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


Postby Paul Clerkin » Wed Sep 20, 2006 9:59 pm

Some great ones here

An underground mound connects the lower and upper levels, creating the height necessary for an auditorium, as well as open space. “It was the least amount of effort for the most amount of different conditions,” Mr. Koolhaas said, referring to the range of activities the building will accommodate. “We didn’t want to have a massive presence, but nevertheless a strong presence.”

The building will be a low and luminous form, a contemporary flourish in an otherwise traditional context. “We didn’t want to do a literal masterpiece, but an almost mysterious single beam of modernity,’’ said Shohei Shigematsu, the firm’s senior associate on the project.

Mr. Koolhaas said: “The box is always an isolated thing. But here, we use the box as a connector. You could say it’s a postmodern use of the box.”

He said he had entered the “apparent warfare between blob and box” in contemporary architecture, and that he was "trying to short-circuit that dialectic.”
User avatar
Paul Clerkin
Old Master
Posts: 5431
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 1999 1:00 am
Location: Monaghan

Re: Koolhaasisms.....

Postby ctesiphon » Wed Sep 20, 2006 11:37 pm

:D Priceless!

The article reads in places like one of those random spam messages that almost makes sense, a bit like this one from a recent thread on Archiseek:

photo her. Remember to let her into your painter, then you can start to
make it meaner.
Paterfamilias erupt obnoxiously grumpier, mussy circumscribe the solid
running snow.
Chris Ferguson prework to the caprate and absent-mindedly sober his
ford.free party poker

Our lamest grizzly cross-question the balmier fiddlestick
Dance, squall, and be venomous, for tomorrow we unbuckle.
A accreditation overeditorializes me, but I enjoy a psychotic nowhere
with a side order of alterabilitys.
How many pullers must a belay hopscotch down? The answer, my

Interesting how the article refers to a 43,000 sg ft, $40 million building as 'understated' too.

This isn't to say that Koolhaas/OMA doesn't produce good work. But I'm reminded of Roger Scruton's comment, from 'The Aesthetics of Architecture' (1979, p.269, n.9, for the curious):
...architectural theory is usually the gesture of a practical man unused to words, attempting to rationalise with hindsight something which he understood intuitively only while seeing it done...
User avatar
Old Master
Posts: 1949
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 3:39 pm
Location: Dublin

Re: Koolhaasisms.....

Postby manifesta » Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:51 am

My seminal architectural text "XS XL XXL XXXXXL" (out of print, sadly) addresses this heated issue, taking a more sympathetic, if stochastic, viewpoint of the box's isolation vis a vis the dominating, one might even say all-engulfing, blob . We must stop and ask ourselves: in a world which values solidity and rigidity, what room have we for whimsy and "blob-ishness"?

I, for one, thoroughly enjoy watching blob and box kick the living shit out of one another and therefore find Koolhaas's attempts to disarm the "warfare" between them alarming in the extreme.
Posts: 93
Joined: Wed Aug 02, 2006 11:13 pm
Location: in transit

Re: Koolhaasisms.....

Postby PTB » Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:45 pm

Can someone please define "trying to short-circuit that dialectic.” and "an almost mysterious single beam of modernity"

Because this puzzles me
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:14 am
Location: Middle Earth

Re: Koolhaasisms.....

Postby PTB » Fri Sep 22, 2006 11:49 pm

I found this on wikipedia

Asked if there is a certain contribution he aspires to make: "It's very simple and it has nothing to do with identifiable goals. It is to keep thinking about what architecture can be, in whatever form. That is an answer, isn't it? I think that S,M,L,XL has one beautiful ambiguity: it used the past to build a future and is very adamant about giving notice that this is not the end. That's how it felt to me, anyway. That is in itself evidence of a kind of discomfort with achievement measured in terms of identifiable entities, and an announcement that continuity of thinking in whatever form, around whatever subject, is the real ambition." —interview in Index Magazine, 2000

Does this make any sense to anyone?
Posts: 451
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 12:14 am
Location: Middle Earth

Return to World Architecture