Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

What’s Interesting? On the Ascendency of an Evaluative Term

What’s Interesting? On the Ascendency of an Evaluative Term AbstractA celebrated aphorism of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe runs “I’d rather be good than interesting.” However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only “good” (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans, and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of “interesting” as a critical category and examines the sort of judgment-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Architecture and Culture Taylor & Francis

What’s Interesting? On the Ascendency of an Evaluative Term

Architecture and Culture , Volume 4 (2): 12 – May 3, 2016

What’s Interesting? On the Ascendency of an Evaluative Term

Architecture and Culture , Volume 4 (2): 12 – May 3, 2016

Abstract

AbstractA celebrated aphorism of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe runs “I’d rather be good than interesting.” However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only “good” (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans, and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of “interesting” as a critical category and examines the sort of judgment-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/what-s-interesting-on-the-ascendency-of-an-evaluative-term-GOwMiQkdPM

References (16)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
© 2016 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
ISSN
2050-7836
eISSN
2050-7828
DOI
10.1080/20507828.2016.1178491
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractA celebrated aphorism of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe runs “I’d rather be good than interesting.” However in design discourses today, this relation has been entirely overturned. Now it is good to be interesting, indeed better than to be only “good” (which is no longer what it used to be). Reflecting on this – with reference to the work of Sianne Ngai, Mario Perniola, Robin Evans, and Mikhail Epstein – this paper considers the rise of “interesting” as a critical category and examines the sort of judgment-in-suspension that it seems to enact, addressing what issues might be at stake in it and what it means in relation to our understanding of design pedagogy.

Journal

Architecture and CultureTaylor & Francis

Published: May 3, 2016

Keywords: architectural pedagogy; aesthetic theory; design studio; architectural disciplinarity; interesting

There are no references for this article.