<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Great Thoughts from Steve Mouzon</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.jonathanmillerarchitects.com/2010/02/great-thoughts-from-steve-mouzon/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.jonathanmillerarchitects.com/2010/02/great-thoughts-from-steve-mouzon/</link>
	<description>architectural design, inspiration &#38; ideas</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 09 Aug 2010 20:31:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Architect</title>
		<link>http://blog.jonathanmillerarchitects.com/2010/02/great-thoughts-from-steve-mouzon/comment-page-1/#comment-313</link>
		<dc:creator>Architect</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Feb 2010 13:27:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.jonathanmillerarchitects.com/?p=211#comment-313</guid>
		<description>The below reply from Steve: (we had comments disabled and he was kind enough to email us.)

Matt, thanks so much for the thoughtful comments! I&#039;m wondering if the problem doesn&#039;t result from a subtle misunderstanding? Here&#039;s what I mean: &quot;The people&quot; aren&#039;t the ones building with architectural image goo, for the most part. It&#039;s the developers and their builders. Why? We all know that Portofino and other similarly great places turn up again and again in focus groups hosted by development companies. So it&#039;s natural for them to say &quot;we&#039;ve gotta build Portofino.&quot;

But what if that&#039;s not what the people are really saying? What if it&#039;s not Portofino itself, or the Cinque Terre themselves, that people are actually wanting? What if the thing they really want, but can&#039;t adequately describe, is the mysterious sense of harmony and appropriateness to its region and its context that these places all embody so deeply? This sense, I believe, is the real key... and is something we need to understand far better than we do now. My upcoming Original Green book deals with it to the limits of my understanding of it, but this warrants far more study and comprehension.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The below reply from Steve: (we had comments disabled and he was kind enough to email us.)</p>
<p>Matt, thanks so much for the thoughtful comments! I&#8217;m wondering if the problem doesn&#8217;t result from a subtle misunderstanding? Here&#8217;s what I mean: &#8220;The people&#8221; aren&#8217;t the ones building with architectural image goo, for the most part. It&#8217;s the developers and their builders. Why? We all know that Portofino and other similarly great places turn up again and again in focus groups hosted by development companies. So it&#8217;s natural for them to say &#8220;we&#8217;ve gotta build Portofino.&#8221;</p>
<p>But what if that&#8217;s not what the people are really saying? What if it&#8217;s not Portofino itself, or the Cinque Terre themselves, that people are actually wanting? What if the thing they really want, but can&#8217;t adequately describe, is the mysterious sense of harmony and appropriateness to its region and its context that these places all embody so deeply? This sense, I believe, is the real key&#8230; and is something we need to understand far better than we do now. My upcoming Original Green book deals with it to the limits of my understanding of it, but this warrants far more study and comprehension.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
