Talk:Buckminster Fuller

Use of Language and Neologisms

I have removed the sentence 'Fuller considered information 'negative-entropic' from the biography section. The content is true, but it needs elaboration. I have changed the section heading 'Neologisms' to 'Use of Language and Neologisms' because I feel it is important to describe and give examples of Fuller's writing style. The new text is certainly not perfect and neither is the referencing. There are quotes which I feel are very helpful to the reader and it would be gret if there was a way to link to those quotes. Thanks to all for editing / sharing. - Dobtoronto, October 31st 2006

Commemorative stamp

I found this picture of Buckmintser Fuller. (http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1964/1101640110_400.jpg) Is this usable?

That's the Time magazine version of his commemorative stamp. A link to info about the stamp is in the external links but I would like to see a mention of the stamp with a thumbnail at the tail of the bio. It's the decent thing to do. • Q^#o • 17:02, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Poet? Architect?

Fuller is described in the article's intro as "an American visionary, designer, architect, poet, author, and inventor." I admire him as a great man, but:

I have never read his poetry, though given the voluminous and often turgid prose that he wrote and published, I wonder if the poetry he wrote warrants his being described as a "poet"?

In his friend and student J. Baldwin's book, BuckyWorks, Baldwin cites Fuller as referring to architects as "exterior decorators" and apparently being more comfortable seeing himself as a "designer." What about changing the description of Fuller in the intro to "an American visionary, designer, author, and inventor"? To me that would seem more accurate, though I do feel "philosopher" might be added. Joel Russ 17:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Bad poetry is still poetry, y'know. --Gwern (contribs) 19:13 20 February 2007 (GMT)

It seems to me that including this idea that Fuller was a poet may serve to belittle his other accomplishments, which were substantial. To illustrate what I mean, lets imagine that someone like Steve Wozniak plays golf and enjoys it (and I have no idea if he does or doesn't, in actuality - this being just an analogy). If this famous and accomplished person simply dabbles in golf, why refer to him as "a golfer" in the first sentence of an encyclopedia article about him, a sentence that lists his major areas of genius or contribution?Joel Russ 00:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Buckminster Fullerene

No mention whatsoever about buckyballs/ buckminster fullerene. -- Jdedmond 20:35, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Article is written in the tone of a fan-site

I added the 'fan-site' template because the article reads like something a Buckminster Fuller museum tour guide might say to museum-goers. The article needs to be rewritten with an eye towards sobriety. J.R. Hercules 02:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Why deletion of whole sections??

What was the point of deleting the article's sections on Fuller's Practical Achievements and Major Projects?

And why (other than the lack of alphabetization or some other system of ordering the titles) was the section on literature about Fuller, his work, and his contributions removed? Joel Russ 14:12, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Image

The picture of Fuller provided is not the one most people are familiar with (check Google image search to confirm this). In addition, it was taken before he had done anything interesting. I recommend the picture at http://bfi.org/our_programs/who_is_buckminster_fuller

It's well-known and provided by the Buckminster Fuller Institute. I would change it right now, but I wonder if there might be copyright questions. Sonicsuns 05:07, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

You're right that copyright is the problem. The current one is Free, but no license is listed for that image and so we must assume it is proprietary and non-Free. Policy/guideline is that removing Free images in favor of non-Free images is something that just shouldn't happen. --Gwern (contribs) 22:00 17 July 2007 (GMT)

He is hot in that picture tho!

Non Sequitors/Strange paragraph about Graham Bell

Taken from the biography secion:

"In 1927 at the age of 32, bankrupt and jobless, living in inferior housing in Chicago, Illinois, Fuller lost his young daughter Alexandra to complications from polio and spinal meningitis. He felt responsible, and this drove him to drink and to the verge of suicide. At the last moment he decided instead to embark on "an experiment, to find what a single individual can contribute to changing the world and benefiting all humanity."

Alexander Graham Bell: actual inventor of the geodesic formula, and physical creation. Bell worked with many geodesic forms and creations, and is the man who first discoverd and developed the physical geodesic shape. Fulled has fully succumbed to the great inventors original position. Bell, as scientisits are aware was a man of vast discovery, creation and invention. Fuller developed the common structural form used for houses and such.

Fuller accepted a position at a small college in North Carolina, Black Mountain College. There, with the support of a group of professors and students, he began work on the project that would make him famous and revolutionize the field of engineering, the geodesic dome. In 1949, he erected the world’s first geodesic dome..."

Just pointing this out.

neckface 63.70.91.229 20:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

He is hot in that picture tho!

Strange Link

The link on the word "worldview" from the line "Fuller was one of the first to propagate a systemic worldview..." in "Philosophy and worldview" links to an article about a radio show. I'd fix it, but i have no idea how and don't want to destroy anything.

Henry Ford link

Hi I don't actually know how to do this, but under the Dymaxion House section, you mention how there is one on display at the Henry Ford Museum. You should probably have a link to that page. 69.141.55.59 22:48, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Bibliography work and unexplained mass-deletion

I've added a complete bibliography list, based on the 2 sources [1] and [2].

I see there are 2 sections above (#Bibliography needs work and #Why deletion of whole sections??) commenting on the bibliography, and deleted sections, so I searched the history and found:

• this extensive vandalism/deletion that was never fixed.

Hopefully someone can take the time to go through that and re-add whatever is appropriate. Thanks. --Quiddity (talk) 21:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

I believe I've restored all the useful things. --Gwern (contribs) 22:22 16 November 2007 (GMT)

Debunked

I removed the reference to the word debunked as a Fuller coinage. This is contradicted by the OED, which assigns the word to W.E. Woodward, 1923, in the book "Bunk," and also by Cassels dictionary http://books.google.com/books?id=YzG9fPXE9AMC&pg=PA41&lpg=PA41&dq=%22William+E+Woodward%22+bunk&source=web&ots=BAKPV1bdA6&sig=CwJOCp_I0pBNbp7Gg-RMMUeG2N4&hl=en - which discusses the word origin in terms of a criticism of Henry Ford, who said, "History is more or less bunk.

In the Fuller archives at http://archives.lib.siu.edu/search.php?creatorid=8 it states "The term debunked is often contradicted to be William Woodward’s invention in 1923, rather than Fuller’s later version in 1927." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.20.131.50 (talk) 20:45, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Fuller in Context, and Bias

There's little discussion in this article about Buckminster Fuller's work in the wider context. For example: what geodesic domes were in use before Fuller, can it be argued he invented them, what influence did this have on architecture, in which contexts, who upon. Who were his critics, what effect did he have on larger society, what is his legacy?

I'm afraid that this whole article reads like - and is - an idolisation of Fuller with zero critical content, a biased point of view and no discussion of his work in the wider context. Fuller (I am told by the article) wanted to change the path of humanity. Well, did he succeed? To what degree? How? Who with? Why?

This article is seems obviously very, very heavily watched and moderated by those in charge of the Buckminster Fuller Institute, and is in essence a de-facto homepage for their institute. It seems like they wish to create an article that's rose tinted and puts Fuller on a pedestal. I think many of us, though, would like to create an article that tells a whole, critical and useful story about Fuller. 78.86.149.141 (talk) 15:14, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Category:Alternative historian?

The Category:Alternative historians has just Fuller in it and should be replaced by an accepted category Hugo999 (talk) 00:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)