<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
  xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
  xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">

<channel>
<title>What is the future of the architectural monograph? : Responses</title>
<description>Design Observer ::Â Join the Discussion</description>
<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/the-architectural-monograph-a-defense/25828/</link>
<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
<dc:creator>Design Observer Group</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2011-03-29T15:46:52-05:00</dc:date>
<copyright>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/1.0</copyright>




<item>
	<title><![CDATA[Responding to "What is the future of the architectural monograph?"]]></title>
	<description><![CDATA[I think that the monograph books are great, but today we live in an interactive world, and the architecture book industry is not embracing it at all. The books are published as in the Middle ages. We architects praise ourselves as master of design and information,but we do a bad job when we have to publish our work, look at the architects websites and you will undertand what I'm talking about.<br />
<br />
I envision architecture books, to be in electronic format, so you can have 3d models, panoramic views, architect comments, users reviews, architecture tours and stuff like that.<br />
<br />
That's regarding the format.<br />
<br />
But what about the content? The monographs were created when architects have a accomplished scope of work. Every new project was an evolution of an idea started in a previous one. Today most architects don't have bold ideas that are easily digested and evolve with the time, so every project from a firm looks like it was done by a different firm, so what is the point?<br />
<br />
Chewing material for you.<br />
<br />
Thanks]]></description>
	<author>Damian Trostinetzky</author>
	<link>http://places.designobserver.com/feature/the-architectural-monograph-a-defense/25828/#comments</link>
	<dc:date>2011-03-29T15:46:52-05:00</dc:date>
</item>



</channel>
</rss>

	


