3 ms·

> I saw a quote while I was there that was something along the lines of, "Gaudí is not an artist with whom posthumous collaboration is possible." A couple minut

• overview 3y ago
  It’s referring to the collaboration on the design itself.
  • diggan 3y ago
    Even that isn't true. Lots of original models/drawings have been lost, new designers interpret or reconstruct what they think Gaudi wanted to do, based on incomplete plans or where decisions weren't fully made. Not to mention new materials are available today that are being used and new processes/workflows which change the results slightly too. Sagrada Familia isn't a 100% implementation of the original vision, as even the original vision was incomplete when Gaudi died.
    • rob74 3y ago
      Ok, maybe he didn't specify how all the statues, doors, windows and other embellishments should look like, but the basic structure and shape (the three portals and the 18 spires which also determine how the support columns in the interior of the church are placed) is the same as in Gaudí's original plans.
    • matthewdgreen 3y ago
      The original statement still makes sense, though, if you correctly interpret it as critique and warning.
    • CPLX 3y ago
      Sometimes people say things indirectly. In this case what they are saying is that Gaudi’s design sense is so unique and iconoclastic that it’s essentially impossible to mix it with other styles of design.
    • lucianbr 3y ago
      Buzzword bingo isn't restricted to software. The statement just says "Gaudi was a great architect". But it sounds more impressive to talk about "posthumous collaboration", especially if you don't analyze it.
    • epolanski 3y ago
      > Sagrada Familia isn't a 100% implementation of the original vision That's what makes it more interesting and fascinating.
• mgkimsal 3y ago
  Maybe not on the design and original plans? IIRC they're trying to do everything according to original designs, which would not be 'collaboration', just... implementation. It's been over 30 years since I was there though - some friends who went more recently said a lot more has been done since then. Might be fun to go back and look for the differences, but I do not remember much detail, just a sense of 'big'.
  • gorbypark 3y ago
    If I am not mistaken, the original designs were destroyed during the Spanish Civil War.
    • whereismyacc 3y ago
      Yeah iirc his studio burned down at the hands of anarchist vandalists. Building some great indulgent monument to god wasn't exactly uncontroversial in the political climate at the time, as I understand it. Anyway, his plans wouldn't have been detailed enough to just go and build it. There was a lot of interpretation to be done in any case.
      • epolanski 3y ago
        I think all of this makes it a more fascinating building.
      • felipeerias 3y ago
        The destruction of Gaudi’s studio wasn’t exceptional. The Republican forces destroyed many other religious buildings and works of art throughout Spain before and during the Civil War.
• wzdd 3y ago
  It's just a nice way of saying it's difficult work because Gaudi was a genius and they can't hope to equal him. It doesn't mean they won't try their best.
• azulster 3y ago
  i understood it to mean that the architectural vision of Gaudi was so original and singular that and future work could only be completion of an original design, an imitation of the already completed work, or an obviously seperated style (like inserting a jazz solo in mozart) in contrast other architects worked within a well defined style with rules and systems that can be worked within by modern architects to "posthumously" collaborate. like how you can use the principles of gothic architecture to add a modern addition to a gothic cathedral. the only principle Gaudi followed was natural inspiration and his own interpretation of that, something nobody could ever define
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]