100! we love you rem! (well, i do. people who dont are usually frustrated career architects with not much fun in their professional life).
in many ways i think s,m,l,xl is the "toward a new Architecture" of our generation. it has been THE book to read for students for almost a decade now.
the split...i think ramus will be quite successful, i'm thinking of the other recent split, the foster/make one, and shuttleworth is doing really well, even being in the same city as foster...obviously he had much more experience, which probably compensaate for that.
to be discussing oma's merits is to be simply trying to go against the obvious, and trying to appear smart while doing so.
silverlake, how do they tackle social issues in a different way? the fact that all along Rem has embraced chaos, consumerism, pollution, commercialization and popularization of culture and knowledge, and all o the other contemporary social phenomena in all of his projects, never denying them, or judging them morally, but simply taking them as part of the context he was operanting within. i think that alone demonstrates much more awareness of the world that the work of someone like Herzon and De Meuron. Look at cctv. how it responds to being the center of tv broadcasting in a totalitarian state.
oma have always celebrated and embraced ambivalence. that offices like theirs have be authorless AND starry. that they must have strong ideals BUT be able to reconcile them for the icon of totalitarians. that they are, honestly, both programmatic pragmatists AND formalists.
their extended family is huge, hundreds of hard working students have breathed the vapours of blue DOW foam and resin at Vincent Van Rijks' studio in Rotterdam. and they have often been only too willing to make public celebration of their own contradictions publishing books that are notable for both ideas and political engagement AND unremittingly crappy graphical presentation. that they are both fundamentally socialist AND entranced by wealth and fashion.
it's very interesting to me that an office which processed so so so many workers who were contributing collaborative authors was simultaneously the biggest example of the need for celebrity in getting these sorts of commissions. teams at oma may be a similar size to those of other offices but their turnover rate is far greater meaning in part that more voices contribute to the process. not to mention that the longest hours in any other office would feel like a holiday to an oma trainee in Rotterdam.
their office begs questions about how it's finicially possible to operate in the capacity they do while maintaining such a tenuous relationship with human and business ethics. as an office, they embody the massochistic work ethic that all serious students hold which is that exhaustion is a near second to godliness. is oma possible with normal working conditions ?
the office was in serious financial peril a few years back due in no small part to the fact that they enter almost every competition out there and most of the time lose. this is expensive and caused a sell off to investors, a process which was more recently reversed during the era of JPR.
for all of it's obvious missteps (I've posted about these before), the SPL was a model for how to build good (considered and thoughtful) civic buildings in a nation that sees virtually none funded publically.
the lot in New York are more than able, but the two new captains have none of the polemical manifesto(s) resume of the writer-architect. they also hew more closely to pragmatism for its own sake, which maybe makes sense in the US, than OMA proper but they have a massive row to hoe to fill the shoes of the mothership.
...but their turnover rate is far greater meaning in part that more voices contribute to the process
thenewold, this sentence struck me - there may be more voices involved, but I'm guessing most of them have little or no commitment to the process, and will bear no responsibility for its result. I don't in general consider flightiness to be a good means to advance culture.
A confession: I know little about OMA, and have visited only one of their buidlings, the IIT one. I adore it. But it did not strike me as a building with a long life span, both materially and topically. It's a very, very fun building, but transient, like the students at any university.
When it comes to the Seattle Public Library, a building that will be with us for a century or more, for better of for worse: is it good or fair for a major public building to "celebrate the fucked-up world we live in?" as TheArchitect said, without professing to any moral position on it? Again, I don't think apathy is a good way to engage a world one wants to improve.
I'm very much enjoying this discussion and I'm learning a lot, so please feel free to knock my comments down.
i agree with Liberty Bell about their buildings life spans materially and topically. I was talking to a co-worker recently looking at an old publication on OMA, and all of the buildings have dated tremendously, and i think this might be due to the fact that they aren't really very beautiful buildings, in the first place even disregarding their conceptual etc merits. As architects it is important to remember who we are designing for (hating to state the obvious).
To clarify what i meant with with koolhaas celebrating the fucked-up world we operate in:
It's all about not trying to morally judge the built society surrounding us as a failure for architecture. But to interpret the good and bad sides of it and try to make a masterpiece that stands out. Its like:
Bad architect: "that strip mall is ugly, I wish they would have made it more beautiful (after my taste)"
Koolhaas: "that strip mall is ugly in an interesting way. Maybe I could use the same principle and materials for a contemporary masterpiece..."
