"The Muses Are Not Amused" response

This article hits the spot on many subjects regarding architecture that I have not been acquainted enough to articulate in my own words. The one regret I have as of now is that the circumstances involved in this reading was not voluntary, which I think has not allowed me to fully want to absorb what the author's message was due to pending deadlines, and secondly, that I have not been exposed to this earlier. As in the case of Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, I initially hated reading the book when I was forced, but with the right combination of Steve Lee gradually dropping the requirement over time, and the book starting to delve into ideas which sparked my interest, I eventually grew to embrace the book and took off to finish it, although it was not required. I would like to thank Steve for exposing us to such a book, for I have never thought that those inchoate feelings and observations I have developed over time could so wonderfully become crafted into words. It was the first book I "clicked" with and seemed to have made an impact in my life.
As with this week's reading, although it has not made an impact at such magnitude, I appreciate the rigor and analysis the author portrays. The diagrams were helpful, almost to a point as if they were created for the sole purpose of aiding this article, and precise to deter one from straying. The section where the author, Jorge Silvetti, discusses in ways which we can deploy blob architecture captivated my interests. Not necessarily that I agree with him, but the subject is a gray field which I take a cynical stance. He speaks of the advantages of blobs but also states that it is simply another phase we experience. Eventually he concludes that we have "stuffed" it with meaning and, from that point on, it has evolved into a new entity that reflects the contemporary culture in the field of architecture. I find this statement disturbing but at the same time, because of his word choice, i.e. "stuffed," I receive the impression that he too is grudginly succumbing to the status quo of the blob. I feel that "stuffed," the act of filling by force, is an excellent word choice to hint his degree of discontent with the situation, if there were any. I do not endorse the art of blobs, because to me it seems like a sculpture that had meanings forcefully shoved up its rear. It is an artist trying to imitate the role of an architect; it is an artist trying to establish self-esteem by adding unnecessary meaning; it is a con-artist.
Anyways, I disagree that blob architecture itself has evolved into an advanced creature with an identity of its own.
My cynical attitude towards the contemporary field is best reflected in the next category of trends in "Literalism." In it Silvetti quotes "Perhaps it is time to accept that metaphor in architecture is useful as a sparkle, as a starter, as a guide, or as a shadow, but that it becomes a dangerous game every tme it leaves its comfortable abode in language and poetry for excursions into other media, a fact that we know well at least since baroque times, when it was widely used, under control, but always treading on dangerous borderlines between the sublime and the ridiculous." To me these phenomena occur because the profession seems to over panegyrize its secluded field. I remember Jon Folan talking about how the profession today has fell to lower standards, and that the miscommunication and lack of collaboration with other fields (a state of isolation) has somehow made the profession an amalgamation of intractable narcissists (i.e. Daniel Libeskind). I think all this embellished eulogy involved in the profession, and its detrimental optimism has aided this profession to grow out of control as it is today.
I appreciate Silvetti trying to strike equilibrium in his arguments, and carefully crafted criticism to alleviate the intensity of his article, but to me his stance seems rather pessimistic.