Koolhaas'ın Dubai'de tasarladığı bir rezidanssss

Oryantalizm karşısında ne yapmalı? Bu bir batılının açısından cevaplaması kolay bir soru, doğuya oryantalist bir perspektifin dışına pek çıkamıyorlar ya da çıkmak istemiyorlar, o yüzden onlar açısından ortada pek de bir problem yok gibi.

Fekat, bir doğulu olarak, biz ne yapmalıyız?

Zorunlu olarak aldanırız, sahip oluruz veya sahip olunuruz. Tamam, meşhur kartlar kulesi zorunlu olarak seçenek yapmaya çağrıldı. Örneğin birisini kupa papazını seçmeye çağırmak istersiniz. ve önce şöyle söylersiniz: kırmızıları mı siyahları mı istersin? Eğer kırmızıları derse siyahları masadan kaldırırsınız; eğer siyahları derse, onları alıp, yine masadan kaldırırsınız. Size de sadece devam etmek kalır: karoları mı yoksa kupaları mı istersin? Ta ki papazı mı kızı mı istersine kadar. İkili işleyişler bu şekilde yola konulur, isterse röportaj yapan iyi niyetli olsun, hiç farketmez. Yani, bu işleyiş bizi aşar ve başka sonuçlara yarar. Psikanaliz, fikirleri birleştirme yöntemi ile bu açıdan örnek teşkil eder. Yemin ederim ki verdiğim örnekler gizli ve benim başımdan geçenler olmasa da, gerçektirler.*

Sanırım şu durumda bizimde önümüzde pek bir seçenek yok gibi, kendimize oryantalist bakacağız (Edward Said için, iki rekat namaz kılacağım şu mubarek cuma akşamı) ya da doğululumuzu hiçe sayıp, dergilerde, internet, interrail gezilerinde gördüğümüzleri taklit edeceğiz. Her iki durumda da, haklı olarak, ya kendimize yabancılaşmakla ya da batıya yaltaklanmakla suçlanacağız.  Üçüncü bir yolun merakına ilk düşen ben değilim, ama şu güne kadar bu soruna tatmin edici bir cevap verebileni göremedim. Basma kalıp bir söylem olduğunun farkındayım ama, ne yazık ki Japonları bu genellemenin dışında tutmak durumdayım. Belki derin bir tahlille onların da bu problemden kaçamadıkları ortaya çıkacaktır, ama ilk bakışta bu probleme kendilerince bir çözüm bulmuşlar gibi görünüyor.

Bugün artık, milli demeyeceğim elbette ama, bu kültüre yabancı olmayan bir mimari üretmek mümkün müdür? Ya da 2009 yılında her şeyin bu kadar birbirine girdiği, coğrafyanını öneminin kalmadığı (Zaha Hadid), zamanın önemi olmadığı,anakronik  (Venturi) bir dünyada böyle bir soruyu sormak anlamsız mıdır?

Diğer bütün sorunların olduğu gibi, bunun da sadece mimari bir ile ilgili olmadığının, arkasında pek çok ekonomik, sosyolojik meselenin yattığının farkındayım, böyle bir çabadan bahsetmenin bile abes olabileceğinin de farkındayım.

Bu pirinç daha çok su kaldırır, ileride yazacağım tekrar.

Gilles Deleuze-Claire Parnet, Dialogues, çev. Ali Akay, Bağlam Yayın., 1990, s. 37,38

¡Qué grandes los rusos! exclamaba un amigo al enviarme el artículo [soviet sf style] sobre Frederic Chaubin donde sale este proyecto para el Ministerio de Carreteras de Georgia en Tbilisi. El de abajo es el Campus de Ciencias de Almaty en Kazakhstan, de OMA. Todo ello cuando hablábamos de esas influencias rusas.

gracias JMML

Uno de los edificios que despierta cierto magnetismo en mi es el CCTV – TVCC, que no es un edificio, sino un complejo compuesto básicamente por dos edificios, el primero, es el edificio de las oficinas y estudios de la Central China Television y el otro un complejo mediático + hotel.