The Seattle public library is basically a series of boring boxes with a strict layout on top of each other, like any generic seattle office building. Even the facade is just a repetitive skin.
But it has one major twist: By shifting the boxes back and forth, you create huge public spaces inside the building skin, exactly what should be the main idea for a public library. The combination of strict well-layouted floorplans, and grand adventurous spaces for the public. The sculptural shape of the building is an attractive bi-product of the concept, and makes it stand out among the generic seattle skycrapers.
"But it has one major twist: By shifting the boxes back and forth, you create huge public spaces inside the building skin, exactly what should be the main idea for a public library. The combination of strict well-layouted floorplans, and grand adventurous spaces for the public. The sculptural shape of the building is an attractive bi-product of the concept, and makes it stand out among the generic seattle skycrapers"
I like its bid idea and structure system. But in realisty, only 1 out of 1000 or even higher could have luxury to have this expensive structure.
Anyway, this is a successful building considering I pass by Chicago Harold washington library everyday.
Very funny jlx - I've been waiting to respond to TheArchitect's post re: Seattle Public Library, because I'm really not sure what I think about it (the buidling - the post, TArch, is very helpful). I certainly question how it is really any different from a lot of the "generic (glass-clad) Seattle skyscrapers". Of course it is a more adventurous/less efficient approach to form and structure. But I still haven't formed an opinion on it (haven't been there) and I think the question of whether it results in an "attractive" or let's say aesthetically-pleasing form is pretty debatable.
But as I've been pondering it I keep thinking to myself "Well at least thank god it's not that hideous, embarassing throwback-historical disaster of a building that the Harold Washington library in Chicago is!!!!!" I was in school when those competition results were announced and none of us could believe that was what they went with...I understand it has some nice interior spaces though.
I like the Light especially in some public space like coffee bar, library, cinema...
Harold Washington library is so dark and conservative inside I felt I get into a jail everytime I enter the building. This is one of the worst libraries in the world. I should say after I traveled and worked in HongKong, Japan, US and China. Comaparing to this, seattle library like a heaven to me. I even want to get inside and take a cup of coffee if I have chance to pass by it everyday.
the post-split spin here, re: museum plaza, is that the developers were after prince-ramus anyway when they hired oma. they were looking for exciting young designers and got to jpr after a visit to the seattle public library. i wonder....
[url=http://www.designboom.com/portrait/zaha_bio.html]joined OMA(office of metropolitan architecture) and became a partner (1977).
own practice 'zaha hadid office' (from 1980).[/url]
TheArchitect... I never said I didn't like OMA. I really admire and abhore their work at the same time, which is a HUGE accomplishment on their part. I think they're one of the few offices that have spread themselves out evenly over so many different areas of the architectural community.
Rem's early manifests are some of the most influencial readings for young architects and their new work is compelling and evokes serious discussions [well, usually] about the role of the architect and the importance of multiple-authors in this age.
Some offices I have always admired for their similiar roots:
Morphosis [god, I love them so much]
Zaha [early hand renderings are conveyed in her built work]
Diller Scofidio [i mean, slow house anyone?]
I feel all of these offices started out in the academic fields and stuck to their guns. Now they're all building really amazing works and continue to push the envelope.
Other offices like Shop and LTL have found ways to create architecture without braking the client's bank accounts.
I really do like most of OMA's work. The Educatorium is diagrammatically interesting but lacks critical detailing [which is to say the same for most of their early work] - the SPL is to this day one of the most dynamic forms created in my opinion and it's sister the PCH is also a very sexy form, rendered in a timeless material.
The CCTV will be the new age of skyscraper and I cannot wait to see the Olympics when it is completed.
Hope that adds to the conversation a bit more than my usual banter.
I agree w/ most of that...the Kunsthal is probably my favorite built project of OMA's...well placed in context, dynamic spatially/materially, not as poorly detailed as the Educatorium etc., provocative re-visioning/de-familiarization of precedent/obsession w/ Mies and Corb...
oh, and The Public, I didn't forget FOA. I just left them out.
What sort of world am I living in where the Educatorium isn't considered well detailed?
At the Kunsthal, we had a museum employee come up to us to small talk, and he ended up telling us that "the building was shit. the roof leaks!" My monocle popped right out!
