http://jwilson.coe.uga.edu/emat6680/parveen/gr_in_art.htm

The problem with rational and logical thinking is that it is trying to set life into a concrete form that offers a rigid system with known outcomes..the mathematics that Corbusier used extensively was the golden ratio..something that actually by itself is great but is not actually strictly true when it comes to growth in nature. Arguably it's an ideal that doesn't want to accept the fact life/nature is not ideal or mathematically constent.

What is important is sensitivity...when someone stops being sensitive and tries to see things through systems they might as well pluck out their eyes...because they've stopped seeing as is and only as preffered. I think it's important to study systems because they do give almost all the answers but none are actually strictly correct what makes something work is its ability to adapt to things and if it is set to a rule how can it adapt? And therefore remain correct in it's relationship to other things. This is probably closer to the principal of nature than mathematics, there needs to be a fundamental that allows for a margin of error otherwise things are too finely tuned and highly strung which makes the system to fragile.

The idea of perfection is overplayed in design, character is far more important and often much more difficult to plan for or create. Perfection is an ideal , perfection can often be very boring and dull. Variation, differences, exceptions to the rule... A designer/artist etc.. Needs to be sensitive not rigid in ideal.

This is why Corbusier is what he is..the pinnacle of a blinkered view that has set itself literally in concrete and is answerable only to an unproven mathematical ideal.

Last edited by Bop (2015-07-26 23:56:08)