La noticia la recogemos de Building Design, que nos habla de las declaraciones de Ole Schereen (arquitecto encargado de la obra) y que informa sobre la razón de los retrasos en el inicio de las reparaciones del hotel, que fue el que se incendió en Febrero pasado por unos fuegos artificiales.

Ciertamente esta es una oportunidad para estudiar otra vez este proyecto ( Building Design nos deja este otro interesante artículo) ya que se trata de una de las obras más singulares de lo que podríamos decir fue la “presentación en sociedad” de la China Potencia Mundial, no es que no estuviera claro que tienen armas atómicas y otras cosas, pero no cabe duda que los Juegos Olímpicos pasados fueron el espectáculo que permitió presentar a una China con el rostro lavado y capaz de superar a las potencias occidentales en la producción de recursos, objetos, edificaciones, etc.

En el caso del CCTV hay mucho que decir, no solo de trata de lo que podríamos llamar la evolución lógica de toda una familia de edificios iniciados con la Terminal de Zeebruge y que tiene su antecesor inmediato en la Biblioteca Central de Seattle, sino que supone un cuestionamiento concreto a la lógica de los espacios de trabajo y  la construcción de iconos, algo peculiar en un país que ha entrado en la segunda carrera de los rascacielos.

De alguna forma este proyecto permitió que se concretaran ideas que se habían planteado en la propuesta para la sede de Universal Studios, uno de los grandes traumas de OMA (como lo fue el ZKM).

Desde mi visión bien parcial y personal creo que este es uno de los últimos proyectos de OMA donde aún prevalece el espíritu de Koolhaas sobre los intereses de la constructora hoy día dueña de OMA. Ojalá el futuro nos permita volver a presenciar las ideas controvertidas y frescas de Koolhaas y compañía para que el mundo siga siendo cuestionado.

By Rusaila Bazlamit
Originally published on Reflect Upon

Yesterday I read an article by Orhan Pamuk titled “Why I didn’t become an Architect” from his book “Other Colors“.
In this article Pamuk starts with a journey he took to one of the underprivileged sites of Istanbul where he walks into buildings that had very different past than their current present. He talks about how people came to live in buildings that were built by outsiders of Istanbul… and he had some interesting insights about who at the end the architecture aims to serve!
From this he take us to a decision he made as a third year student of architecture to drop architecture and change his career to become a writer and a novelist… He describes the difference for him between empty sheets that were waiting for “modernist” architectural designs and between empty sheets that were waiting for “his” words…
He ends his article with more reflections about architecture and the-serving-who dilemma as he walks in the ruins of the aftermath of the earthquake that hit Istanbul in recent years.
Through his personal recollections of his decision… he gave me a better understanding of my own choice to stop practicing architecture…

Later on last night I had an interesting phone call from one of my good friends who happen to be an architect though now she is more of an urban designer.
And I was sharing with her my reading… and I found myself expressing my own reasons of leaving architecture…

Probably the first detachment between me and architecture happened when I was taught history of architecture… through these courses I was somehow taught to appreciate architecture and master pieces through their images. So what was designed to be an experiential space was projected through lenses and prints into a see-and-admire experience. I truly understood the depth of this problem when I had the chance to visit famous buildings while I was at the USA. When I went to see the Guggenheim in NY… I was brought into tears… standing there in the massive lobby gave me an experience which I can’t put into words let alone images… I felt something…

My second detachment happened when I couldn’t relate the big talks and deep concepts that some of my fellow classmates would come up with… and I forcing my self to see the reflections of these concepts in their designs.. but all in vain… I would be standing bewildered and left to think I’m less than the rest of them… because my concepts were not projected as I wanted into my spaces…

This feeling got even worse when I started meeting up with the big names of Architecture at our Amman… and even worse when I did my internship at the company of one of them….

