surprise, surprise -- Jan Kaplicky's Future Systems wins (he's a Prague native no?) -- with something that looks like its out of Futurama. Emergent took 4th, and Dagmar Richter tied for 6th...and what are those couple of pretty normative boxes doing in the midst of all this formal opulence?
I think it's pretty obvious that they were just searching for an architect, and not a building in this competition. To think that one of the major jury members was born in CR and works in London and the top two places were taken by Londonites, and the grand prize being a Czech native, seems rather fishy to me.
Kaplicky: "Zaha, how about we meet for lunch"
Hadid: "Oh Jan, that'd be wonderful, I hope you've got a feast waiting for me."
Kaplicky: "Quick intern, get that model off the table, Zaha isn't supposed to see our entry into a confidential competition ;) ;)"
Hadid: "Oh Jan, you so funny!!! Where's my lunch!?!"
Isn't this the first project Future Systems has won by competition in Prague...somewhat unfair.
Otherwise I think it is a dramatic building that sends architecture into another direction (think Ito + zaha = green alien). We always love squishy aliens - that's the rule
zaha would eat the model.
the project doesn't seem that far fetched from the rest of their work, and i see nothing wrong with a jury selecting a native son. it happens all the time, and it's also possible the rest of the field was entirely weak. who sat on the jury?
if the greenie thing did that 15 years ago before the blobbers arise, i would say it looks kind of interesting.... now, looks pretty ordinary and i'm curious to know how the jury make such decisions.
I don't have a problem with them picking a native son, what I have a problem with is them stating that it was supposed to be a blind competition but it obviously wasn't. If you're going to go architect shopping, at least be honest about it up front.
hmm... don't understand why people are bashing Jan's winning entry. Is this type of attitude a common response towards most competition conclusions? (thats kinda sad... please don't do that)
After looking at their Boards and report book, it's an incredibly convincing project, well thought-out and very well represented. A very dumb structure with an elaborate tensile "fabric" caladding system: meaning the project is totally realizable, and much of the effort and finances can be invested in developing a potentially amazing cladding system and into the interior furnishings. I think thats pretty smart. book circulation is also simple but extremely efficient. And the "eye" is totally money. A great urban move.
I mean, sure some of Jan's work can look silly, but have you ever seen a built project (architectural or product) by Future Systems that looked ridiculous and sucked? In my opinion their realized projects are incredibly sophisticated and elegant.
so please, no petty unqualified comments. If you do want to express dissent, then qualify it.
qualify it? the uncanny resemblance to such convincing precedents for a library as the Lysol commercial's cartoon germs and various Futurama characters aren't enough?
a good argument, sxinou, and a respectable point of view. it may be that this project will end up being a very good, very sophisticated building that serves prague wonderfully.
but it is hard to get around the immediate associations, you must agree? if the library functions incredibly well but looks like a toilet, what will the message be? if it looks like a germ or the hat that guy in fat albert wore, what is the message about prague and prague's library be that goes out to the world?
as smart as kaplicky/future systems might be, they're ignoring very basic typological associations that help people understand their surroundings. this is neither a decorated shed nor a duck because both of those, presumably, give some indication of what the architecture accommodates. learning the wrong lessons from gehry?
I am realy sorry ,but this issue come up again and again and for me it is a personal problem ; something I don't understand something I am frustrated I agrea that but --- what lesson from Gehry are you talking about ?
From my point of wiew architecture consist of the fact structure, not the thoughts before or the flashy sketches, for me Gehry's buildings are surface covering a false structure made only to hold the fancy panels in the air -- is that the lesson to learn ? Reson I ask is , that if you look under the clotches it act as if no thought went into it, Huge volumes are just left unused and the "structure" there, are in fact and in real, by fact and there to check just fiddled together by skilled workers and, underneath you find a tradisional house and even that is obvious, then there are newer a word about the main Volume that consist of a tradisional building structure , covered with fancy formed sheets carried by a structure that was Never never never thru any CAD program n and esp. not a CAD program made for building areoplanes, whatever meaning that would encounter .
For me that is a lesson to learn if one open his eyes.
Is the lesson to learn that this newer had any impac on architecture except in the academic circles --- that this did not develob anything but dull theories and not one single decent house to live in --- is it supposed to be a lesson about how focused academic architecture are in the surface of things, or how blind it is towerds the structure.
