Comments on: Goldberger on Architectural Criticism in the Age of Twitter

By: Emaleigh

Emaleigh — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 19:33:47 +0000

Totally agree with MM Jones. I saw this story shared on Twitter and immediately thought it odd that Paul Goldberger (@paulgoldberger) was even speaking about Twitter as a medium. Articles aside, his Twitter account is not particularly engaging, mostly used for output with little to spark conversation. There are plenty of other critics, in cities like San Francisco, Philadelphia and Los Angeles for example, that are really making a statement on Twitter. They’re keeping active accounts and reaching far beyond their columns, sharing articles and stories (including work they didn’t write), and engaging the public in a conversation about cities and architecture’s importance in our everyday lives. If you want to really talk about bringing architecture to “the people” in a new way, it’ll take you just a few minutes browsing the Twitterverse to see where its really going down. It’s great to see – I’d argue people are learning from critics more than ever before.

By: MM Jones

MM Jones — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 11:11:18 +0000

Yet another perpetuation of the misconception that the use of Twitter must mean that the conversation ends at 140 characters, when a great number of tweets are links to blog posts, essays, online publications, etc. or are part of a back-and-forth conversation between multiple, engaged thinkers. Goldberger is on Twitter but either doesn’t understand it or is misrepresenting it in a regrettable mix of misrepresentation and hyperbole.

By: John Egan

John Egan — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:09:34 +0000

Great lecture! I also enjoyed his reminiscing about sitting in Scully’s lectures on Architecture while a student at Yale even after he’d taken the course.