Kunsthal is indeed an incredible building, spatially, experientially and in its connectivity to its site/situation and response to program.
Not to mention Porto, Seattle, Educatorium, Vila Bourdeaux, Villa dal Ava, Dutch House, IIT, Souterain Hague, Prada LA all being arguably extraordinary built works in many ways (particularly in the postions they take with respect to the established discourse/discipline of architecture).
Additionally, OMA's had more influential unbuilt projects than most architects even hope or dream to achieve (La Villete, Paris Library, Jusssei, ZKM, Zeebruge, Seoule Airport, Yokohama, Melun-Sunart...)
Let alone the body of writing.
-- so, while not saying one has to love the work, anyone informed about the work must respect it's importance
plus, though perhaps less glamorous than some of those mentioned, also left out of post-OMA offices:
Mass Studies (Minsuk Cho)
Studio Gang (Jeane Gang et al)
Urban Lab (Sarah Dunn, Martin Felson)
Work AC (Dan Wood)
Studio n-1 (Christos Marcopolous)
de Geyter
Stephane Beel (I believe)
even Nuetelings
maybe Max One and NL Architects...
When did Martin Felsen from Urban lab work for Rem? I think it is Sarah Dunn worked for Rem as a project architect when OMA was doing IIT McCormick Student center.
i think the library is definitely a rehash of eisenman's (& kipnis & zago's) weak form. call it what you want, but its still unabashed formalism.
as much as i don't wanna like rem (for some reason), he's definitley had some great projects in the past. kunstal is brilliant, especially when compared to mies' national gallery.
OMA USA splitting from OMA Europe??
100! we love you rem! (well, i do. people who dont are usually frustrated career architects with not much fun in their professional life).
in many ways i think s,m,l,xl is the "toward a new Architecture" of our generation. it has been THE book to read for students for almost a decade now.
the split...i think ramus will be quite successful, i'm thinking of the other recent split, the foster/make one, and shuttleworth is doing really well, even being in the same city as foster...obviously he had much more experience, which probably compensaate for that.
to be discussing oma's merits is to be simply trying to go against the obvious, and trying to appear smart while doing so.
silverlake, how do they tackle social issues in a different way? the fact that all along Rem has embraced chaos, consumerism, pollution, commercialization and popularization of culture and knowledge, and all o the other contemporary social phenomena in all of his projects, never denying them, or judging them morally, but simply taking them as part of the context he was operanting within. i think that alone demonstrates much more awareness of the world that the work of someone like Herzon and De Meuron. Look at cctv. how it responds to being the center of tv broadcasting in a totalitarian state.
oma have always celebrated and embraced ambivalence. that offices like theirs have be authorless AND starry. that they must have strong ideals BUT be able to reconcile them for the icon of totalitarians. that they are, honestly, both programmatic pragmatists AND formalists.
their extended family is huge, hundreds of hard working students have breathed the vapours of blue DOW foam and resin at Vincent Van Rijks' studio in Rotterdam. and they have often been only too willing to make public celebration of their own contradictions publishing books that are notable for both ideas and political engagement AND unremittingly crappy graphical presentation. that they are both fundamentally socialist AND entranced by wealth and fashion.
it's very interesting to me that an office which processed so so so many workers who were contributing collaborative authors was simultaneously the biggest example of the need for celebrity in getting these sorts of commissions. teams at oma may be a similar size to those of other offices but their turnover rate is far greater meaning in part that more voices contribute to the process. not to mention that the longest hours in any other office would feel like a holiday to an oma trainee in Rotterdam.
their office begs questions about how it's finicially possible to operate in the capacity they do while maintaining such a tenuous relationship with human and business ethics. as an office, they embody the massochistic work ethic that all serious students hold which is that exhaustion is a near second to godliness. is oma possible with normal working conditions ?
the office was in serious financial peril a few years back due in no small part to the fact that they enter almost every competition out there and most of the time lose. this is expensive and caused a sell off to investors, a process which was more recently reversed during the era of JPR.
for all of it's obvious missteps (I've posted about these before), the SPL was a model for how to build good (considered and thoughtful) civic buildings in a nation that sees virtually none funded publically.
the lot in New York are more than able, but the two new captains have none of the polemical manifesto(s) resume of the writer-architect. they also hew more closely to pragmatism for its own sake, which maybe makes sense in the US, than OMA proper but they have a massive row to hoe to fill the shoes of the mothership.
thenewold, this sentence struck me - there may be more voices involved, but I'm guessing most of them have little or no commitment to the process, and will bear no responsibility for its result. I don't in general consider flightiness to be a good means to advance culture.