====
Being myself the daughter of an architect… my father… is the type of architects that you should make a film about… my father embodies the real architect struggle to be an architect in a society dominated by empty concepts or trendy designs… [coming to think of it... I should make a film about my father... just like Nathaniel Kahn did "My Architect"]
My father supported my decision of leaving architecture behind… though I know that he is much in love with architecture… for him… architecture is creating a place where a person can feel… that is the only concept my father ever followed in any of his designs… His style of architecture has changed according to time, place and his own maturity… maybe one of these days I should blog about his work…
====

But now back to me and my reasons of leaving architecture…
I stopped at the big talk of the big names… as I said… after working for one of them… I realized that architecture as it is being used is not in harmony with who we were and who we aim to serve…

After that… I graduated and joined the working force… I began to read for Rem Koolhaas… the more I worked… the more I read… the more a nagging voice inside of me got louder…

Until the day I decided to liberate myself… from “… the obligation to construct…”

I turned all my creative abilities… all the crazy concepts and ideas that were rattling inside of my head into different media which for me made sense…. and felt more natural…

Now, I don’t feel any need to be pretentious… to add any glamor to my products… I express myself… and I don’t do that to serve anyone… yet somehow I’m serving more now than I ever did… or thought I would…

The way I see it… The problem with architecture is that it is used to glorify the architect’s mind and visual abilities… or maybe as Pamuk said to serve his/her imagination…

Architecture as I was taught and seen practiced is creating empty spaces… and for that reason I left architecture….

Buscando algo que no estaba me he dado cuenta de que no publiqué esta entrevista [in the modelshop] de vincent de rijk (el que le hace las maquetas a koolhaas, entre otros) y he decidido rescatarla. No olvides visitar su web mejorada [vincentderijk.nl]

via archinect

Olhem que sugerente a definiçao do edificio pelo proprio Rem Koolhaas:
“Mais do que um edifício, trata-se de uma nova proposta de condição urbana – uma simulação do perfil da cidade, no próprio edifício. O projeto procura criar uma mediação entre a estrutura existente da Prefeitura atual e os outros edifícios vizinhos. Por meio de uma ambiguidade intencional, o projeto mergulha em meio à diversidade arquitetônica de períodos diversos, incorporando escalas e estilos presentes no entorno imediato.”

http://concursosdeprojeto.org/2009/10/22/concurso-roterda-oma/

.cafcalas

Lebbeus Woods on Koolhaas’ proposal for Dubai

Article Published in New York Times

Koolhaas Proposal for Dubai 1

Koolhaas Proposal for Dubai 2

Koolhaas has been plying this idea for quite a few years now. In the 80s and 90s, it took the form of “in early Modernism, the heroic thing for architects to do was fight the mainstream; today it is to go along with it.” Then came “Bigness,” followed by the “Generic City,” and let us not forget “Shopping.” Now comes his big Dubai proposal, which amounts to transplanting a chunk of the Manhattan he celebrated for its “culture of congestion,” thirty years ago, in “Delirious New York,” onto an artificial, offshore extension of the city of Dubai.

Dubai is certainly the inevitable place for the realization of Koolhaas’ ideas. It is by now the capital of an economic and political New World Order. A city-state without income taxes, labor laws, or elections, it is ruled by a corporate oligarchy of hereditary rulers, accountable only to themselves and their investors. Quite a model for the global future. Built up rapidly over the past few years on the wealth gotten from the world’s greed for oil—and more recently as an unregulated sanctuary for cash—it has no depth of history or indigenous culture, no complexity, no conflicts, no questions about itself, no doubts, in short, nothing to stand in the way of its being shaped into the ultimate neo-liberal Utopia.

Unlike Manhattan, which grew incrementally on its grid over two centuries and is laden with everything from history to conflicts and self-doubt, Dubai is a kind of frontier boom-town that has to import everything to be anything, from workers to investors, from ideas to architects, from high culture to low. Now, apparently, it is importing…congestion? Sitting between two deserts, one of water and one of sand, congestion does not come naturally to Dubai. The dynamic compression of space and activity that creates a critical mass of imploding human energy called a city has to be imposed there as an idea and somehow generated as a reality over the next few years, without genuinely urban conditions. The strategy seems unlikely to succeed, except as another attraction in the high-end theme park Dubai has become. But that is not the proposal’s most disturbing aspect. Given the tabula rasa the site offers, and the apparently unlimited finances its owners possess, we might ask: is this the best vision for the future that the architect could come up with?—a gratuitious look backward at the ultimate 20th century city, rather than an imaginative look forward to the possibilities of the 21st century city.

