Daniel Libeskind & Tomás Saraceno at MADE      
Written by tadiROCK
Friday, 9. November 2012

We had the honor and pleasure of welcoming two world-renowned creative minds to MADE yesterday – architect and city planner Daniel Libeskind and artist Tomás Saraceno for a scintillating conversation, moderated by Lukas Feireiss.

The conversation touched on a wide variety of topics; including creativity, inspiration and the future of design, and their relevance and stature in our society today and in the years to come. Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Saraceno shared their thoughts and perspectives on these matters, providing unique insight into subjects that affect all of our daily lives.

We would like to thank Mr. Libeskind and Mr. Saraceno for spending this wonderful evening with us.

A special thanks to Lukas Feireiss and curator Marcello Pisu from Falling Walls Foundation.

Enjoy the photos of the evening!

 

Photos by Timur Emek.





comments

  1. I’m not sure what Daniel Libeskind has to contribute. Seems he missed the last exit to relevance about 10 years ago. Churning out hack projects for Asian developers is not my idea of creativity.



  2. I think it would have been more interesting to have paired Tomas Saraceno with someone like Richard Serra, another artist whose sculptural work also deals with space in an almost architectural way. There would have been an interesting dialogue comparing Saraceno’s light, etherial sculptures with Serra’s heavier, more opaque works. Unfortunately Libeskind added nothing meaningful to the discussion. I found his glib, trite and often off-topic / formulaic responses spoke more of his interest in marketing himself than of anything to do with art. For me, it merely underscored his increasing irrelevance in art discourse today.



  3. Saraceno’s architecture is welcoming, accessible, inviting and humane. Because he is humble, he is able to respond to people and to acknowledge the human scale. On the other hand, Libeskind’s retrograde work is divisive, polarizing, hostile and disruptive of aesthetic continuity. Libeskind’s agressive and brutalist designs create unneccessary barriers. He is not instrumental in making walls fall down. He is only interested in indulging meaningless whims which he mistakenly confuses with architecture. I think it is interesting also to compare Saraceno’s warmer, more crafted approach to design with Libeskind’s abstract, cold, machine-like aesthetic that always seems devoid of the human touch.




Leave comment