<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>DS04 - Latest Comments</title><link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="http://api.friendfeed.com/2008/03#sup" href="http://disqus.com/sup/all.sup#forumcomments-e76f2e79" type="application/json"/><link>http://ds04.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://ds04.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:55:36 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Building the Revolution: Soviet Art and Architecture 1915-1935</title><link>http://www.ds04.org/2011/11/building-the-revolution-soviet-art-and-architecture-1915-1935/#comment-366626527</link><description>&lt;p&gt;"From here, Constructivism will annihilate art in all its forms, ending its separate identity." - Varvara Stepanova on the death of art. Joining art, design and architecture, was this the new triplets of the revolution? Building the Revolution treats art and architecture individually, when wasn't the point of constructivism not to?&lt;br&gt;Interesting photos, and understandably the photographers name was on the blurb, but what of the architects who built them?&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alice Hiley</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 17 Nov 2011 09:55:36 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