What, for example, are the space-organization possibilities of networks of information exchange, rather than streets? What are the architectural design possibilities of synthetics, rather than steel or concrete building frames typical of high-rise construction? What are the possibilities for increasing choices in non-hierarchically organized urban spaces, rather than classical, Cartesian systems? And so on—the list of new possibilities is long.

Maybe Koolhaas doesn’t believe that Dubai is the place for a forward-looking vision. Or maybe he believes, true to his post-Modernist roots, that the past offers the best model for the future, if it is leavened with irony, and garnished with a dash of the surreal. Or maybe he simply doesn’t have a vision for the future. Who knows? We should care, however, because the world’s attention is focused on Dubai, and on Koolhaas and other architecture stars, and because—like it or not—what they do is taken as a model for the future, even when it is, how shall I say, not nearly good enough. LW

This one was meant to be ready for the anniversary of Man’s arrival to the Moon… But it rested unfinished in a drawer till now.

Prada Transformer official website: http://prada-transformer.com/

Koolhaas on CNN (via AMNP):  http://architecture.myninjaplease.com/?p=4749

El anti-blob de Koolhaas (in Spanish): http://www.plataformaarquitectura.cl/2009/03/15/anti-blob-de-koolhaas-the-prada-transformer/

E eu fiquei intrigada com a imagem do recorte do calçadão de Copacabana que forma as rampas da fachada do MIS. Achei muito interessante, mas fiquei com a impressão que já tinha visto.

E agora me lembrei: o recurso é muito parecido com o que o Rem Koolhaas usa no projeto para a Biblioteca de Jussieu, na França – também num concurso, em 1992. Aliás, esse projeto (o do Koolhaas) é muito interessante, vale a pena dar uma olhada no site do arquiteto, ou na revista El Croquis. O conceito da Biblioteca é de uma grande rampa, que vai se dobrando e criando diversos níveis no edifício, que ainda abriga volumes meio soltos, como “bolhas”. A estória da rampa se dobrando o próprio Koolhaas parece retomar depois, na Biblioteca de Seattle, que foi construída.

Por isso os projetos conceituais são importantes. Tudo bem que vários deles não são possíveis de serem construídos. Mas eles geram idéias, que mudam a forma da gente de olhar para determinadas coisas – e, vários deles, acabam produzindo eco mais tarde.

E, lembrando da Marina, acho que a escala das rampas no projeto do Koolhaas é bem mais confortável.

by Sandy Ikeda

I started reading Rem Koolhaas’s insightful but seemingly endless Delirious New York a couple of years ago and just finished it this morning. Why so long? Well, it’s partly because I don’t read so fast, but mostly because it’s maddeningly obscure, both its structure and prose.

Although it has a lot of interesting and important things to say about the “culture of congestion,” RK’s writing is as self-indulgent as his architecture.  Architecture should not be art, non-fiction should not be (mostly) non-sense.

The City of Captive Globe is devoted to the artificial conception and accelerated birth of theories, interpretations, mental constructions, proposals and their infliction on the World. It is the capital of Ego, where science, art, poetry and forms of madness compete under the ideal conditions to invent, destroy and restore the world of phenomenal Reality.

There are, of course, some really nice phrases — “paranoia is a shock of recognition that never ends” — and analyses, such as of the roles of Coney Island and of Hugh Ferriss in the evolution of New York architecture (and I liked how he describes Manhattan’s skyscrapers as “extruding” through the grid).  They came at high cost. I couldn’t get very far before the spinning in the my head made me put it down for a day, or two, or more before steeling myself to pick it up again.  Despite the many captivating images in this book, reading it was work.

But I would still recommend this book if you’re interested in the way of cities.  Here’s a suggestion though:  speed-read it.  Paradoxically, this makes the overly terse and elliptical text more comprehensible, and there will be little or no loss of meaning.  However, do pause when something catches the eye, which, alas, will be often.

