Interesting! Well unless their website is meant to give that impression without it being the truth, there seem to be only a few units left for sale... so, I'd say it works.

It's too gimmicky, cheesy, and just downright annoying. It contains what I consider two of the greatest violations of good web design: automatic resize of browser window and sound effects that play automatically.

That being said, there are some nice renderings and photos on the site and I like the 3d blocking diagram where you can view different apartments. But to me it would have worked better if it had been presented in a more sober and straightforward manner. If I had been looking at it more casually I probably would have been turned off by the cheesy chip shop graphics and disgusting food pictures before I ever figured out they were selling condos.

it's different, and that's the idea. everything is the same, and this is different. the world needs more difference. even if it doesn't appeal to me, i appreciate its willingness to try something new.

it's different, and that's the idea. everything is the same, and this is different. the world needs more difference. even if it doesn't appeal to me, i appreciate its willingness to try something new.

yep, I completely agree, 5.

ALsop! my god what a schlockmeister. i thought it was an elaborate mocksite.
btw, the thin stick figure is completely inaccurate

where's the iconographers NOW? cheap posturing of what are banal buildings in sensationalized frenchfry format; complete idiocy

i think this whole thing is an incredible idea. granted alsop may not fit everyones aesthetic taste, the concept is brilliant. does anyone know of anything like this being done in the states?
i say, knowing what we know now about housing, and having now read jane jacobs, we should start trying some of this, give people somewhere interesting they can live and be proud of

I would argue that it is not different. After exploring there website all I felt left with was as onslaught in masterbitory web graphics and a building that isn't really doing anything new (better versions of print graphic buildings by Herzog & DeMuron, and massing by MVRDV) They showed an wealth of cartoony people in condos but what point have they made about a new living condition?Perhaps I am wanting an attempt to redefine what the unit is and how that will affect urban living, not merely applying different colors and wall patterns. The arguement about "everything being the same" seems to be overgeneralized.

That being the critique. I don't think it is necessarily a bad project, as would like to support architects in their design efforts and the employment of design into the developers world but I have to take issue with the heavyhandedness of adverisment and marketing without a whole lot of depth to back it up.

well said tagalong. Alsop has been straining to reproduce the early '90s dutch graphics for years (and succeeding if flat and oversaturated colours is his metier).
He consistently presents himself as the 'enfant terrible' of the uk scene... he is amply qualified of one of those two qualities, actually.

I totally agree with that. What I find interesting in this particular case is how architecture is being presented to the public through massive overload of graphics and sounds in an amount that you actually feel they are trying to cover the fact that the building IS boring.
Of course it raises the question how much bad design you can get away with as long as your marketing department is selling it well...

the entire housing industry is predicated on bad design and good marketing

There were nice renderings on there? I couldn't find anything.

Personally, I found it very annoying. I'll give it props for trying something different, but it comes across as childish.

Sylvester - you can get away with as much as people will let you, and right now, at least, the market is still semi-hot. It's slowing, though, so developers will actually have to think a little more to sell things. Doens't mean they'll think about architecture, though.

For the record what I appreciated as being different (and 5, too, I'd reckon) was the sales method, not the building.

The building seemed interesting enough to me. I thought the post was about the sales pitch, not the architecture. There's really not enough to go on to criticize the architecture in that website. So all y'all, calm down.

yeah, I found nothing wrong with the building, but then again, they seem to have spent their efforts (and $$, no doubt), promoting a website, not the building.

for my money, I'd rather see a decent rendering of what the actual building will look like. Regardless, though, whether it be the market itself (most likely) or the marketing, they are almost sold out, so someone is happy.

gotta agree trace, myriam. not much to see of the actual building...

but for the record i LOVE will alsop. he is insane, does crazy shit, but also some really spectacularly good work.

my fav is probs this in toronto


although his peckham building is quite nice too:



what's not to like?

