plan to visit one of these days). I hope you enjoy the following little gallery.

Huis Sonneveld, as seen form the outside

Waiting room for guests

Dining room

Kitchen, bare and only used by the staff

The living room, with the strip window

Girls’ bathroom, in the most fashionble of colors

Guest room

Terrace from Puk’s room

Puk’s room

Parent’s bathroom

Ge’s room

Master bedroom

Master bedroom

Wardrobes with built-in lighting (that was in 1930!)

Dressing room

Stairs

Thermostat

Maid’s room

Maid’s bathroom

It’s interesting to see how high bourgeois life is served by modern architecture. But though the house seems quite comfortable, some rooms (especially the guest room) are furnished like your better hospital. The maid’s rooms, though they have the same facilities, are smaller. The Sonnevelds must have been pretty progressive for their time. Apparently, Mrs Sonneveld was the first mother in Rotterdam who picked up her daughters with a car. And that concludes your architectural education for today.

Peter S.

Where It All Went Wrong (in Architecture)

Hi there. When I have nothing to write about, I often start thinking about the stuff I’m doing, and whether it’s even worth doing it. I don’t mean whether I should eat that donut, or go to that movie, I mean my long term plan: architecture. Although I am committed to the modern project, I cannot help but feel that somewhere along the way, many things went wrong.

For example: when we question the quality of dwellings, it’s not the shoddy construction, or even the gret density that bothers us, but it’s the absence of a good space. In order to achieve maximum efficiency, rooms (they could not really be called spaces, no less places) are arranged according to functional diagrams that seldom take into accounts patterns of human habitation. The early works of Modernism, however, are often distilled homes, ie things are usually correct minus the opulent decoration.

Therefore, I was very surprised when I found out that the Villa Savoye (by Le Corbusier in 1932) follows many of the advices given in A Pattern Language (1977). For example, many rooms have light on two sides, living spaces on the south, master bedroom to the east, the private terrace, etc…

Villa Savoye, the living room flooded by light

Villa Savoye, the bathroom in the master bedroom

Villa Savoye, the private roof-terrace, view from the living room

Where did it go wrong? I believe the answer is simple. Besides the obvious fact that Villa Savoye is a detached house with a spacious plot of land, where perfect orientation was easily achieved, which is harder to do in row-housing, or flats, I believe it all has to do with generations.

The first generation of Modernists was still educated in the old system, which, although they rejected some of its features, they subconsciously held on to the lessons they have been taught about domesticity. In later stages, this was excluded from the education (we did not learn any of the stuff that is in Pattern Language, though we might argue that it’s quite elementary knowledge). Therefore, the later generations mucked it up, and only the great ones could come to those various conclusion about the pattern of human life. And that’s why so many modern architects still compared (and undoubtedly still do) their work against the Heroic Period (from 1920 to 1930).

While I do not advocate the return to the old forms, or any form of formalism, I do believe that architects should rediscover the simple living patters, so that all could benefit from a home, whether one lives in an apartment, row-house, and not just those who can afford a world-class architect (though after watching Koolhaas Houselife, you might have some doubts).

This should also work the other way. While A Pattern Language argues for an almost traditional(ist) way of life and almost a hippie like society (What can you expect from a book written in 1977 in Berkeley?), this shows that the vocabulary of modern architecture is not always at odds with ‘home’.

Peter S

PS: My hypothesis is not substantiated by anything but a hasty conclusion from half-deducted facts. Sometime in the near future, I hope to show you the photos from Huis Zonneveld (not as cool as Villa Savoye, but still pretty good).