Architectural Replicas - Four Hyopthesis on the use of Agnostic Copies in the Architectural Field

Goberna Pesudo, C; Grau, U

Architectural Replicas - Four Hyopthesis on the use of Agnostic Copies in the Architectural Field

Goberna Pesudo, C Grau, U

Permalink

Publisher:: Treatise
Publication Type:: Book
Citation:: 2015
Issue Date:: 2015

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	2015_03_10_FAKEindustries_revisions.pdf	Published version	32.16 MB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Goberna Pesudo, C	en_US
dc.contributor.author	Grau, U https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1906-1615	en_US
dc.date.issued	2015	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	2015	en_US
dc.identifier.isbn	978-0-9961116-9-0	en_US
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/40471
dc.description.abstract	The word “replica” bears a double meaning; it designates a literal reproduction of a preexisting work and, in a sense denoted in Romance languages, a response to a previous statement. Replicas that respond to the first part of this definition have played a structural role in the history of architecture. For centuries, plaster casts of architectural fragments circulated through Beaux-Arts Schools and professional ateliers as proof of the existence of an ideal, from which to copy. The second part of the definition adds nuance. Can one produce a work of architecture that already exists, and by doing so, take a position? (Not by chance; “replica”—translated as “reply”— often designates the representative’s right to answer in parliament.) We believe that there are architectural replicas that respond to both meanings. We call them agonistic copies	en_US
dc.publisher	Treatise	en_US
dc.title	Architectural Replicas - Four Hyopthesis on the use of Agnostic Copies in the Architectural Field	en_US
dc.type	Book
utslib.location	USA	en_US
utslib.for	1201 Architecture	en_US
pubs.embargo.period	Not known	en_US
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building/School of Architecture
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access
pubs.consider-herdc	true	en_US
pubs.place-of-publication	USA	en_US
pubs.publication-status	Published	en_US

Abstract:

The word “replica” bears a double meaning; it designates a literal reproduction of a preexisting work and, in a sense denoted in Romance languages, a response to a previous statement. Replicas that respond to the first part of this definition have played a structural role in the history of architecture. For centuries, plaster casts of architectural fragments circulated through Beaux-Arts Schools and professional ateliers as proof of the existence of an ideal, from which to copy. The second part of the definition adds nuance. Can one produce a work of architecture that already exists, and by doing so, take a position? (Not by chance; “replica”—translated as “reply”— often designates the representative’s right to answer in parliament.) We believe that there are architectural replicas that respond to both meanings. We call them agonistic copies

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/40471