i liked the website, the mqrketing technique and also the architecture of the building. I wish more architects would learn to have fun like Alsop does.
Though i wish they had some better renderings of what the actual building would look like

like it

supporters, detractors, supporters, equivocators. it's like futbol on telemundo.

seriously, for real? there's an irreverent factor in a lot of young offices here - i blame it on archigram>teamX>cedric price>monty python. a unique english tradition of sedentious practice with fits of cheeky irrelevance, masquerading as intelligent theory. When it's done well it's quite amazing. Unfortunately there seems to be more of the pastiche image for press junkets than critical design these days.

hi jump, the peckham library IS nice, and was conceived when it was Alsop and Stormer. the box on stilts... you'll need to explain that one (it works on peckham as a covered plaza with entry - ex. how do you get in the dalmation - the red laundry chute? does it create an urban condition of repose - looks to be too high for that)

sententious. no really i did well on the standardized tests i swear

Architecture is very serious, especially among academics. On the other hand, life is short, why not enjoy it? Everybody should enjoy life. And architecture, while maintaining a good level of integrity, should be 'fun,' because architecture is all about the people who spend their lives in and around it.

I'm not saying that I blindly love alsop or the frenchfry apartment, but I see a trend of which I'd like to see more.

attention/provocation is good. otherwise we continue to get:

now now, the options are not only agent provocateur or DEATHSTAR developers - i don't think mcmansions are on the cards here

with urban spash involved i would seriously doubt any mcmansions..

snowi,

the thing in toronto is for a design school addition and the red thing as far as i can tell is a stairway leading from the existing school building to the new one...maybe, i can't recall the plans at the mo. there is more typical access as well, so i jes for fun perhaps, or a second means of egress...maybe someone living in TO knows...

thing i like about it is he coulda jes put the thing on the ground...amazing that he could get them to build this instead...

i wouldn't pass alsop off as pure cheekiness, mind. the daycare in stonebridge is surprisingly sensitive and well done on a very low budget.

maybe - i concede the success of convincing the client/reg. body of lifting the building, but to little affect, for me.

for contrast, would you appraise it as worthy as Ando's zen temple under a lilypond (urban settings aside - client privilege being equal) in japan? The use of gimmickry, as affect, for me is problematic - it's not only levelled at alsop, although his work is a lightning rod for this criticism - seen the pacman and space invaders urban scheme?


what's a spash (space?) perhaps we share the same keyboard deficiency, although I tend to create new words altogether

Ando does a wonderul job of integrating building with site and truly elevating the entire experience.

A big box on stilts with obnoxious colors doens't compare, imo.

But, I will tip the hat to him for getting them to build it. it's different, and I like it for that. It makes people think, and assuming it doesn't take 20 minutes to get to it (that's the part I don't understand - doesn't it deter people from using it being so high? I certainly ain't walking them stairs!), and that's good.

All in all, I like the box. If it didn't have obnoxious colors I'd like it a ton more. Those colors, to me, are 'gimmicky'.

Love the website Love the exterior HATE THE FRICKEN UNITS!!! YICKS 200,000 pounds - thats over 400,000 Canadian Dollars. for a 2 Bedroom apartment WITH NO ENSUITE BATH for the Master Bedroom. NO Second bath at all, just a small powder across from the Main door. Thats' the first thing you see when you enter the suite. Lots of FRICKEN Corridors before you hit the main living area. Big waste of space. BAD VERY BAD > > > DEsigned by monkeys no doubt.

urban sp (L) ash. apologies.

ando is iffy at context. usually he denies it (that is his raison detre after all; interior spaces,light washing down and views to internal and VERY controlled ando-made landscapes or concrete walls...), or he makes modified modernist objects in the landscape. A lot of it is quite nice, but contextual and ando are not two words i would use together very often.

the alsop thing in TO is an ADDITION, which means the building it sits on makes the connection to the ground; and the flying bit is not as isolated as it looks. Personally i think it does more for place making and engaging its site/context than almost anything by ando; although i can see how it might not age as well...