Alphabet: The alphabet launches a series of platitudes that could not otherwise be reasonably inserted in the texts [versus xviii-1302]
Assembly: The book is assembled, not written; therefore it is not a novel about architecture [versus 1348]
Beauty: Of the two positions on beauty: (1) a principle (geometry, balance, composition, etc.) that will render good buildings, and (2) a property emerging from a good solution, S,M,L,XL demonstrates position (2)
Chronology: The chronology explains the contents of the book (how did they do it?)
Concept: A pervading use of vocabulary does not necessarily indicate a clear set of concepts
Gay science: The call for urbanism to lighten up is legitimate, however not because it is not responsible [versus 971, 829] but because it offers new possibilities
Globalization 1: Rem Koolhaas shits his pants for Richard Meier; whereas he is one of his most alike collegues [versus 365]
Globalization 2: The Byzantium clash demonstrates they are both picked for their style not their architecture [354-361]
Level: The use of levels of scale offers a good structure for ordering the book
Numbers: The careful numbering of the pages demonstrates the necessity for some control
Serious: The weight and production time of S,M,L,XL contradict its supposed lightness [versus 1053]
Understanding: Coherence imposed on an architect’s work is the result of reflection; this is lacking in the book [versus xix]
Weight: The measure of discussion per project indicates its relative weight; therefore the book is not a reference work
Wrong: Two billion people can be wrong [versus 1087]

http://lava.ds.arch.tue.nl/books/koolhaas.html

A few days ago, I dropped another title into the Summer Reading post. My local library isn’t very big and doesn’t carry most of the books I’ve been looking for, but I’ve been making myself go at least weekly for those previously mentioned chance encounters with books I’ve never heard of.

This time, the book WAS correctly shelved, but I hadn’t noticed it before. Bernard Rudofsky’s Streets for People. With biking on the mind, I thought it might be a good read. Littered with photographs and drawings (most black and white), I read it “on shuffle” for a week or so before actually hunkering down to the written content. His sources and references range from Hemingway to Palladio to Rousseau, his case studies from New York to Tokyo to Verona. It is an extensive review of what makes some streets pleasantly beautiful to walk through and some a near-death experience. It is a persuasive plea to bring back the pedestrian street. Published in 1964 (the binding is falling apart), but still very relevant, if not more so. Here is a summary and some notes of my own. All of the images come from the book, unless otherwise noted.

——–> ON FEET

So many people forget that they can walk, or feel inconvenienced by what is actually the most convenient mode of transportation. While car traffic is a frustration to people going to and coming from work on a daily basis, rush hour filled with honking and stress, people traffic promotes a more civil interaction among “drivers”. It’s healthy, refreshing, and in many cases (in a more urban setting, for example), doesn’t take up much more time.

I remember watching My Architect and hearing Louis Kahn’s proposal to build a walkable city center for Philadelphia, where cars would be left OUTSIDE of city limits. As Kahn said, “In the center of town, the streets should become buildings.” He studied traffic movement in Philly (drawing above is from MoMA’s collection) and searched for a way to tame the sea of asphalt. The proposal included a system of viaducts for people and shops (see the section of this post, On Floating”, below), and the cars kept away (with parking “towers” on the perimeter). This is wonderful idea (in the movie, Edmund Bacon makes it clear that he thinks it is idealistic and ridiculous, but his son, and hopefully the viewer, sees that neither is completely true), and not the first of its kind, but, as Rudofsky points out, Americans are in love with their cars (they are “capricious love objects”) and balk at any suggestion that we abandon them.

And weather, as we see in other countries, can be the “protagonist of design” (sound familiar?).  Porticoes turn streets into shelters from downpours and snowstorms.  A canopy makes unbearable heat less so. Just think of the buildings that flank the Cut, where you can walk inside, outside, or somewhere in between.  This semi-covered space is popular among universities in America and abroad, and cities, and is similar to canopy-covered markets (each shop another arch between columns).  I’d have to say that the canopied street is probably Rudofsky’s favorite “improvement”; it receives the heaviest amount of examples and text in the book, and is discussed at length in not one, but two chapters.  I won’t dedicate too much time to it here (already, this is a lengthy post…), but just mention that it serves as both a cause and effect to many of the types of streets in the section below.