Again I agrea that this is more my "problem" but think about it --- what if these spetacular tincans realy are a dead-end but very few got the nerve to say so. What if it is true that the use of complicated CAD is simply a P.R. lie. and you can find articles years apart that contradict themself , where one article talk about things impossible from other articles --- if all this is distand flashlight blinding an intire academic world so it don't see the truth --- that this acturly work against any progress if it is silli methods that is used, that this make no progress but only fit for grandous words about something no one cared look real close to.
True there are lessons to learn , but they are not very pleasant or positive ones but true "this" is the natural develobment in case there are anything to "learn", this is how this dead-end evolve ,that is exactly what alian us from the "progress" some see in useless tincans with silli structure and a tradisional house inside just to prove, that it is all surface and don't even transverse the intire sturcture with somthing newthinking, oly outside it attemt, under the thin clotches it uncover a mess, and the core are just a tradisional building system, realy what lesson are to be learned and, isn't it on time soon to learn it ?
sxinou I like you statement. actually I think the design itself looks kind of naive but anyway, the build library will be a great peace of architecture. maybe the blob-ism era looks to be over - but why? I think because no one was able to build this kind of staff - not able to actually realize this smooth double curved surfaces. future systems are avant-garde they didnt build a lot of their staff, but now they are having the breaktrue. jan kaplicky always pushed boundaries, if you are looking at the most innovating designs of norman foster -the early work- jan was always deaply involved, in my opinion he was the creative mind - the guy with the vision - working besides great ingineers like peter rice or richard horden, He had this Archigram thinking, maybe he was to radical, he left foster to start his own business, worked among others for nasa and for sustainable environment research ...
blobs like "the friendly alien" in graz (austria) by peter cook have technicaly a pretty old school facade (concrete covered with bended glass elements).the company of a good friend of mine is the facade-manufactor for the maseratti building by future system.Jan K is not just tying to get a nice looking facade from them, he is definitely pushing boundaries in developing a new and efficient way in mass production of double-curved facades.
if this building is fitting the context, thats an other question. cities are trying to get the bilbao-effect, this building has definitely potential for it.
Steven Ward>
I have to admit, when I first saw Jan's model I was completely blown away; definitely not in the good way. However, after surveying their boards a couple times, my opinion totally flipped, and the project suddenly became clear and the cyclops-casper-lysol germ-thingy became quite seductive.
I totally agree with you on this notion of iconic metaphor that this proposal brings forth to the public. The weight of the image is incredibly powerful, and I'm sure much controversy will take place, if it hasn't already. My personal view though, is very optimistic, and i really hope this project will turn out nicely.
vindpust >
This is just my opinion, but I think your argument is very naive, though I may be misreading your post. That sort of surfacing technique is quite Gehry specific. Many other architects out in the world are taking those construction techniques to another level. If you look at some of the works by Foster, UN Studio, RUR's (bridge in China), Zaha, and the list goes on and on, it is quite obvious that lessons learned from Gehry is incredibly valuable in contemporary architecture, and by no means a "dead-end." Just take a look at whats going on in China,
Contemax>
It's interesting that you pointed out the Maserati project, about how Jan's trying to mass-produce facades of double curvature. That would be really amazing! I mean, there are projects built using double curvature, but I think they were extremely costly. This is also something that, I think, Greg Lynn has been battling with for quite some time now.
i'm sure they have fantastic construction technic for the facade... what about the software aspect? i heard a few saying it start making sense when they read into the panel, however, i dun have such access, care to explain why it start making sense as a library?
because it absorb the "urban flow" as many of the contemporary architect being obsessed with?? just wondering...
Prague Library Competition
So . . . has anyone heard anything about the Prague Library Stage 1 Winners? . . Results due date is today . . .
http://www.nkp.cz/competition_library/ENinfo.htm
. . . ?
i'm still trying to get my goddam refund
What you want to know? This is only 1 round of competition.Winners must preserve their anonymity up to the announcement of the results of Stage II.
Results were supposed to be announced yesterday. has anyone heard anything?
surprise, surprise -- Jan Kaplicky's Future Systems wins (he's a Prague native no?) -- with something that looks like its out of Futurama. Emergent took 4th, and Dagmar Richter tied for 6th...and what are those couple of pretty normative boxes doing in the midst of all this formal opulence?
any links to the works??
yeah, above in the main post...see jury report pdf, compare numbers to pics shown...
this reminds me of the cartoon back in the 70's...
http://www.nkp.cz/competition_library/images/photo/s2hodnoceni/297large.jpg
and zaha was staring at that greenie in the photo, she looks like she wanna eat that thing.
oh man.....
