check out flickr profiles next week and i am sure there will be more than enough images of the installation.

that rocks, I can't wait to see it in person.

I saw the four losing entries at MoMA on Friday and I'm so happy this one won. It's a structurally interesting project that seems to actually give a damn about construction (unlike last years) and surprisingly actually provides substantial shade (again unlike last years).

Two of the losing proposals essentially duplicated the failures of last year's project. More of the same idiosyncratic, decorative, continuity-'form' making blah blah hoo hah that goes to great lengths to end up not making space and not provide shade.

I wonder if they architects acutally did their job and specified a fabric for this years which doesn't yellow after less than a week. Appropriate materials, what an idea (!)

Which of the two losing proposals are you referring to? And why do you sound so bitter?

this one looks 'appropriate', but damn boring. Looks like an average park to me, but at least it's functional (unlike last years).

So the fact that it is functional gives it merit in your eyes....I guess you could look at it that way….however the McDonalds by my house is functional, yet I it has never been published, such a shame.

I'm trying to find picts of the other proposals on the web with no luck. Anyone have links ?

MayaMonkey... youre using false logic..

i think they are arguing that as its an architecture pavillion and not just whimsy or sculpture it should have function..

theyre saying that part of a project being successful and good is it being functional.. that doesnt equate to them also saying that everything that is functional is good architecture.. grow up. use better logic.. youre an adult now.

nice call hotsies, nice name too.


it looks quite average. i think it would get more interesting if more extreme programs could be inserted. shading devices can only be so interesting when done in the same site over and over.

i posted some pics on flickr. . . tagged under "ps1 moma obra beatfuse"

enjoy!

...everyone is being too kind.
it looks like a bad 1st year project....from the 80's.

ouch.

... well, the official party isn't until the 1st - i took these when they were tweaking it out.

i have to agree that it looks very dated. something yamasaki would have done in the 70's...

its still a helluva lot better than last year's.

I think the pavilion is chosen for a simple reason. The lack of program gives designers room for experimentation. Since you are so good at reading in to what people are saying you should have taken a moment to deploy those powers over my post.

Let me take a moment to elaborate on my previous statement to save you the effort. PS1 cultivates an environment for the deployment of new ideas. The generic program and the fact that the structure is temporary is a testament to that. I would rather someone produce a piece that is a "whimsy and sculpture" in an attempt to test new materials, and explorer new form, than produce something that in the end does not result in a contribution to our field.

The nature of PS1 is what does not allow for a synthesis of this type of radical experimentation with the craftsmanship and materials that would be required to create a permanent structure. It seems that a great designer would recognize this and utilize materials that would allow them to capitalize on this situation.
In short, what you all seem to overlook about last years project is the simple fact that this piece was constructed under the ridiculous time and budget restraints of this competition. One could argue that participants should be able to work around the constraints to develop a project that achieves such a synthesis, but the fact is, design is a give and take....within the restraints you cannot have it all.

Good point maya monkey...now, if we could stop using the word "deployment" it would be great indeed!!
**the materials used in SUR are not new, knor revolutionary by any means, just hop on your car and check out all those nice cornices and fake columns around your local strip mall...yes they are made of foam and use the same type of final coating...just not in "ferrari red" as they were found in sur ; )
PS: Before I start getting bashed by my comment, I was part of this project and Hernan is a good friend of mine as is Drura Parrish, the man behind its fabrication. ;)

'what you all seem to overlook about last years project is the simple fact that this piece was constructed under the ridiculous time and budget restraints'

not overlooked. lots of projects have ridiculous time and budget restraints; its part of architecture. whats worse is qualifying a bad piece of architecture with this.

i dont think 70k is ridiculous by any means. i think last years construction was more agressive, therefore got more reaction. nobody approached the project in more than formal ways. yet...

umm...check out the gutter...

gutter.curbed.com

They have some photos...and apparently some stories concerning problems with the design....

