I can understand why they want to demolish this 1972 pile of washing machines. Take a look at some of the attractive new architectures in Dubai for example.
i dont thinks its sarcastic, have a look at the forums at skyscrapercity.com and you will find a peculiar fetishism for the tallest, flashiest crap being built.
and this article in Architectural Record April 30, 2007 :
"Kisho Kurokawa can’t seem to catch a break these days. Just days after the Japanese architect lost his bid for the governorship of Tokyo, the Nakagin Capsule Tower, his best known building and one of the few built examples of the Metabolist movement, was given a date with the wrecking ball."
There is only one thing we can do on this website. To find funds and organize a "Save Nakagin" architectural design competition. Is there anyone there who have some experience on managing this sort of work?
a competition would be great, la boule! but how would you know where to start with this one? first of all, unlike the breuer library, this is driven by a developer. if it were an american developer i know that an appeal to their architectural history sympathies would get you nowhere; i don't even know what the dynamic would be in a japanese context but i can't imagine they would be MORE sympathetic.
best bet would be to somehow appeal to the potential marketing value in the uniqueness of this wacky-cool landmark structure. habitat's prices have gone through the roof, and it's hip to live there. how to foster that kind of desire for a capsule?
i hope that there is enough uproar that this building can be saved.
BUT, if not, i'll be happy to bid on a capsule on ebay... one of those would be much more neat-o than the prefab guesthouse i was thinking about getting.
that's exactly what i want to do... i'd give anything to buy a capsule...
plus the competition could replace old units with new...
and heck why don't they give a few units to AFH or something...
well anyway, if any of the chicago archinecters are loaded and want to buy a capsule and ship it over here... i'll pay top dollar for a tour, or a nights stay perhaps...
The article specifically singles out earthquake performance, asbestos and too little density as reasons.
An architectural comp on international scale could be good idea - 2 of the 3 reasons could be architectural solutions. The earthquake performance - thats a little heavy
"For his part, Kurokawa has pleaded to let the Capsule Tower express one of its original design qualities: flexibility. He suggested “unplugging” each box and replacing it with an updated unit, letting the base towers —which he calls “timeless”—remain untouched. Japan’s four major architectural organizations, including the Japan Institute of Architects, support this scheme. But the building’s management remained unconvinced and raised concerns regarding the towers’ ability to withstand earthquakes, as well as its inefficient use of valuable land. The new building will increase floor area by 60 percent."
here is the key: its inefficient use of valuable land. The new building will increase floor area by 60 percent.
The value of the additional area in downtwon tokyo is surely driving the buiding management's efforts...a lot of money to be made...money, money, money...the value of good (great) architecture just doesn't seem to be able to compete...i am sad now...
it would be interesting to know if the base was designed to stand more capsules... perhaps a proposal could be made along kurokawa's lines bur adding more capsules [maybe they're also lighter]. i mean, i don't think height would be a problem [especially if the design was based on flexibility].
anyone in japan could give us more insight? jump? anyone?
funny enough i just went to see the building this afternoon.
it is hard to see in the photo but the building is quite decayed/decrepit, which is maybe not a surpise. It is amazingly like a scene from bladerunner, a picture perfect snapshot of what the future used to look like, but rundown and distopian...
As far as updating it...well there are height limits in Japan, based on shadow laws, solar access, footprint size and FAR. I don't know what the zoning says for this site exactly but am fairly sure it can't be improved in terms of efficiency that would allow it to compete with a 60% increase in floor area. Not merely by adding a few floors to the existing structure anyway...
and i am personally a bit unsure about the structure...it is perhaps OK, maybe not...earthquake laws were made much stricter since the kobe earthquake and i suspect this building is no longer up to stuff anymore...and that whole asbestos thing is a major issue from my perspective...
so what to do? Me, I don't entirely mind that it is slated to go. Cities are organic, and metabolism has left its mark in ways more meaningful than mere buildings...considering that metabolism was supposed to be about change i don't know what the complaint can be when it actually takes place in unexpected ways...from a philosophical standpoint it rings hollow to me...
however i am surprised that it hasn't been bought up by designer-people like habitat in montreal and similar classics in europe have been...japanese culture against old things asserting itself maybe...i dunno...
jump Me, I don't entirely mind that it is slated to go. Cities are organic, and metabolism has left its mark in ways more meaningful than mere buildings...considering that metabolism was supposed to be about change i don't know what the complaint can be when it actually takes place in unexpected ways...from a philosophical standpoint it rings hollow to me...
