i think it was fun to design. i would like to be allowed to design something like that, he did it, and built it. he wins.

a very good review was given on the latest domus issue, the main criticism being that some of the programmatic innovations rely heavily on the users using them the right way, and on the library not being underfounded or understaffed. and that happens all the time with public buildings.

sometimes i think that for all his internationalism and open mindness, koolhaas designs with a dutch, well educated, lutheran user in mind. then the thought goes away and i just want to be him :)

i still like the approach, the idea of the exchange room is brilliant, and the large print carpets are hip and the bld does seem to integrate in its sorroundings a lot better than , say, cincinnati by hadid (although that might also be read as leaving the status quo untouched...)

i think that no matter waht, in 20 years time he will be remembered as the greatest architect of this period (gehry will fade away), since most of the time the practical incogruences and mistakes of great master's buildings are "forgotten" (luis khan's glare, ando's drainage off vertical surfaces, mies' blinds, rossi's blocks of flats...)

anyone been there?

people look a bit uncomfortable in these buildings, but then they often do. i was reminded of a lecture about "culture" buildings and modern public space, and the analysis of a photo taken of the newly opened queen elizabeth hall on london's south bank, in 1951. the lecturer's keen eye and perhaps some suspension of disbelief was required to recreate the scene in the reception - a few people milling around, sitting uncomfortably at the edge of the seat, avoiding eye contact, just like the tube in fact. now of course we're spilling coffee over everything and climbing onto the window sills, but it took a few decades to get to comfortable with the building.

i wonder how many people still think modern buildings are weird and uncouth, i wonder if some buildings just never get domesticated and i wonder if koolhas's public buildings intimidate more than they liberate. looks pretty cool though.

good point righteous!
i guess some building never get domesticated, they just fall out of use. europe is littered with these so called modernist masterpieces with boarded up windows.

yet, a place like the educatorium has become "friendly" in a relative short time, people sitting and mingling around the place for no particular reason.

i guess this could be one of the main ways to judge a public building. maybe the only good one.

Living in Seattle, after all the dust has settled from the opening, it seems the biggest concern/criticism that has developed is:

"Where are all the books?"

It seems a growing number of patrons are beginning to question the decision to build the library in the first place, especially if there are no books to fill it, and no staff to run it.

I just visited and was very impressed with the flow, I was happy just wandering about stopping to look at the architecture here, a book there, a computer here.......

kai -
how were the acoustics?
looking at the pictures i can imagine hearing a chair moving from a hundred yards away.

JAG

the comment about the books is a common one I'm sure, and totally ridiculous. The point of the new library was to modernize, improve communication abilities per new technology , and most importantly, give more room for a larger, growing collection. Of course they still don't have the collection at full potential.

I would agree however that the overall spaces are so monstrous I'm reminded of one of the biggest arguments agains the Eugene courthouse by Morphosis.....that those high ceilings are a little too wasteful of taxpayers' money.

As an architect/designer I love the grandeur of these great public spaces. I think that we need to get past our common conception of 'library'. It can be an active, social environment....clearly emphasized by the teenager level .

this building is not perfect, of course.....but is a real testament to contemporary architecture in that it questions our standards. Our building/design methods should always be tested and changed. This is the most exciting building I've seen in the U.S. Kudos to Koolhaas for using his firm's stature to take such a risk. Somebody needs to.

I'm especially looking forward to the Opera House in Dallas and the commotion that might cause.

That building is fugly

i tend to agree with dan - but i would be willing to ignore that if i became convinced that it worked great as a library.

why should we settle for ugly functional libraries?

does anyone know how he did at bringing the building in on budget?

fugly is in the eye of the beholder.
one mans fugly is another mans future ex-wife.
and so on.

there are buildings i think are gorgeous - but some of my colleagues think they look like ass.
of course they are wrong - but really who is to say?
but at the end of the day if it's fugly - and it doesn't work - well that's pretty hard to defend.

and if your ex-wife is fugly and doesn't work then shoot her.

Looks like OMA may have finally delivered a job with adequate detailing. Only time will tell.

i thought it would make a much better mega-bookstore than library. all those dusty sorry old books in that fancy koolhaas hut seemed just... wrong.

Not to defend ol' Rem, but this building is a literal articulation of a program. The skin is stretched around it. My question is materials aside, what is the efficiency rate of this scheme over something more orthogonal (and boring) built on the same site? In other words, if Rem didn't charge his usual (assumed) 25% for this job, would a more conventional package (say by NBBJ) cost any more?

There was some price comparisons in one of the articles published just when it opened... can't remember wich and if it was fair & balanced, but I think it stated that the Seattle library was cheaper than some high-profile thing built a couple of years back. The multi-functionality of different parts and the cheap materials were seen as the reasons of the relatively low cost. Still wondering about maintenance... Big glass houses have always quite a challenge in temperature control & such...

OMA has hardcore-urban sensibilities, their work is not meant to be easy-access beautiful but rather the opposite.

There are lots of things I dont like about OMA but the way they challage preconceptions of beauty is great. To me straightlaced beauty is dead, Gehry, Zaha, Foster... dead. Drama, special effect... dead.

Designs need a tension, uglycute is better than beauty. Quirky, characters are much more interesting, goes for people and buildings.

The current generation of OMA work is amazing in its iconic, quirky beauty.

Talking efficiency rates compared to an orthogonal version is only interesting because of the wierd claim on rationality that Rem and the media has made on behalf of the library.

Calatrava... fossilized

yes, Kalle. To bad the public doesn't realize that... (NYC terminal)

He's just another signature designer doing bullshit that cities think they need to become a 'destination.' Once every first-world city with a population over 500,000 has a curving white Calatrava bridge and a titanium clad Gehry sculpture they will realize they need something new.

Don't blame the public. Blame the architecture critics who've failed to enlighten them, or even pose the question.

i've yet to visit the seattle library...i hope to soon. i have recently visited te student center at IIT...on the approach my girlfriend, also an architect, said it was ugly. i had to agree, but i was still wary of the outcome of my final opinion. we walked inside and everything changed. that building is amazing...as are most of the OMA buildings i ave visited. most are also "ugly" on the outside. but DAMN if those buildings aren't the most incredibly spatially evocative spaces i have been in. I'm pretty certain, and maybe this is common knowledge, that OMA has risen above stylistic tendencies found in most bigname/signature architects and firms today. he still follows Mies's "Form follows function" to a tee and it still comes out a beautiful piece of work...we can go into definition of beauty if you would like. I guess we will have to wait and see how the building battles the test of time. but from what i have seen, thus far, it is incredible. i have heard seattle has creted a 10x10block area in their downtown wireless capable for free. in order to bring businesses to the downtown area. is this true? is the library in said area?

people can't even program their vcr's let alone understand the instruction manual for living that starchitecture foists on them. i thought this was a koolhaas thing, don't overestimate the public?