A confession: I know little about OMA, and have visited only one of their buidlings, the IIT one. I adore it. But it did not strike me as a building with a long life span, both materially and topically. It's a very, very fun building, but transient, like the students at any university.
When it comes to the Seattle Public Library, a building that will be with us for a century or more, for better of for worse: is it good or fair for a major public building to "celebrate the fucked-up world we live in?" as TheArchitect said, without professing to any moral position on it? Again, I don't think apathy is a good way to engage a world one wants to improve.
I'm very much enjoying this discussion and I'm learning a lot, so please feel free to knock my comments down.
i agree with Liberty Bell about their buildings life spans materially and topically. I was talking to a co-worker recently looking at an old publication on OMA, and all of the buildings have dated tremendously, and i think this might be due to the fact that they aren't really very beautiful buildings, in the first place even disregarding their conceptual etc merits. As architects it is important to remember who we are designing for (hating to state the obvious).
To clarify what i meant with with koolhaas celebrating the fucked-up world we operate in:
It's all about not trying to morally judge the built society surrounding us as a failure for architecture. But to interpret the good and bad sides of it and try to make a masterpiece that stands out. Its like:
Bad architect: "that strip mall is ugly, I wish they would have made it more beautiful (after my taste)"
Koolhaas: "that strip mall is ugly in an interesting way. Maybe I could use the same principle and materials for a contemporary masterpiece..."
For example:
The Seattle public library is basically a series of boring boxes with a strict layout on top of each other, like any generic seattle office building. Even the facade is just a repetitive skin.
But it has one major twist: By shifting the boxes back and forth, you create huge public spaces inside the building skin, exactly what should be the main idea for a public library. The combination of strict well-layouted floorplans, and grand adventurous spaces for the public. The sculptural shape of the building is an attractive bi-product of the concept, and makes it stand out among the generic seattle skycrapers.
point taken 'TheArchitect'. lets see what some of his works look like in 10-20yrs
"But it has one major twist: By shifting the boxes back and forth, you create huge public spaces inside the building skin, exactly what should be the main idea for a public library. The combination of strict well-layouted floorplans, and grand adventurous spaces for the public. The sculptural shape of the building is an attractive bi-product of the concept, and makes it stand out among the generic seattle skycrapers"
I like its bid idea and structure system. But in realisty, only 1 out of 1000 or even higher could have luxury to have this expensive structure.
Anyway, this is a successful building considering I pass by Chicago Harold washington library everyday.
Very funny jlx - I've been waiting to respond to TheArchitect's post re: Seattle Public Library, because I'm really not sure what I think about it (the buidling - the post, TArch, is very helpful). I certainly question how it is really any different from a lot of the "generic (glass-clad) Seattle skyscrapers". Of course it is a more adventurous/less efficient approach to form and structure. But I still haven't formed an opinion on it (haven't been there) and I think the question of whether it results in an "attractive" or let's say aesthetically-pleasing form is pretty debatable.
But as I've been pondering it I keep thinking to myself "Well at least thank god it's not that hideous, embarassing throwback-historical disaster of a building that the Harold Washington library in Chicago is!!!!!" I was in school when those competition results were announced and none of us could believe that was what they went with...I understand it has some nice interior spaces though.
I like the Light especially in some public space like coffee bar, library, cinema...
Harold Washington library is so dark and conservative inside I felt I get into a jail everytime I enter the building. This is one of the worst libraries in the world. I should say after I traveled and worked in HongKong, Japan, US and China. Comaparing to this, seattle library like a heaven to me. I even want to get inside and take a cup of coffee if I have chance to pass by it everyday.
So u are from IIT or UIC?
REX makes sense if you spell it Architex
he is just trying to get on REM's nerves with REX. haha, architectural bitch fight! just like at uni, only with more credibility at stake
one man's attractive by-product is another man's faceted boil...
the post-split spin here, re: museum plaza, is that the developers were after prince-ramus anyway when they hired oma. they were looking for exciting young designers and got to jpr after a visit to the seattle public library. i wonder....
