that guy is a certifiable nutcase like his mama zaha.

and by nutcase, you mean genius.

Is Zaha Hadid leaving Zaha Hadid?


Z is an artist, not an architect. PS is an architect's architect.

no i don't

I think this is just a rumour to promote his forthcoming book. And wait...this title has not yet been released...until next week. What a coincidence!

ZH is an architect!
PS is sometimes a genius!
...and jp is obviously still learning!

Is there a point where we should all stop learning, mixxi? Oh did I get your name wrong? I forgot.

dam that book sounds good

Isn't it really only a matter of time though anyways? It's only natural for these sort of offices to beget even more "starchitect" offices.

Seriously, from Behrens (Corb, Mies) and Wright (Neutra, Schindler) to Saarinen (Pelli, Roche, Venturi) and now OMA/Koolhaas (basically everyone involved with contemporary architecture, including ZHA) it just seems to be the course to follow.

I wouldn't be surprised to see Schumi take off on his own. In fact, I'd be very curious to see what ZHA would get up to with Hadid firmly back in the driver's seat.

comaring shmuk, to Mies? what are you crazy?

Right Don, because I clearly equated Schumi with MVDR....

Where did such an asinine idea come from?

ok maybe i misunderstood your statements, as long as you don't equate Mies to the rem and zaha crazies, sorry.

to OP, do you mean in a business or private manner?

Mies is 50% of the reason I didn't choose go to IIT. The other 50% I call "3d printing".

do you really care? srsly?

"The book elaborates the theory of architecture’s autopoeisis in 8 parts, 50 sections and 200 chapters. Each of the 50 sections poses a thesis drawing a central message from the insights articulated within the respective section. The 200 chapters are gathering and sorting the accumulated intelligence of the discipline according to the new conceptual framework adopted, in order to catalyze and elaborate the new formulations and insights that are then encapsulated in the theses. However, while the theoretical work in the text of the chapters relies on the rigorous build up of a new theoretical language, the theses are written in ordinary language – with the theoretical concepts placed in brackets. The full list of the 50 theses affords a convenient summary printed as appendix at the end of the book. "

Um, what? English please. We already had enough nonsensical archi-babble with Eisenman.

i get it, architects think they are lawyers and love to elaborate their general notes NO one ever reads....so go ahead and give a book a Title that is a Sentence...ITS CALLED A TITLE for a reason.

oh wait that's the premise, invinting languages...

yeah only bad things come from very long titled theories Eisenman's: Begining of the End, End of the Begininng, Beginers End, middle, stop , End Begin, Post Post, Neo....

and I like what he has said so far...

I think that it is fairly common that in hard times, theoretical and philosophical explorations are chastised in favour of more pragmatic concerns, and in lush times the opposite occurs.

Remember that architecture is not architecture without experimentation. Even though I now tends towards the pragmatic [reflecting my own professional state] I will always argue for this.

I wish Schumacher all the best and hope there is something to get stuck in to.

Has architecture ever been about buildings?

theoretical and philosophical explorations? zaha and schuk, do not even begin to talk about philosophy, did you see shcum's USC lecture? what an idiot.

sad to hear that they are getting divorce... could have been a lovely couple though :(

dia - i guess generally it's the other way around:

hard times -> architects have time to sit and doodle & think while unemployed,

good times -> they have to actually bother with building, construction, program, society and stuff and can't just do "notations" in their garret.

Zaha Hadid and her firm are not architects, they are sculptors. Walk into any of their buildings and nothing gives you the sense of a building- they're overwhelming, overstylized and underprepared. On another note, Zaha Hadid looks like kermit the frog.

Anyone who knows anything in UK knows the true talent is hadid - patrick is the cad monkey and the work became very pragmatic -

just look at the paintings of hadid pre-patrick

As opposed to paintings post-patrick - don't think I have seen those...

The work has changed because the scale, production time and quantity of projects has changed.

---

On another note, mr Schumacher seems to be a creator in his own right & maybe his departure from the firm will result in two different and (more) distinct careers? - Who knows. I certainly hope so, because I hate most of the stuff they have done together.

"autopoeisis in 8 parts, 50 sections and 200 chapters."

