Issey Miyake

World architecture... what's happening generally....

Issey Miyake

Postby murdock » Sat Oct 27, 2001 12:03 am

Hello!

I am considering a project comparing the works of Issey Miyake with Architecture.

I hope to explore:

An item of clothing to be designed with Architectural principles? (Structure, materiality)

Comparing Miyakes 'Pleats' with the Architectural 'Fold'.

Any direction for more info involving the 'fold' would be helpful and any ideas as to how you would like to see this proposed project go/develop OR involve a different architectural angle?

Post here or anyone can mail me!

Also Generally,

What do people think of Miyake's clothes?

Would you describe them as 'architectural'?

If so, can you say how?

I have my ideas but would like some more opinions to form a discussion and ideas.

Thanks, Regards

Murdock (student)
murdock
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: UK

Postby trace » Sat Oct 27, 2001 4:53 pm

You might begin with http://www.archidose.org/Mar99/030899.htm (By the way, archidose links to archiseek - as the most "thorough directory of architectural sites". Keep up the good work, Paul!)
trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby trace » Sat Oct 27, 2001 7:55 pm

Sunday, October 21, 2001

ARCHITECTURE
New for Fall: Architects
In their new alliances with fashion houses, building designers have started on a path that could lead to creative visions–or empty style.

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF


RANDY LYHUS / Los Angeles Times

A decade ago, architects were a cultural aberration, wallowing in the language of arcane French philosophers and I-beam details. Today, international fashion magazines relentlessly plug the latest architectural enfant terrible, fashion houses seek out architects for their avant-garde credentials, and the architectural profession in general has an energy and cachet that must make even the most successful haut couture designer green with envy. Who would have thought that architecture and fashion would ever make such cozy companions?
To those who grew up amid the cloying earnestness that surrounded late Modernism, when architects often saw themselves as social missionaries, the glamorization of architecture may come as an unwanted shock. After all, architecture is a social art. It is not only an aesthetic spectacle; it can act as a lasting expression of our collective values. Part of what makes fashion seductive, by contrast, is its ephemerality.
Issues of superficiality aside, architecture's sudden immersion in the world of fashion and pop culture may be a blessing in disguise. Having dumped the notion of a universal style, architects are freer than ever to explore their art's expressive potential. Jean Nouvel, Rem Koolhaas, Norman Foster, Frank Gehry, Peter Zumthor and Santiago Calatrava are only some of those who have helped to broaden the architectural horizon. Architecture, in fact, has never been so free-spirited.
Since the Renaissance, builders and architects have sought to define a set of absolute principals that could guide the design of buildings. Leon Battista Alberti once argued for an architecture whose geometric rigor reflected the natural order of God's universe. Later, Andrea Palladio pointed to classical precedents as the purest expression of a civilized world.
That preoccupation with the past was dropped sometime in the mid-19th century, when an emerging avant-garde began looking for a new architectural language, one pointed firmly toward the future.
Nonetheless, architects continued to cling to the idea of a universal language. In 1923, Le Corbusier set out his five points for a new architecture, whose clean lines and abstract forms would rid the world of undue clutter. And by 1934, Philip Johnson had proclaimed the arrival of an International Style that would embody the modern age. To such polemicists, the world would be reshaped with the functional precision of a Swiss watch.
That quest died hard. In the 1970s, postmodernists proclaimed the death of Modernism, and then tried to replace it with their dogma, which preached a return to classical forms, albeit with an ironic twist. At the end of the 1980s, Johnson returned again, this time to promote the Deconstructivists.
But by then, even those who were being hyped as part of this new wave quickly disavowed the term, and it became increasingly clear that there would be no new architectural zeitgeist.
The result, especially in the past few years, has been an eruption of new styles and aesthetic images, each representing a distinct point of view. The spectacular rise of Gehry—who first captured the public's imagination with the flamboyant forms of his 1997 Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain—represents only one important strain in contemporary architectural thought. The sleekly refined glass forms of Nouvel's Cartier Foundation in Paris, by comparison, have the hard refinement of cut diamonds.
Architects such as the Austrian Zumthor, meanwhile, design luxurious Modern forms of marble and wood that have an intentionally atavistic quality. Such work makes even the uptight elegance of a Richard Meier looks almost radical. And then, there are the neo-traditionalists, such as Robert A.M. Stern, who continue to knock off older historical styles with varying degrees of success.
The degree of creative openness has led to the melting away of many of the traditional boundaries between architecture and the other creative professions. But it may be the sensuality of much of the new architecture that has made it particularly alluring to the fashion world. Last year, for example, Condé Nast completed a cafeteria designed by Gehry for its New York headquarters building. The cafeteria's undulating glass forms have made it a favorite of Vogue and Glamour editors.
More recently, Condé Nast has hired Koolhaas to rethink the design of several of its magazines—a task not normally offered to architects. Koolhaas is also at work on three boutiques for Prada, the luxury fashion house, as part of a broader effort to redefine the company's global image.
Even some fashion designers are beginning to look to architecture for inspiration. At a London show last year, the Cyprus-born designer Hussein Chalayan featured furniture that could be transformed into clothing. At one remarkable moment, a languorous model lifted a circular panel out of the center of a dark wood coffee table, gently stepping inside. She then lifted the table top up like an accordion to form a shimmering, hoop-shaped skirt.
In short, the boundary between architecture and fashion is more porous than ever, and a growing cultural elite is becoming literate in the language of modern design. Armed with that new knowledge and exposed to a range of possibilities, clients now select an architectural style as if they were picking through a rack at Barneys.
So what does this mean for architecture? At worst, the result has been an architecture that is more about aesthetic posturing than expressions of deeper ideas about contemporary culture. Many clients, private and institutional, now push for increasingly flamboyant architectural statements in a narcissistic attempt to attract attention. The result is often the creation of stylish forms with no lasting importance.
But the flip side is more rosy. The level of formal freedom that architects experience today may be unmatched by that of any other period in modern history. We no more associate Modernist buildings with progressive values, for example, than we think of a woman in a suit as taking a principled stand against a patriarchal society.
That has lifted an enormous weight off architects' shoulders. Their task is more narrowly prescribed. The bombastic manifestos are gone. In their place, architects are apt to create more personal, idiosyncratic visions of humans' place in the world—works that can coexist snugly within a culture of radically opposing viewpoints.
It is that personal dimension that piques our curiosity, surprises us, excites us. The question now will be whether we dig beyond the seductive surfaces and force ourselves to judge these works according to the values they embody, their depth of character. If so, we may be entering a period as rich as any in the history of architecture. Looking good and doing good may not be a contradiction after all.