...another OMA spin off is now called RAD (Aaron Tan's office, formerly OMA-Asia)...
REX
RAD
MVRDV
PLOT / whatever they're seperately called now...
You forgot FOA.
I heard that Zaha worked at OMA, as well. Can anybody verify?
[url=http://www.designboom.com/portrait/zaha_bio.html]joined OMA(office of metropolitan architecture) and became a partner (1977).
own practice 'zaha hadid office' (from 1980).[/url]
TheArchitect... I never said I didn't like OMA. I really admire and abhore their work at the same time, which is a HUGE accomplishment on their part. I think they're one of the few offices that have spread themselves out evenly over so many different areas of the architectural community.
Rem's early manifests are some of the most influencial readings for young architects and their new work is compelling and evokes serious discussions [well, usually] about the role of the architect and the importance of multiple-authors in this age.
Some offices I have always admired for their similiar roots:
Morphosis [god, I love them so much]
Zaha [early hand renderings are conveyed in her built work]
Diller Scofidio [i mean, slow house anyone?]
I feel all of these offices started out in the academic fields and stuck to their guns. Now they're all building really amazing works and continue to push the envelope.
Other offices like Shop and LTL have found ways to create architecture without braking the client's bank accounts.
I really do like most of OMA's work. The Educatorium is diagrammatically interesting but lacks critical detailing [which is to say the same for most of their early work] - the SPL is to this day one of the most dynamic forms created in my opinion and it's sister the PCH is also a very sexy form, rendered in a timeless material.
The CCTV will be the new age of skyscraper and I cannot wait to see the Olympics when it is completed.
Hope that adds to the conversation a bit more than my usual banter.
who took over JohnProlly's keyboard? ;)
I agree w/ most of that...the Kunsthal is probably my favorite built project of OMA's...well placed in context, dynamic spatially/materially, not as poorly detailed as the Educatorium etc., provocative re-visioning/de-familiarization of precedent/obsession w/ Mies and Corb...
oh, and The Public, I didn't forget FOA. I just left them out.
What sort of world am I living in where the Educatorium isn't considered well detailed?
At the Kunsthal, we had a museum employee come up to us to small talk, and he ended up telling us that "the building was shit. the roof leaks!" My monocle popped right out!
AP - yeah sometimes I wake up on the non-cynical / sarcastic side of the bed.
Kunsthal is indeed an incredible building, spatially, experientially and in its connectivity to its site/situation and response to program.
Not to mention Porto, Seattle, Educatorium, Vila Bourdeaux, Villa dal Ava, Dutch House, IIT, Souterain Hague, Prada LA all being arguably extraordinary built works in many ways (particularly in the postions they take with respect to the established discourse/discipline of architecture).
Additionally, OMA's had more influential unbuilt projects than most architects even hope or dream to achieve (La Villete, Paris Library, Jusssei, ZKM, Zeebruge, Seoule Airport, Yokohama, Melun-Sunart...)
Let alone the body of writing.
-- so, while not saying one has to love the work, anyone informed about the work must respect it's importance
plus, though perhaps less glamorous than some of those mentioned, also left out of post-OMA offices:
Mass Studies (Minsuk Cho)
Studio Gang (Jeane Gang et al)
Urban Lab (Sarah Dunn, Martin Felson)
Work AC (Dan Wood)
Studio n-1 (Christos Marcopolous)
de Geyter
Stephane Beel (I believe)
even Nuetelings
maybe Max One and NL Architects...
Hhhmmm....The Belly of an Architect......
The shifting of boxes.....
Sounds like Eisenmann.........
come on guys. i'm sure we all know that no idea is really "new", its just presented in a different way, with a different level of conviction.
bothands:
When did Martin Felsen from Urban lab work for Rem? I think it is Sarah Dunn worked for Rem as a project architect when OMA was doing IIT McCormick Student center.
yeah I know Sarah Dunn was there -- maybe Felsen wasn't
hmm, did someone say eisenman?
i think the library is definitely a rehash of eisenman's (& kipnis & zago's) weak form. call it what you want, but its still unabashed formalism.
as much as i don't wanna like rem (for some reason), he's definitley had some great projects in the past. kunstal is brilliant, especially when compared to mies' national gallery.
Fortunately for us Eisenman didn't build it.
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.