How very tiring.
SnotGobbet-ism is born...
which one is the building?
I think it's pretty obvious that they were just searching for an architect, and not a building in this competition. To think that one of the major jury members was born in CR and works in London and the top two places were taken by Londonites, and the grand prize being a Czech native, seems rather fishy to me.
Kaplicky: "Zaha, how about we meet for lunch"
Hadid: "Oh Jan, that'd be wonderful, I hope you've got a feast waiting for me."
Kaplicky: "Quick intern, get that model off the table, Zaha isn't supposed to see our entry into a confidential competition ;) ;)"
Hadid: "Oh Jan, you so funny!!! Where's my lunch!?!"
sloring - bitter?
Isn't this the first project Future Systems has won by competition in Prague...somewhat unfair.
Otherwise I think it is a dramatic building that sends architecture into another direction (think Ito + zaha = green alien). We always love squishy aliens - that's the rule
zaha would eat the model.
the project doesn't seem that far fetched from the rest of their work, and i see nothing wrong with a jury selecting a native son. it happens all the time, and it's also possible the rest of the field was entirely weak. who sat on the jury?
if the greenie thing did that 15 years ago before the blobbers arise, i would say it looks kind of interesting.... now, looks pretty ordinary and i'm curious to know how the jury make such decisions.
disclaimer: i didn't participate the competition.
??
the slime building ...
here some other pics
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=11987301
fair enough... i hope you all get to build in your respective countries when you are in your 70's.
disclaimer: i didn't participate the competition.
I don't have a problem with them picking a native son, what I have a problem with is them stating that it was supposed to be a blind competition but it obviously wasn't. If you're going to go architect shopping, at least be honest about it up front.
Will it stand the test of time......this "simpsonite-squish-alien-jellyfish-like" something..? Who Knows.
anyone know where I can see the rest of the panels for the competition?!in particular Emergent's entry?!
hmm... don't understand why people are bashing Jan's winning entry. Is this type of attitude a common response towards most competition conclusions? (thats kinda sad... please don't do that)
After looking at their Boards and report book, it's an incredibly convincing project, well thought-out and very well represented. A very dumb structure with an elaborate tensile "fabric" caladding system: meaning the project is totally realizable, and much of the effort and finances can be invested in developing a potentially amazing cladding system and into the interior furnishings. I think thats pretty smart. book circulation is also simple but extremely efficient. And the "eye" is totally money. A great urban move.
I mean, sure some of Jan's work can look silly, but have you ever seen a built project (architectural or product) by Future Systems that looked ridiculous and sucked? In my opinion their realized projects are incredibly sophisticated and elegant.
so please, no petty unqualified comments. If you do want to express dissent, then qualify it.
qualify it? the uncanny resemblance to such convincing precedents for a library as the Lysol commercial's cartoon germs and various Futurama characters aren't enough?
RossM - there's more on Europaconcorsi...
a good argument, sxinou, and a respectable point of view. it may be that this project will end up being a very good, very sophisticated building that serves prague wonderfully.
but it is hard to get around the immediate associations, you must agree? if the library functions incredibly well but looks like a toilet, what will the message be? if it looks like a germ or the hat that guy in fat albert wore, what is the message about prague and prague's library be that goes out to the world?
as smart as kaplicky/future systems might be, they're ignoring very basic typological associations that help people understand their surroundings. this is neither a decorated shed nor a duck because both of those, presumably, give some indication of what the architecture accommodates. learning the wrong lessons from gehry?
I am realy sorry ,but this issue come up again and again and for me it is a personal problem ; something I don't understand something I am frustrated I agrea that but --- what lesson from Gehry are you talking about ?
From my point of wiew architecture consist of the fact structure, not the thoughts before or the flashy sketches, for me Gehry's buildings are surface covering a false structure made only to hold the fancy panels in the air -- is that the lesson to learn ? Reson I ask is , that if you look under the clotches it act as if no thought went into it, Huge volumes are just left unused and the "structure" there, are in fact and in real, by fact and there to check just fiddled together by skilled workers and, underneath you find a tradisional house and even that is obvious, then there are newer a word about the main Volume that consist of a tradisional building structure , covered with fancy formed sheets carried by a structure that was Never never never thru any CAD program n and esp. not a CAD program made for building areoplanes, whatever meaning that would encounter .