——–> ON FLOATING

Allow me to introduce the pont-maison.  It is a bridge that is also a city street.  Or, perhaps more accurately, a city street that is also a bridge.  In fact, from the bridge, you would hardly be able to tell that the city was discontinuous at that point (except from within the buildings perched on the structure).  Merchants loved it (no cutting corners to avoid a shop), and in some cases, it became a mini city in and of itself (a non-island, self-isolating?).  The idea reminds me of a sort-of two-sided boardwalk, or, in the case of the Old London Bridge, miniature castles on heavy stilts.  It is a fascinating way to generate space where there is none (unless you’re building a more literal floating house…).  Think Gunkanjima.  Think Venice.

And if there isn’t any water, that’s all the more reason to build bridges.  Rudofsky calls for the pedestrian version of the overpass (New Jersey breeds the latter like rabbits – why can’t we give a few to people instead of cars?).  Some of the book’s examples are long strips of streets that seem to float in the air, taking generous strides over buildings below to reach higher ground, while others are clustered mini-spans wedged between conglomerated houses.  One is a public flyover of the city, exposed to the same sights and sounds without being immersed in cough-inducing exhaust fumes, while the other is more secluded, a private, compact space that is perpetually transitional, straddling its neighbors, yet can serve as a house of its own.

Of course, this makes us think of the High Line, our new favorite example of an elevated street.  Despite the fact that it was written decades before construction began, Streets for People mentions New York’s floating railroads, and that during rush hour, walking is the fastest way to get around the city (though he never puts the two together).  The spaces underneath the High Line have been mentioned (and criticized) quite a lot. Regarding any development of the “underbelly” of the new park (photo found on Flickr), inspiration can perhaps be drawn from Rudofsky’s Italian examples, where the spaces below are programatically and visually linked to the spaces above.

All this talk of bridges and elevated streets comes back to one very important theme: people are on top.  We love our cars and have sacrificed plenty for them, but when we are forced to reconcile both vehicular and pedestrian traffic in one space, stacking them, at least the people aren’t forced below.  So not ALL common sense has been lost.  The sketch above is curious, because the proposed city would be entirely raised above the ground, with the exception of cars – it is curious because it would be a lot less complex and a bit less intriguing if everything stayed at ground level, but the cars were forced UNDERground (rather than creating a pseudo-groundplane above the actual groundplane, as the architect here has done).  Unless, of course, you’re working with a preexisting city, such as…

New York.  Or rather, Delirious New York.  This section of the Streets book, particularly Friedman’s sketch, reminded me of a proposed solution to NYC’s traffic problem, by Harvey Wiley Corbett (images from Koolhaas’s book, Delirious New York).  It involved “elevated and arcaded walkways” – creating a new level for people – while, step-by-step, giving up the groundplane to the cars (sacrificial appeasement of the unruly beasts).  It is Venice (again), but with “an ocean of cars”.  Corbett carves away at the existing buildings: the city becomes an active mine of some precious metal they call Public Space.

——–> ON FOUNTAINS

“The love and veneration that great civilizations bestowed on water as a life-giving force are unknown to Americans.”  We buy it by the bottle.  But what of fountains?  Public water fountains are rare, here, and there is an implied “look but don’t touch” sign on most.  Yet, on a hot day, I am thankful that some of my neighbors are wasteful enough to leave their sprinklers on near the street (after the summer NJ has had so far?! what are these people thinking???) so that I can ride through them.  And I have to go five miles out of my usual route to fill up a water bottle at the public library (“How many more times is she going to try to convince us that libraries are wonderful places?”), rather than buy a new one.  Fountains work in plenty of places – they aren’t just for tossing loose change into.  One of my favorite images in the book is the one above.  It isn’t a natural disaster – it is a human solution.  Think Ancient Egypt.  Think of flooding as a solution.  Not only to walk (or ride) through the swollen fountain / submerged piazza – it is an outdoor air-conditioning system.

