Gorretti: Over Exposed City

Over Exposed City:

Border and edges – mid 80s and WWII started to divide their cities
This mentality affected airport design – notion of terrorism
Go TO the city vs. going INTO the city

Inner boundaries i.e. Corydon or Osborne not just Winnipeg

Reaction:
Is it about the relationships we develop with the image that allows us to be in the city instead of going to the city? If I were to visit New York for the first time would I be able to recognize it? Are the iconic buildings and scenes from picture of New York my only indication of my place and whether I’m in it?

Cities are divided by borders edges

Types of boundaries and edges: racial, financial, interest, commercial, industrial, residential etc… social connection???

Reaction:
Do the things we do, places we go and people we know create boundaries? How significant are the boundaries and edges of an individual?

Transparent buildings

Permanence is no longer important

Reaction:
Do we accept this culture of non-permanence, do we proliferate it or do we reject it?

Perhaps there is no right or wrong answer to this question, or perhaps it is that we do all of the above. I think there is a romantic notion of permanence. I think we want to believe that things can stand the test of time because we feel that it exudes the ideals of quality and endurance. However, the truth is things aren’t permanent they break, fade, get lost, don’t work and are out grown. I feel our culture recognizes this natural process of non-permanence and has developed a means to counter act it. The result is a grotesque exaggeration wherein not only are things non-permanent but they are disposable. This notion is brought to life with every prenuptial agreement, extended warranty and quoted resale value. Nothing is forever and everything is temporary. Is this because time is money?