For me that is a lesson to learn if one open his eyes.
Is the lesson to learn that this newer had any impac on architecture except in the academic circles --- that this did not develob anything but dull theories and not one single decent house to live in --- is it supposed to be a lesson about how focused academic architecture are in the surface of things, or how blind it is towerds the structure.
Again I agrea that this is more my "problem" but think about it --- what if these spetacular tincans realy are a dead-end but very few got the nerve to say so. What if it is true that the use of complicated CAD is simply a P.R. lie. and you can find articles years apart that contradict themself , where one article talk about things impossible from other articles --- if all this is distand flashlight blinding an intire academic world so it don't see the truth --- that this acturly work against any progress if it is silli methods that is used, that this make no progress but only fit for grandous words about something no one cared look real close to.
True there are lessons to learn , but they are not very pleasant or positive ones but true "this" is the natural develobment in case there are anything to "learn", this is how this dead-end evolve ,that is exactly what alian us from the "progress" some see in useless tincans with silli structure and a tradisional house inside just to prove, that it is all surface and don't even transverse the intire sturcture with somthing newthinking, oly outside it attemt, under the thin clotches it uncover a mess, and the core are just a tradisional building system, realy what lesson are to be learned and, isn't it on time soon to learn it ?
------- Shuld I add, that I do not see this as a conservative backstriving or arts hating comment , acturly quite opposite , thinkabout it.
sxinou I like you statement. actually I think the design itself looks kind of naive but anyway, the build library will be a great peace of architecture. maybe the blob-ism era looks to be over - but why? I think because no one was able to build this kind of staff - not able to actually realize this smooth double curved surfaces. future systems are avant-garde they didnt build a lot of their staff, but now they are having the breaktrue. jan kaplicky always pushed boundaries, if you are looking at the most innovating designs of norman foster -the early work- jan was always deaply involved, in my opinion he was the creative mind - the guy with the vision - working besides great ingineers like peter rice or richard horden, He had this Archigram thinking, maybe he was to radical, he left foster to start his own business, worked among others for nasa and for sustainable environment research ...
blobs like "the friendly alien" in graz (austria) by peter cook have technicaly a pretty old school facade (concrete covered with bended glass elements).the company of a good friend of mine is the facade-manufactor for the maseratti building by future system.Jan K is not just tying to get a nice looking facade from them, he is definitely pushing boundaries in developing a new and efficient way in mass production of double-curved facades.
if this building is fitting the context, thats an other question. cities are trying to get the bilbao-effect, this building has definitely potential for it.
Steven Ward>
I have to admit, when I first saw Jan's model I was completely blown away; definitely not in the good way. However, after surveying their boards a couple times, my opinion totally flipped, and the project suddenly became clear and the cyclops-casper-lysol germ-thingy became quite seductive.
I totally agree with you on this notion of iconic metaphor that this proposal brings forth to the public. The weight of the image is incredibly powerful, and I'm sure much controversy will take place, if it hasn't already. My personal view though, is very optimistic, and i really hope this project will turn out nicely.
vindpust >
This is just my opinion, but I think your argument is very naive, though I may be misreading your post. That sort of surfacing technique is quite Gehry specific. Many other architects out in the world are taking those construction techniques to another level. If you look at some of the works by Foster, UN Studio, RUR's (bridge in China), Zaha, and the list goes on and on, it is quite obvious that lessons learned from Gehry is incredibly valuable in contemporary architecture, and by no means a "dead-end." Just take a look at whats going on in China,
Contemax>
It's interesting that you pointed out the Maserati project, about how Jan's trying to mass-produce facades of double curvature. That would be really amazing! I mean, there are projects built using double curvature, but I think they were extremely costly. This is also something that, I think, Greg Lynn has been battling with for quite some time now.
all of the verbose theory above still doesn't change the fact that it's f'ing ugly
:shrug:
i'm sure they have fantastic construction technic for the facade... what about the software aspect? i heard a few saying it start making sense when they read into the panel, however, i dun have such access, care to explain why it start making sense as a library?
because it absorb the "urban flow" as many of the contemporary architect being obsessed with?? just wondering...
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.