Subject:
|
Re: Building priorities (was Re: U.S.S. Grand Rapids for the GATS)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.us.michlug
|
Date:
|
Sat, 30 Jun 2001 20:39:51 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
634 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Peter Guenther writes:
> In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > In lugnet.org.us.michlug, Chris Leach writes:
> > > Why we are talking about buildings it has pretty much agreed on
> > > by most people in the club that personal MOC's will be placed on display
> > > first then if room kits from other AFOLS (ie non Michigan people
> > > designed/built)can fill any space left.This was discussed the other day at
> > > Contraption.
> >
> > Sorry I missed it. I have been working up the (small) space allotted to me
> > to make a good looking display without regard to where the buildings came
> > from. I think that's more important (to have it look cohesive and look like
> > the buildings belong together) than where they came from.
> >
> > But if the entire group feels differently I will have to rethink what order
> > I put things in if there is a risk that some of that space will be taken
> > away because it was used for buildings built from (non LEGO) kits.
>
> My point when we discussed it was that first and foremost, we do this for
> fun. We do it because we love building with LEGO. For that reason, our
> priority should be to give space to our members to display their own
> handiwork. If we've got stuff from non-members (and as far as I'm concerned
> stock sets), then we fill in with that afterwards. First and foremost, our
> display is just that--OUR display, a representation of what the members of
> MichLUG do. I'm in it to show off my stuff a little bit, to have fun
> building with LEGO, and to bring some fun into other people's lives. Then
> we take that output from our members and work it together to make it
> cohesive, sure. So my priority is involving the members first, then doing
> the best display we can.
>
> If we had a 10-year-old member, for instance, who put his heart into a
> building for the display, I'd want it in the display--even if it looked like
> a ten-year-old's building and didn't fit in that well.
>
> In that same vein, as another example, while Kevin Wilson's buildings are
> extraordinary (and I'd love to be able to buy them all), if a member were to
> build a school that wasn't as good, I'd still want it in before Kevin's
> because it's the work of a member.
I understand and accept that viewpoint but I guess my goal is a little
different in that I want to have the best display possible, one that wows
the crowd, not necessarily one that includes only work of members, or one
that is geared to be as inclusive as possible and sacrifices coherency or
cleanliness of form.
To that end, a large number of well done small buildings are needed, not
just a few big ones. IMHO, the last layout suffered from too many large
buildings that didn't have a "reason for being" and that were spaced way too
widely. (tall buildings typically appear in downtowns and get crowded together.)
So to that end while I would prefer to not give precedence to TLC buildings
unless they really *are* good (so that rules most of them out) I do want to
use the best buildings I can in the space I am responsible for, regardless
of where they come from. I built all of them myself, no one else built them
for me.
We do this for ourselves, true. But what floats *my* boat is wowing crowds.
I have a space allocated that is all of 1x5 plates. I will bring what I
think will make the most compelling display possible to occupy that space,
and it will be organised so that it makes sense as a whole. If the
membership then chooses to take that space away from me, so be it, I will
abide by that.
++Lar
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
48 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