Nicolai Ouroussoff is The Times' architecture critic.

Copyright 2001 Los Angeles Times
trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby murdock » Sat Oct 27, 2001 11:04 pm

Thanks Trace,

Very intersting and helpful.

What do you think of the project?
Does it interest you?

With 'Architectural Principles' what can suggest they could be?

Any thoughts?

Regards

Murdock.
murdock
Member
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Fri Oct 26, 2001 12:00 am
Location: UK

Postby pvdz » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:16 pm

If your looking to compare Miyake's "pleats" with an architects "folds" then the work of Enric Miralles might be of interest to you, especially his archery target job for the Barcelona Olympics or even the fire station designed for same, this was not built, however it does display the kind of tectonics that could be comparable to the pleats of a garment.
pvdz
Member
 
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 30, 2001 1:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby MK » Thu Nov 01, 2001 3:16 pm

There are many interpretations of the architectural fold, or the phase transition. It is a point in time or space where huge changes can occur. They can be percieved as waves or as actual events. Water a zero degrees celcius, changing to ice is a phase transition, a friendly protest changing to a riot. It is strongly linked with chaoplexity, ie the predictability of an overall outcome through a series of apparantly random and chaotic events.
We are starting to see that the world is made up of these random events, the formation of a fingerprint in the womb, the operation of the brain, weather systems. A&D have dedicated an edition of their publication to 'folding', it can be bought easily enough, and there is a great book by Charles Jencks, 'The Architecture of The Jumping Universe.' It is a very difficult and polemic topic, with many different interpretations. I am interested to see how you link the clothing folds of Miyake with those of Eisenmann, try reading Diagram Diaries. Either way post your findings on the topic here.
MK
Member
 
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2000 12:00 am
Location: Limerick

Postby trace » Thu Nov 01, 2001 5:27 pm

Completed September (?): ISSEY MIYAKE STORE, NEW YORK Gordon Kipping, with a sculptural installation by Frank Gehry and murals by Alejandro Gehry. "Multiculturalism with pleats," according to New York Times critic Herbert Muschamp. 119 Hudson Street. (212-226-0100)
trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby trace » Thu Nov 15, 2001 1:06 pm

From The New York Times, November 11, 2001

The Commemorative Beauty of Tragic Wreckage
By HERBERT MUSCHAMP

Extract:
'Logically, an architecture critic's associations begin with the family of forms. For instance, there were reports that after Sept. 11, some architecture fans were unsettled by the resemblance between the wreckage at ground zero and some Frank Gehry projects. Actually, no one was more painfully conscious of the resemblance than the architect himself. By a twist of fate, a Gehry project was scheduled to open in New York a few days after the disaster: a new Issey Miyake shop in TriBeCa, 10 blocks north of ground zero.

'Miyake had asked Gehry to create "a tornado." Working with Gordon Kipping, a young New York architect, Gehry obliged by fashioning a sculptural installation of long titanium strips that twist and curl, animating the space with a sense of barely controlled imagination. (The project, which has since opened, is at the corner of Hudson and Harrison Streets.) It pleased Gehry that this was the first publicly accessible work he had designed expressly for New York.

'I first saw the space on the night of Sept. 10, a few days before the scheduled opening. Later, I accompanied Gehry, Miyake, Kipping and Gehry's son, Alejandro, an artist responsible for the murals that ornament the shop's interiors, to a restaurant a few doors down the street. It was raining heavily, but during dinner the downpour stopped. When we left the restaurant, a little before midnight, the twin towers reared up to infinity through tumbling, gray Wagnerian clouds. It was a good last look.'

The full article is at http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/11/arts/design/11MUSC.html?ex=1006589126&ei=1&en=97faae281cd3e755
trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby trace » Fri Jan 18, 2002 11:43 am

trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby vitruvius » Fri Jan 18, 2002 9:33 pm

I know it's not directly related to Issey Miyake but the work of Hussein Chalayan incorporates architectural forms.
vitruvius
Member
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2002 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Postby trace » Tue Jan 14, 2003 9:03 pm

http://www.a-matter.de/eng/frames.htm?projects/pr027-01-g

See also MIT's journal, "thresholds 22: fashion"
trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby trace » Tue Jan 14, 2003 9:08 pm

trace
Member
 
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2000 1:00 am

Postby roskav » Wed Jan 15, 2003 1:01 am

Wow this is the best discussion thread in a while! Looking forward to more!
roskav
Member
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2000 1:00 am
Location: Dublin, Ireland


Return to World Architecture



cron