As has been written all over the place, this was not the most fascinating exhibition, as the main part consisted of facts prettily illustrated to look a bit like contemporary art, a bit like science,
a bit like wacky corporate info and a whole lot like Koolhaas' WIRED issue of a couple years ago. I'm more interested in proposals than facts so I'll concentrate more on the pavilions that didn't take the main theme too seriously.First off the ultra fabulous and supremely weird Japanese pavilion which featured
the work
and inspirations of architect Terunobu Fujimori. Not only is his work , umm, particular,
but what can I say about carving an architectural model AND it's base
out of a single tree trunk? The only place I'd seen his work in the past was of course Casa Vogue...
The Austrian Pavilion featured an exhibitit called Rock over Barock (!) and featured 2 Hans Hollein and one Frederic Kiesler project from the 60's and some contemporary works inspired by these. Holleins' Superbuilding is propably the single most inspiring image in the biennale...
The Korean Pavilion featured a show on Housing: how it gets chosen, built, placed in the city etc. Apparently housing gets built by catalogues; you draw the building, a pamphlet gets published, people choose and buy from the catalogue and from 1-1 mock ups, and the thing gets built if it sells well enough.
Also apparently they are running out of "last homes" or graves,
and they have to invent new techniques
to properly bury their own.
The French pavilion featured Daniel Buren's fantastic striped cylinders on the facade, something I seem to have subconciously reffered to in the Cloud House, though I'd never actually seen them.
Inside the pavilion had been turned into a squat with 20 young architects DJs artists bla bla living and rotating for the duration of the biennale.
The idea is great and fresh etc but I found the scaffolding thing kind of ugly and borng and even passe, if I may say so. Other things to check out are the Cypriot participation which featured projects about the "green line",
and I particularly liked this inhabitable frame that could be transfered and transformed into many differered buildings. The idea is not new
but the result was super interesting. The Dutch pavilion featured a historical exhibition of utopian projects for cities,
like Constants' bridges etc. Not a challenging or attention grabbing show but definetly full of great encyclopedic content,
and the set-up was hip as usual.
Finally the Americal pavilion focused on the destruction from Hurricane Katrina, and projects
that propose solutions for the flood striken area.

This past weekend I bought a little piece of land in Solbim, on the mainland of Second Life (if you want to visit, the coordinates are 128, 128, 0) . The plot is between two houses, so just enough room to try out the building tools and make a little demo house for Angelo and me. So naturally I went for inverted leopard rhomboids with arrow graffiti interiors, just as a base for building on.
The next door neighbors came over, and I thought I was happy to meet them, instead I got : "whats this - this is ugly- can u please delete it? - now, yuk yuk" etc etc. Apparently they both hated the Leopard, thought it vomitrocious, and one of them even wanted to get into a fight. The neightbor to the east put up a wall of forest so as to not see my house, and the one on the side demolished his house and put the plot up for sale. So much for feeling at home on the internet.
All this was semi fun of course, but it brings us to the real Carrie Bradshaw: Is a Leopard wall less fitting for a building than a exposed concrete wall, and arent they all just texture maps? Can we consider one material to be authentic and correct and another one kitch or just wrong? When are they going to invent photoprint concrete so everything can be texturemapped everywhere and nothing be tha same again?

Been thinking about Leopard Buildings recently, ever since the
The Leopard Cube by Konst2 is a an exhibition space at 
The Athanasius Kircher Society revisits England's
For a bit more on the sadly derelict structures, see earlier on
via the always cool
Still the view is fabulous and people swim around there even though this is quite close to Athens.

The view from the eastern edge of the island is awesome, and my friend
In fact the christians were responsible for the major destruction of the ancinet greek heritage.
Total 18th century beauty, I felt part of the Grand Tour indeed.
Cant' seem to be able to stop posting these days, probable because I'm finally at an internet connection and also seeing tons of beauty around. Everything seems to be about island architecture, and funny enough the
Another cosmic coincidence: The Hotel was designed by their dad Makis Kostikas in 1967. It is a rare deviation from the vernacular modernism as established by
The
A Jules Verne monster on a hot white roof;
A stair that leads to nowhere;
A wannabe-muslim christian church poured right out of the ice-cream machine;
a post-modern roofie gone a bit weird,
and weirder,
and a little white nightmare suffering from the recent trend of buildings spotted with stones (?)
The look is casino interiors combined with a strange machine aesthetic, they try to look like they're not on the water. Sometimes they're interesting, sometimes boring and sometimes they look better upside-down.





1.jpg)