Last weekend (for the 4th), my family took a trip down to Princeton (some Revolutionary War history, good ice cream, and places for the puppy to wander about – a good place for Independence Day).  It got hot quickly, and Hampton (dog) was thirsty, so I brought my family to the university’s Fountain of Freedom (in front of Yamasaki’s Robertson Hall). The fountain is a pool (not even two-feet at its deepest), surrounded by trees (and tree-like columns) and air around it cool.  I’m not sure how drinking-safe it is (from the fountain directly, I mean, not the spillover), though Hampton lapped it up happily.  Pleasant place to stop if you’re walking around the town/university.

——–> FINAL (inconclusive) THOUGHTS

Is the architect loved by all, or, like so many other heroes (Batman, etc.), considered a menace?  ”There still remains the architect’s role to be assessed in connection with the urban nightmare.  Despite an uninterrupted record of bungled cities, Americans have preserved a touching faith in the practitioners of architecture.”  He quotes Ada Louise Huztable: “Architects never felt the urge to establish ethical precepts for the performance of their profession, as did the medical fraternity.  No equivalent of the Hippocratic oath exists for them.”  Do we need one?  Are architects like journalists, still actually on a quest for truth but with a bad name?  Rudofsky urges architecture students to travel, “and I do not mean what passes today [or TODAY] for travel, but the methodical cultivation of one’s powers of observation and discrimination through exposure to civilizations other than one’s own.”

Sorry for the length.  I’m heading over the the library now to pick up a new book.

So now, what are YOUR thoughts?

A veces la arquitectura genera situaciones inesperadas que sirven para aprovecharla de otras maneras. Espero que disfrutes tú también con este vídeo.

Questo sembra essere oggi il ruolo dell’architettura, o meglio ciò a cui si piega, schiava di un sistema di poteri, esaudisce le più imprevedibili richieste senza obiettare, senza mettere in campo il proprio bagaglio teorico-critico e di ricerca. Nonostante la profonda riflessione teorica sul ruolo sociale dell’architettura, essa, nelle manifestazioni più importanti, nutre esclusivamente la cultura dell’io. La asseconda e la moltiplica, attraverso la propria grande potenzialità mediatica. L’architettura oggi è ancora lo spot dallo Status Symbol più elevato. Nell’era in cui l’immagine è tutto, l’architettura diventa solo questione di pelle, blob vs box ed altri stupidi slogan del genere animano il dibattito tra le sette culturali. Nel frattempo le metropoli si trasformano in luna park, tendono a somigliarsi sempre di più, ridicole come vecchie babbione che si truccano da adolescenti, spalmandosi quintali di colore tra le profonde rughe della pelle ormai cadente, riproducendo immagini che suscitano un dolente pirandelliano umorismo . Architettura come operazione di maquillage e non come scenografia ideale di una comunità evoluta. Architettura che non ricerca alcun segno di continuità e di relazione con il resto della città, “fanculo il contesto” come dice Koolhaas.

Ma lo stesso Koolhaas nel suo fare architettura si contraddice realizzando mostri come la CCTV di Pechino, dove la performance tecnica diventa grande protagonista per celare la scarsità del valore estetico. L’omologazione della società produce l’architettura contemporanea. Il regresso culturale degli ultimissimi decenni è preoccupante, la conoscenza, il sapere e la memoria si sono spostati su internet, negli ultimi tempi anche le nostre relazioni. L’architettura ha sempre meno bisogno di essere vissuta, l’importante e che colpisca il più possibile, in competizione con il tessuto urbano come le insegne di Las Vegas. Non importa a che cosa serve e se funziona, l’importante è che si faccia notare. Tra interno ed esterno di questi edifici spesso non esistono relazioni: appartamenti, uffici, centri commerciali, teatri, parcheggi … coesistono all’interno in maniera assolutamente indifferente.

L’architettura deve recuperare un ruolo didascalico e culturale nella società contemporanea, deve saper creare spazi di aggregazione che riportino al centro la collettività, deve tornare ad occuparsi della dimensione umana e sociale, cercando di andare oltre la competizione estetica. Deve connotarsi come un’architettura sobria che possa ritrovare dal punto di vista formale quel valore di armonia che oggi ha perso.

