design forum - DesignAddict


	> Edit your post


	title of this thread your message Unsnagging the engineering and the design virtues of Renzo Piano's CAS is more complicated. He started with such a high concept for CAS that a Hollywood producer would be envious of his pitch. I'm lifting the ground up and sliding a building under it, he reputedly more or less pitched. It is a catchy concept. A good high-concept may be defined as a premise for something that can be expressed in a single sentence expressing physical action and instantly grasped as something new and different. Piano's concept is VERY high. Alas, Hollywood has learned the lesson that not all great concepts make great movies. Why? First, what makes a high concept fascinating, understandable and memorable sometimes cannot fill up 110 minutes of screen story. Second, compelling high concepts invariably hinge on a powerful logic of action. Note: I pick up the ground and slide a building in under it. Compare this with the high concept of a slasher movie: I put six kids in a house and kill five. Or the second degree of freedom pitch for Alien: Jaws in a can. Renzo Piano: I lift up the ground and slide a building in under it. Wow! Its so vivid. You can just see it. And you can just see the faces of the CAS board of directors, some scientists, and some money bags, after listening to a 5 other architects drone on about detailed models, registering: hey, I get this! after Renzo pitches and sketches on a pad of paper only. This is design taken totally Hollywood, at least in the sense of a pitch. Score one for Renzo. But is the building this high concept pitch enabled as great of a design as it was a pitch? Or is it a high concept structure with engineering virtuosity than design virtuousity? associated web images (optional) associated web link (optional) your email your password create a forums account \| you forgot your password?