Sami Angawi, an expert Saudi architect, said he was “surprised and upset” to learn of confidential plans, leaked last week, in which the holiest Islamic city would be redesigned by “outsiders.” Times
This is what, an entire article based on some quotes from some guy? C'mon, how hard is it to go find at least one person who's opposed to any given architecture or development project. This is kind of frivolous of the Times.
765, dr. angawi is not just 'some guy.' look it up.
he also represents many people's opinion and thoughts as stated in the article. what? is that a sacrilege to oppose something? as significant as this? i happened to agree with his take on the subject. while not against the improvement of mecca and vicinity, i find this project extremely like 'zona hoteleria' type of development without any regard to scale and historical significance of the city let alone some basic tenets of islam and materiality.
you make it sound like people should shut up and not discuss any of the fallacies of the royal commercialization of a large faith as visibly and concentrated as is, if i am understanding your reaction. i can understand arguing 'for' the project as well, but so far you don't convince me about discrediting dr. angawi and his opposition to this project proposal.
additionally, i don't think journalists will find too many people openly opposing to this project in saudi arabia.
when the referenced illustration first leaked several months ago, there were a lot of ridicule in some other muslim countries.
it offends a lot muslims for;
a- saudi royalty treating the site as their personal property and commercial enterprise.
b- project treats the program as aggressively as illustrated, not only dealing with kaaba as a 'mega' tourist attraction but also border lining in reinforced idolatry. it brings vulgarity to mecca.
i don't blame the architects for this. they seem like just following orders, after all, it is their reputation.
criticism must go to saudi king and court who arrogantly make irreversible series of decisions to transform mecca as a kitch ideal.
Orhan, I wasn't intending to discredit anyone, and really don't have an opinion about the project one way or another. I think it's just an entirely predictable counterreaction and the quotes could've been filled by anyone:
"X expert thinks Y architect is inappropriate for z job because they lack the necessary cultural sensitivity"
Hypothetically, what if x = a republican politician, y = a muslim architect, and z = a new masterplan for the Vatican?
no problem. i did, later understood what you might have meant better anyway.
but this project is way too complicated as i try to understand myself. it is not one those easy transformation projects resolved via some smart rational planning concepts employing x number of rooms and bathrooms and site plan for buildings.
And i, of course, hadn't considered that there might be a disconnect between the priorities of the Saudi regime and the priorities of Islam at large. Yes, not a simple project at all.
i don't know if it exists but one would think a comprehensive master plan and zoning should be produced first.
i can see some clear setbacks and breathing open space like a ring around the masjid al-haram with much less concrete and establishing some height gradients similar to the great chicago plan of burnham. etc...
anyway, it should be very interesting how this whole story unfolds and what new problems islam manages to produce in its yet another transformational period.
The biggest issue for me with this project is not who or which architect is involved as much as it is the commercialization aspects.
While i understand that given the large numbers of visitors/tourists/pilgrims involved that better/newer or more effective facilities might be needed it does seem as if the Saudis are seeking to mold a faith wide issue to their own private or commercial needs/desires...
Also, like Orhan i would be curious as to whether there is already a master-plan or if such a document would be first step in the above process.
It seems obvious and rudimentary when tackling issues/project of this scale/implication.
The pilgrimage is something that needs be realized as much as the architecture.
If Landscape Urbanism is still too fancy a word,one may dumb it down to the design of the systems and how these come together -- infrastructure, transportation, circulation, etc. --
As the wise notes above indicate this needs some planning --
Nam I too took issue with the commercialisation of the whole thing and wondered if the development not necessarily the design would take away from the sincerity of the pilgrimage.
Also I am curious as to how people use those spaces now? Not the aspects we know directly around the Kaaba but the aspects leading up to this.
Along with the transformation of the holy site itself, the entire city is being uprooted and starchitects and commercial developers are given a blank slate. Essentially, we have a country run by people who want to remove any historic element that is not directly worshipped, because their assumption is that people will worship more than one symbol. The irony is, the biggest symbols transforming the Meccan landscape are large commercial projects that not only dwarf the Ka'ba, but are essentially inaccessible to large swaths of the Muslim world. It's really nice to know that I can feast on KFC, my wife can browse some exclusive Euro boutiques, and our children can have fun in amusement venues before we go to pray in the Grand Mosque. Next year, we'll go to Vegas.
