THE POSTMODERN MIASMA

THE POSTMODERN MIASMA
If the move frome less is more
(Mies van Der Rohe)to less is a bore (Robert Ventum)and more is more(Robert Ventun)and more is more(Robert Stern)signals the rise of promo, and thus a deliberate (re) engagement with popular culture, historism, and the everyday,the question remains,what did pm do for architecture,and ongoing development?While the commentators like stern and venturi postmodernism enriched architectural work, increased intelectual,aesthetic and formal accesibility,provide multiple meanings,and facilitated better comminication for other critics , like Diene Ghirardo and Howard,caygill,it represented merely deceit and the retreat of the avant-garde.
Drowing on awide range of sources both of the time and from more resent perspectives ,students are asked to present acrefully development response to the following questions:
1.what both at the time and in retrospect,do you believe were the intentions behind postmodernism,and how successfullydid it function as acritique of modernism?
2.How would you arque /analyse both its negative and positive effects on architecture in its own time,and on sabsequent developments?
3.Was its comitment to popularity desirerable?was its aparent rejection of architecture commitment to the avant-garde and to high art justifiable?And what did it do for architecture and for architectural thinking,both internationaly and in Australia?