A recent trip West provided a chance to get back to reading actual books, and enforced a interruption from the routine of this site. The distinct difference of consuming more considered writing, and the relative ease of not getting up and scouring local publications for noteworthy items, were striking. Even as new forms of writing and publishing have presented opportunities that were heretofore restricted to academic publishing or dilettantes, their pervasiveness may not be a good thing — the reading in question was Neal Leach’s The Anaesthetics of Architecture, and sitting and thinking about a glut of information erasing meaning led to some introspection about what is going on around here, one result of which will be a hiatus of sorts for the next 4-6 weeks (meaning this site will not be entirely bereft of posting, but the infrequency would be best served by an RSS reader).
Being fussy about design means a high level of introspection is expected. The next few weeks will also include a redesign: a major software update is pending, and the desk is currently littered with various popular how-to’s that cover the proper way to execute CSS and build a more standards-compliant friendly site. Whereas some aspects of this design work, there are several glaring failures. Much of the improvements will be under the hood, but should result in greater reader control, for both off- and on-line reading. Though the current state is reasonably tidy and effective, the visual result is not dissimilar to, say, an Urban Outfitters: some hipster gloss without a firm conceptual base. Normally, this sort of geek-tech talk is considered unnecessary, but given the editorial tone here, a short acknowledgement of the structural (code-wise) failures of this site was desired.
This revamp also extends to content. One of the goals in starting this project was to produce well-considered, tight, and entertaining prose about the city and the structures that are its defining elements. Though the latter is clearly in evidence, the former is less so. One clear reason is that you can’t plan for interesting or exceptional events to occur daily. And spending a good chunk of it writing means that there is even less opportunity to discover. The ill-defined editorial goal was to hew some middle ground between the best of architectural criticism (Michael Sorkin, and Stuart Klawans are two personal inspirations; though the latter is not architecture, that speaks to the dearth of good, popular architectural critics) and essayists who wrote more generally about the city (William Whyte), to define a synthesis of experience of the narrative of experience and the environment in which is unfolds. A little high-minded, sure, but if its works, it shouldn’t read as such.
Instead, what happened too much was regurgitating items found elsewhere online. The standard was that some commentary had to be added that was lacking in the source material. Given the arid conditions of architectural and urban criticism in local publications, this wasn’t hard to do, and is still an essential need, but chasing after the Times will always be only that. Lacking a staff of reporters, finding one’s own news means walking the streets more.
The most immediate and obvious change will be a reduction in the frequency of publishing. The new target will be Monday morning publication, with more abbreviated comments when the more egregious examples of journalism turn up. Items will likely be longer, and if this goes as planned, be better written (unlike, say, this very sentence). Some other bells and whistles may turn up (photos, for instance). If you’ve like what you have seen so far, please keep coming back. What’s to come will should be a refinement and perhaps even an expansion.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
We’ll be back after this short interruption.
A recent trip West provided a chance to get back to reading actual books, and enforced a interruption from the routine of this site. The distinct difference of consuming more considered writing, and the relative ease of not getting up and scouring local publications for noteworthy items, were striking. Even as new forms of writing and publishing have presented opportunities that were heretofore restricted to academic publishing or dilettantes, their pervasiveness may not be a good thing — the reading in question was Neal Leach’s The Anaesthetics of Architecture, and sitting and thinking about a glut of information erasing meaning led to some introspection about what is going on around here, one result of which will be a hiatus of sorts for the next 4-6 weeks (meaning this site will not be entirely bereft of posting, but the infrequency would be best served by an RSS reader).
Being fussy about design means a high level of introspection is expected. The next few weeks will also include a redesign: a major software update is pending, and the desk is currently littered with various popular how-to’s that cover the proper way to execute CSS and build a more standards-compliant friendly site. Whereas some aspects of this design work, there are several glaring failures. Much of the improvements will be under the hood, but should result in greater reader control, for both off- and on-line reading. Though the current state is reasonably tidy and effective, the visual result is not dissimilar to, say, an Urban Outfitters: some hipster gloss without a firm conceptual base. Normally, this sort of geek-tech talk is considered unnecessary, but given the editorial tone here, a short acknowledgement of the structural (code-wise) failures of this site was desired. This revamp also extends to content. One of the goals in starting this project was to produce well-considered, tight, and entertaining prose about the city and the structures that are its defining elements. Though the latter is clearly in evidence, the former is less so. One clear reason is that you can’t plan for interesting or exceptional events to occur daily. And spending a good chunk of it writing means that there is even less opportunity to discover. The ill-defined editorial goal was to hew some middle ground between the best of architectural criticism (Michael Sorkin, and Stuart Klawans are two personal inspirations; though the latter is not architecture, that speaks to the dearth of good, popular architectural critics) and essayists who wrote more generally about the city (William Whyte), to define a synthesis of experience of the narrative of experience and the environment in which is unfolds. A little high-minded, sure, but if its works, it shouldn’t read as such. Instead, what happened too much was regurgitating items found elsewhere online. The standard was that some commentary had to be added that was lacking in the source material. Given the arid conditions of architectural and urban criticism in local publications, this wasn’t hard to do, and is still an essential need, but chasing after the Times will always be only that. Lacking a staff of reporters, finding one’s own news means walking the streets more. The most immediate and obvious change will be a reduction in the frequency of publishing. The new target will be Monday morning publication, with more abbreviated comments when the more egregious examples of journalism turn up. Items will likely be longer, and if this goes as planned, be better written (unlike, say, this very sentence). Some other bells and whistles may turn up (photos, for instance). If you’ve like what you have seen so far, please keep coming back. What’s to come will should be a refinement and perhaps even an expansion.