First of all, I was positively surprised how this exercise played out. In the beginning, I as a almost no-books-reader, was a bit suspicious how I’m going to be friends with a book this old. However, the approach on how you made us introduce to each other was very creative.
I enjoyed the visit to Einsiedeln and very much appreciated the excercises there and the group work about how to approach books in such a library. You made us appreciate the elegance and delighntess of the unique books and much effort was made by every supervisor. Thanks to the team for this.
Then, to each task. They were distributed over the period of a year and always seemed like a hurdle in a track race. Just like in a 400 Meter hurdle race, the hurdles are distributed in greater distance than in a 100M. They are not big and surely possible to jump over but are always in eye seight. All the distance to cover between represents the rest of our studies. So personally, to me the task were interesting and always feasible. Though for some tasks like “Lineage” I had issues to find pleasant results. Even more with the fact, that i was not sure if I could find anymore with more time I invested, because, I assume, that these tasks are also part of research in undefined area.
Now more to my personal relationship with my book.
Thanks to your tasks, and as I have understood that was your main concern, I got in touch with a book this old. That also includes I had conversations with the librarian about the book, I have met Mr. Oechslin, spent time with the book i was asigned to after learning how to treat such. I saw relevant drawings/prints older than every person i have ever seen. Basically i could smell delicate paper older than anyone in my family, which is rare in a sterile world like ours today. So for me that was a very nostalgic experience. Contentwise, it was not the biggest learning experience. But the Idea that it was, has never even come to my expectation. The Book, the collection of books rather, was written in french, highly decriptive and case specific. So it was not a philosophical book at all, so for me that was a bit unfortunate.
So all in all, my old friend just happens to have had different interests i guess. Pierre Post in his collection of works, was very focused on the position of elements and therefore told the works’ story in that manner. I get his point and maybe he just had the aim to precisely desicribe the prints that followed in the books. Whereas I had rather told the fairytale of the constructions and then showed the details in the print.
Nevertheless, i was definitely communicating with a different generation of architects in a more intimate way, than by just bluntly hearing or reading about them through contemporary medium.