An excellent start Kaylee! I’ll record a few notes here for our conference conversation: 1. Your introduction seems very clean right now. But you also might need to pursue a clearer and more compelling motive device (see comment). 2. There are a few spots where local claims could use more evidence. We should talk about whether that gap means you’ll need new claims or to simply present evidence you already have. (pgs 3-4, for example) 3. Your document’s structure might need more attention. a. A critical debate section could help you clarify both the theorists’ ideas and why they’re important. b.. You might do more to express the motivating tension apparent in your project’s body paragraphs by shaping your document structure to reflect that. . 4. You make an interesting argument about Powell in the final page. He does want us to look for ways in which apparently local cultural forms are really an expression of a network of global influence. I hope we get to talk a bit about that claim in conference. Does the building’s decor encourage you to do that? Or does it simply invite a regional tourism of sorts? *You can find many more comments in the margins to the left.

x) Introduction x) Frampton; and Eggener’s objections x) Starting position – The building is hyper modern in some ways – the building is managed/owned by outsiders x) But, the building also retains older architectural forms x) Powell and Calder x) The building is also a living part of local culture….not just a tourist destination x) Conclusion INTRODUCTION x. shared context (what is the mission in?) x. from one perspective, it seems bad x. but from another, it’s probably good….this is the one we should value.