I'm not sure I'd call my own body of work an "autopoeisis."

Because I'm not entirely sure that a book can write itself. I've had papers that have written themselves and they were mostly bullshit and bold-faced lies.

I think he has chapters confused with paragraphs, sections confused with chapters and parts confused with essays. It certainly is an odd organization to use compartmentalized chapters as a method for explaining individual ideas.

I'm not sure how you can have two hundred individual ideas on parametricism considering it is all formulaic. <- Ha, jokes!

Mizzerati-

I don't think that ZH is an architect by any way shape or form. Neither is FG. Neither is DL.

Any head of a firm that does not understand, truly, how the forms are produced is no longer an architect. They are a name brand. Nothing more. If he or she cannot direct the process, I promise you, they can't direct the outcome either. They're merely a shape maker or an artist, or at worst a commercial entity. There's a huge difference. It's amazing to me that 'architects' don't even understand what they themselves are.


Patrick Schumacher is an architect's architect because he is responsible for building the forms that the great and genius ZH creates with a few hurried strokes of her brush or pen. He painstakingly wrote code, directed people, invented new ways, engaged with suppliers and fabricators. ZH drew and painted emulsion on brushed metal. Which takes more intelligence and effort?

Did you see the episode of Charlie Rose when Chuck asked her if she was an artist or an architect and she took incredible offence? I'm pretty sure Herzog would have laughed in Chuck's face [but Charlie would have never asked that of Herzog, or deMueron, or Mayne, or Sejima, right?] Doesnt that say something?

It's not about 'genius' sketches. It's about the process of production.

If patrick s. was basically ZH's cadd monkey, maybe in that sense i simphatize with him, but judging from his lecture at USC, it is clear that he is also as crazy as Zaha or Rem.

you can't refer to him as schumi...its confusing the hell out of me...you know Bernard Tschumi.

I am all on board with jp...although you have to give these old guys a break, the tools for architecture have changed so much its hard for a person who learned to think and work in architecture by drawing learn to A) use a computer and be good at it B) relearn the new language and process of architecture...

I take all that back, I know old guys who can and better than young guys and you know what they do - they work and work and work as ARCHITECTS - you know like the old days, guys who show up at site and give builders advise and advise the DOB on the right code interpereation and run a company (oh wait I don't think architects could ever run a company)

When did I ever say PS was a cad monkey? [Btw, whoever started calling it 'cadD'? It's not 'computer aided design design' is it? I've seen this a few times.]


I said PS was [why are we talking about him in past tense] and is more of an architect than ZH. And I referenced a bunch of reasons why. Did you even read my contribution?

Crazy like a fox, maybe.

Tschumi is tschumi and also another architect's architect. If he hadn't done the paperless studio in the early 90's then I don't know where we might be. It might be better, it might be worse, but it wouldn't be right here, right now. We probably wouldn't even be having this [inane] discussion.

Not sure your question about reading the contribution is directed towards me, but yes I read it.

Those of us who want to be architects are embarrassed daily by these artists who want to do buildings.

So just schumi (tshumi) like we used to say

Not sure your question about reading the contribution is directed towards me, but yes I read it.

Those of us who want to be architects are embarrassed daily by these artists who want to do buildings.

So just schumi (tshumi) like we used to say

It was never, ever 'schumi'.


And forfuckssakeihaterepeatingmygoddamnself.


'Just Tschumi' is a catastrophically naive thing to say.

Dude[ette] it's not about just theory, its not about just practice, its about both simultaneously, and it has to be.

If you're embarrassed by BT then, I, honestly, and unapologetically, am embarrassed by you.

no just plain crazy as in loco.

Helsinki, thats probably true. Its my experience that when times are hard people think about new ways to 'practice' architecture as in a mode of operation. When there are tons of project and clients, there is a move to differentiate projects through design operations.

Schumacher married to a chinese young lady. ZH is too old and obese. Schumacher should have left her office

Architect35, that can't be your real age...

Jp you are very emotional

I'm just glad that Patrick Schumacher solved the case of who shot the pumpkin in Chicago last week.

rustystuds, you made my day...