Silverlake, you really ought to be more specific if you want people to take your criticism seriously. "Bad piece of architecture" doesn't mean anything coming from an anonymous poster on a venue like archinect...if your name were attached to an established body of respected criticism then you could get away with such vague, unsupported comments but here it just amounts to a few more wasted inches in a relatively weak thread of comments.

We know your type. You give yourself away with the throwaway line "lots of projects have ridiculous time and budget restraints; it's part of architecture." Your smug posture is almost as bad as the pleats in your thick cotton pants. Time to tighten up your argument, friend, or we won't even read your next one. Ridiculous time and budget constraints are not nearly as ubiquitous as you say. Sure, it happens, but not all the time. Further and more importantly, PS1 is in an entirely other class of constraint and ridiculous does not even begin to describe the limitations imposed on the project. It is literally impossible to do this project within the budgetary constraints drawn around it by MoMA and PS1. Every competitor winds up funding it in part through outside means and labor is always free. This is a highly unusual and difficult circumstance, especially for very young, relatively inexperienced offices. So let's be a bit more nuanced with our arguments and forgiving with our criticism, shall we Silverlake?

Speaking of nuanced arguments, where did your friend "thenewold" go with his unsubstantiated criticism of the unnamed two losing entries from this year's final five?

Having tacitly thrown my support behind Hernan's entry, let's also give some credit to Obra's work this year. While it does bear superficial resemblance to something you might have seen three or four decades ago there is also a freshness that should not be overlooked. Have a look at the roof plan, for example. A subtle, differentiated pressurization moves through the cellular organization in a way that we wouldn't have seen in the soap-bubble shell structures of the past. Those projects were usually unconstrained at their edges (not structurally, but organizationally) which led to a "naturally balanced" disposition across the field. Not so with Obra's project. Part of this, of course, has to do with the hard boundaries of the PS1 courtyard but I suspect the designers used this condition knowingly to produce a more contemporary vision of the grid-shell field.

So there you go, Dockers. You see, it doesn't have to be a matter of form vs. function, Hernan vs. Obra. That's so boring. A bit more effort next time, shall we? Reading this stuff is such a slog otherwise.

rock. it's about time there were some more columbia-minded folks around here. it's so easy to out-maneuver most of the slugs on this website.

All right, Joed, I appreciate the comment but remember, it's only fun to throw stones when you can back it up. So let's hear it: just how flaccid are the comments of Thenewold and Silverlake?

ha. i knew you would say that. i don't feel like backing it up, though; this thread doesn't particularly interest me, other than to see that you and mayamonkey are holdin' it down. i used to put a lot of effort into posts, but quickly realized that this site isn't such a great place for intellectual conversation. maybe there's been a change in the wind, though...

troglodite, this thread is about this years entry, so i'm not going to go into detailed criticism about last years here. Hernan's entry was discussed to death already. So when I say 'bad piece of architecture', i'm summing up the sentiments of many anonymous posters and respected critics alike. Don't take it personally.

btw, I really don't understand the whole dockers thing.

from Philip Nobel at The Architect's Newpaper...

"Tell that, my friend, to the poor sodden souls at Obra Architects, the young New York comers picked for this year’s Young Architects Program installation in the forecourt at P.S.1. After a frenzied construction campaign frustrated by our unfortunate June deluges, the series of plywood-ribbed and polyethylene-scaled “shells” opened and, you all may have heard as well, immediately started to melt. “It’s not melting!” Jennifer Lee, cofounder of the firm with Pablo Castro, protested when she was reached at the site during an emergency visit a few days after the opening. “It was in its completed vision for a few days and then some aspects of it had to be re-engineered.” As any visitor to Queens could see for themselves, the re-engineering included a hastily improvised system of cables, wooden posts, and stray pieces of plywood propping up the vision that the curators had likened, pre-construction, to “a giant albino python.” Lee said all would be made right—“We're looking forward to people coming back to see it in its new life”—and then she too waxed philosophical: “It was about trying to push the limits. There are ten shells altogether and in certain of them we possibly, conceivably, pushed the limits too far.”