From: QueeneMUSE@aol.com
Date: Wed Sep 22 1999 - 02:23:56 MDT
In a message dated 9/21/1999 3:46:23 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Damien B
writes:
<< >Um, there would be many people on this list who weren't yet born when 2001
>came out... Maybe even Tron. These are retro-futures. That's not what you
>meant, is it? >>
Mead's art is still modern, no matter what year he did the work. Just like
Frank Lloyd Wright is still 'modern', because his design philosophy is a hair
a more advanced than most of today's architects (barring Prince, Kellogg,
Niles and a few others). Same with Lautner, though it is retro it is still
futuristic and in many ways unsurpassed.
*My* definition of retro would imply reinventing a trend rehashed from past
popular culture (i.e.: 70's polyester, lava lamps, peplum jackets, etc.) that
is recognizable as old fashioned, hence: kitsch. Retro-future would also
imply kitsch: ie clunky robots, divign helmets, etc.
Syd Mead's Tron is still a futurist design piece.Look carefully at his
drawings.The ergonomics work. So do his architectural and industrial designs.
His work never made it into mainstream, even though many people saw Tron,
they did not emulate it. Blade Runner was actually a "flop" in the eighties,
and didn't become a cult classic until many years after.
His work did not become mainstream and it has never been widely accepted. He
represents Extropian views. His philosophy is not retro - it is forward
thinking - promoting technology as friend not foe. He is still a futurist,
even if some of his drawings were done yesterday.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:05:14 MST