Feb 23, 09 10:26 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
17 Comments
expert saudi architect?
since when were iraqi expats outsiders?
holy cow.
iraqis are not saudis even though they had a king from ta'if (present day saudi arabia) in their formative years.
anyway,
minnick, your comment can be rephrased as;
'holy cash'
This is what, an entire article based on some quotes from some guy? C'mon, how hard is it to go find at least one person who's opposed to any given architecture or development project. This is kind of frivolous of the Times.
holy cash.
765, dr. angawi is not just 'some guy.' look it up.
he also represents many people's opinion and thoughts as stated in the article. what? is that a sacrilege to oppose something? as significant as this? i happened to agree with his take on the subject. while not against the improvement of mecca and vicinity, i find this project extremely like 'zona hoteleria' type of development without any regard to scale and historical significance of the city let alone some basic tenets of islam and materiality.
you make it sound like people should shut up and not discuss any of the fallacies of the royal commercialization of a large faith as visibly and concentrated as is, if i am understanding your reaction. i can understand arguing 'for' the project as well, but so far you don't convince me about discrediting dr. angawi and his opposition to this project proposal.
additionally, i don't think journalists will find too many people openly opposing to this project in saudi arabia.
when the referenced illustration first leaked several months ago, there were a lot of ridicule in some other muslim countries.
it offends a lot muslims for;
a- saudi royalty treating the site as their personal property and commercial enterprise.
b- project treats the program as aggressively as illustrated, not only dealing with kaaba as a 'mega' tourist attraction but also border lining in reinforced idolatry. it brings vulgarity to mecca.
i don't blame the architects for this. they seem like just following orders, after all, it is their reputation.
criticism must go to saudi king and court who arrogantly make irreversible series of decisions to transform mecca as a kitch ideal.
Orhan, I wasn't intending to discredit anyone, and really don't have an opinion about the project one way or another. I think it's just an entirely predictable counterreaction and the quotes could've been filled by anyone:
"X expert thinks Y architect is inappropriate for z job because they lack the necessary cultural sensitivity"
Hypothetically, what if x = a republican politician, y = a muslim architect, and z = a new masterplan for the Vatican?
no problem. i did, later understood what you might have meant better anyway.
but this project is way too complicated as i try to understand myself. it is not one those easy transformation projects resolved via some smart rational planning concepts employing x number of rooms and bathrooms and site plan for buildings.
And i, of course, hadn't considered that there might be a disconnect between the priorities of the Saudi regime and the priorities of Islam at large. Yes, not a simple project at all.
i don't know if it exists but one would think a comprehensive master plan and zoning should be produced first.
i can see some clear setbacks and breathing open space like a ring around the masjid al-haram with much less concrete and establishing some height gradients similar to the great chicago plan of burnham. etc...
anyway, it should be very interesting how this whole story unfolds and what new problems islam manages to produce in its yet another transformational period.
The biggest issue for me with this project is not who or which architect is involved as much as it is the commercialization aspects.
While i understand that given the large numbers of visitors/tourists/pilgrims involved that better/newer or more effective facilities might be needed it does seem as if the Saudis are seeking to mold a faith wide issue to their own private or commercial needs/desires...
Also, like Orhan i would be curious as to whether there is already a master-plan or if such a document would be first step in the above process.
It seems obvious and rudimentary when tackling issues/project of this scale/implication.
The pilgrimage is something that needs be realized as much as the architecture.
If Landscape Urbanism is still too fancy a word,one may dumb it down to the design of the systems and how these come together -- infrastructure, transportation, circulation, etc. --
As the wise notes above indicate this needs some planning --
Absolute Religious Hypocrisy
It’s always strange to see how the rules can be bent to fit in with global economy
Architectonicita,
Indeed!
Nam I too took issue with the commercialisation of the whole thing and wondered if the development not necessarily the design would take away from the sincerity of the pilgrimage.
Also I am curious as to how people use those spaces now? Not the aspects we know directly around the Kaaba but the aspects leading up to this.
Along with the transformation of the holy site itself, the entire city is being uprooted and starchitects and commercial developers are given a blank slate. Essentially, we have a country run by people who want to remove any historic element that is not directly worshipped, because their assumption is that people will worship more than one symbol. The irony is, the biggest symbols transforming the Meccan landscape are large commercial projects that not only dwarf the Ka'ba, but are essentially inaccessible to large swaths of the Muslim world. It's really nice to know that I can feast on KFC, my wife can browse some exclusive Euro boutiques, and our children can have fun in amusement venues before we go to pray in the Grand Mosque. Next year, we'll go to Vegas.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.