News
About | Archive | Mood Board | Ask

26 May 2012

While reading the new CLOG issue, focusing on apple, It just hit me, while reading about structural glass, innovation, objects to architecture, that there seems to be a conflict of interest. The magnificent glass panels of the new flagship stores, example 5th avenue 2.0, present a clear conflict, on one hand the architecture spreads it’s utopian ideal, minimal relief from our chaotic lives, a transparent haven for all - but technically this architecture does not provide the optimal conditions for the functional use of the products it holds, and so the building finds its place underground. It seems as if Steve should have hired Petra Blaisse as a consultant alongside the magnificent Sir Norman Foster. It seems the “anti-glare” screen is the real hero.

While reading the new CLOG issue, focusing on apple,

It just hit me, while reading about structural glass, innovation, objects to architecture, that there seems to be a conflict of interest. The magnificent glass panels of the new flagship stores, example 5th avenue 2.0, present a clear conflict, on one hand the architecture spreads it’s utopian ideal, minimal relief from our chaotic lives, a transparent haven for all - but technically this architecture does not provide the optimal conditions for the functional use of the products it holds, and so the building finds its place underground.

It seems as if Steve should have hired Petra Blaisse as a consultant alongside the magnificent Sir Norman Foster.

It seems the “anti-glare” screen is the real hero.


Posted 12 months ago with 1 note
Tags: Petra Blaisse  norman foster  steve jobs  apple  architecture  
  1. notonthedole said: I’ve often felt apple’s design aesthetic/ethos doesn’t translate, or perhaps hasn’t been properly translated, into architecture. That said their stores in Covent Garden and Paris Opera are stunning examples of old meets new.
  2. visesimorgen posted this