Il paradosso della città contemporanea è che all’ombra del competere degli edifici simbolo esiste l’altra dimensione: la città omologata, identica in qualsiasi parte del mondo: centri commerciali, aeroporti, parchi… prime tipologie della città globale che sta cancellando in un arco brevissimo di tempo le identità culturali createsi nei secoli.

Gianluigi D’Angelo

3° Premio categoria inediti – Concorso per giovani critici Under 35 – II edizione 2009

My fabulous cousin reminded me (mid-move, sorry that it has been so long between posts) that I have never knitted her anything. A horrendous oversight! After all, knitters are always looking for people to unload bless with yarny goodness. Think summer and one too many zucchini plants in the garden.

Now that I have moved away from Orlando and put many miles between us once again, it is good to know that she has something with her that I made with my own hands… an object that is literally stitched together with love. Of course, I still owe her a scarf. I am not a miracle worker. I got about halfway through the scarf which, considering all the moving madness, I’d say is a win. I loathe moving! The organizing, the purging, the boxes… the humbling love of your housemate who graciously models your knitted hat once again even though you have been cranky all day!

Devorah is full of grace. Those who know her know that well. Look at that photo, she is even smiling while wearing a hat made for someone with a bigger head. Patience, she has it. Koolhaas, this lovely dome of buttery soft cables, was designed by Jared Flood. Ravel it here. The yarn is 100% baby alpaca (Miski, by Mirasol) and therefore the cables do not pop as much as some other koolhaas’ I have seen. But the color was perfect (she asked for blue or purple) and the softness is not to be believed.

This was a lovely pattern. A bit hard on the fingers (what with the all over cabling), but if you are looking for the perfect reason to learn cabling without a needle, this one is more than worth it.

Discarded version of the Bhabha-Kwinter-Koolhaas Cartoon that gives a better idea of the original drawing.

The economic decline may have slowed the Emirate’s development, but the raising of the world’s “most leaning” tower continues. RMJM has just sent a progress report on the Capital Gate tower, which leans (or rather, appears to lean) at an 18-degree angle—more than the Leaning Tower of Pisa (which does in fact lean). The tower has reached the 17th  and 18th floors of its projected 35-floor height. Constructed on top of a 7-foot deep concrete base, with a steel, diagrid exoskeleton, the finished structure will house a high-end hotel. Some 490 piles, reaching 100 feet into the ground, will help it resist wind and seismic forces.

The amazing thing is that I’m writing about this. Capital Tower may present significant engineering challenges, but it’s even more remarkable how the Emirates publicity machine remains uniquely harnessed to architectural form. Buildings take on strange shapes because they must compete with one another in a climate of pure speculation. In most other contexts, you would want to know why the building leans—what is the meaning? the purpose? the intention? In places like Abu Dhabi, form doesn’t follow function, it follows advertising, which in turn chases the decadent human delight in the ever-new. You make a leaning building so that when it’s half finished you can send out notice that the world’s most leaning building has reached its halfway point. As Frederic Jameson writes, “Of all the arts, architecture is the closest, constitutively to the economic…” And he’s right. This building looks like the economy of the Gulf states.

 If the Leaning Tower of Pisa seems a miracle, it is a miracle that contrasts the power of God (to sustain things in mid-air) with the fallibility of man. Capital Gate makes us wonder at the power of engineering, and ultimately, at the power of money, which ensorcells these strange objects out of the sand. Rem Koohlhaas’s CCTV tower in Beijing is similar in its terrifying celebration of pure power, but it is the power of the state (to observe and control and send messages) which is encoded in the building’s dizzying overhang. Older buildings make us wonder, who built that? Today’s buildings make us wonder, how does it stay up? There’s an important difference there, a shift from a powerful person (Pharoah or King) to a more abstract, hidden sense of raw power.

Collage from the installation “KUNST-HAAS”. Harvard GSD, May 2009

All the videos are renderings and/or diagramatic animations except for the third video. The third video is raw footage of cctv models. The models are larger than the observing people.