I agree. Architecture is about evolution. I didn't know or hear about this building until it was being demolished (granted I am a first year arch. student). But, through it's demolition it has become an architectural martyr. A memory of an architectural experience that pushed the envelope but maybe didn't put it far enough. Meaning architecture of the past and present can't predict architecture of the future, only influence it.
I'm more interested in what would be replacing this. Then I'll decide if it should go or not.
Mark, the Nagakin Capsule Tower is a fairly significant building, even if you'd never heard of it. It's going a little bit far to say that its only famous because its being knocked down.
I don't think there's any chance of preventing its demolition. The land value is just too great. Which is a shame I guess, but like jump says, demolition is part of metabolic change!
Out of interest, does Japan even have rules for protecting modern buildings?
there is a group that does preservation, but not very succesfully.
the imperial hotel by FLW was moved to a disney-type theme park with other meiji era buildings, and there are a few others that have become icons...but preservation for its own sake is i think a slightly alien idea in the japanese psyche...much has been written of the psychology of impermanence in Japan that emerged from hundreds of years of perpetual war, fire, typhoons and earthquake destruction (NOTHING lasts forever here) and all that, but i am not so sure that is the reason. most of all japanese culture is based on consumption, and nakagin has been consumed...
anyway...no, i don't believe there are any rules to speak of re preservation of ANY buildings. certianly I have never come across a building tht was listed grade I or Grade II etc. I think the market is the main thing that keeps things existing...from a certain perspective i suppose that is fine...mixed feelings for me on that end...but in general there is just not much worth preserving here to begin with...
agfa8x, I'm realize I'm coming at this topic with ignorance but I feel like my point does make sense (at least to me).
Architecture (especially modern) is about evolution and how we can take what we learned from one project and put that into the next. The process. Although this building is conceptual and aestheically appealing it apparently did not [or does not now at least] address a real issue architects have to deal with, money and affective use of space. What can we do now to think about ways to build something with the same conceptual/aesthetic success that also addresses these issues? In Frank Gehry's sketchs they talk about how when someone criticizes Frank is fine with starting over. Why? Because he is coming from a higher plane of knowledge.
I'm not trying to say that Nagakin is insignificant but rather that its importance is based off of an idea. This idea won't die unless we let it. To me, architecture doesn't have to be materialized to change the way we think or perseve the world around us. Nagakin presented us with an idea, we loved it, we experienced it, and now it's time take what we've learned and move on. It was beautiful glimpse of a possible future.
...and thanks for explaining that, jump. The different mindset is what makes Tokyo, Tokyo, I guess. But I never like seeing a good building get knocked down.
hm, yeah. it is a pity...the technology of metabolism has been preserved here with things like plug-in unit baths...
...and typical japanese prefab housing with waterworks in one unit being plugged into a bedroom unit, etc etc, except without the seams and the expression of "units" in the aesthetic...
but the theory of the approach has somehow been lost in the ether...
which is maybe for the better ( ? )... I absolutely believe Christopher Alexander had it right when he pointed out that a city is not a tree (part I) (part II here ), and metabolism was fundamentally flawed for its dogmatic and simplisitc insistence that it should be (like a tree, that is)...
i don't otherwise like much from alexander but this was very insightful when he wrote it in the 60's, and is still relevant today..
anyway, since i read that article i haven't really seen much of value in metabolism as a theoretical approach, and since seeing the buildings it spawned i have even less faith that it works as a system at all. Now it is going down I sort of see it as a building and an idea that was voted on by the people and found wanting. This is not merely about money. It is also about comfort and standard of living, which as far as i can tell must by necessity be lower than it should be simply for the architecture to work as an idea...that makes not so much sense to me.
it is an icon though, and one of the few remaining interesting buildings by kurokawa, in a purely visual sense, and for that i am slightly sorry to see it go...
Mark Anthony, I expect your opinion will likely change in a few years as well. I dont think modernism is quite as you describe it, though it is an interesting and positive take. That frank gehry is ok with change is possibly true, however i seriously doubt that he is coming from a higher plane of knowledge. If anything he is a realist and knows when to push and when to drop issues...but mostly he is just doing his thing and tries not to let theory or opinions get too much in his way...
When I visited I remember they had one of the capsules down on the street for visitors to walk in. Talk about claustrophobia....
That is a shame that they will tear it down. At least they could un-plug and sell off the capsules like someone suggested before wiping the slate clean.
It's especially disappointing when you know there will be a faceless boring box to replace it.
Is there anyone knowing some people in the architectural field in Japan?
Every fall, there is a student's competition organized by both JA and A+U, the next one could be about minimal spaces (a new capsule for Kurokawa's Capsule's Tower), supervised by Kurokawa himself.
If there is anyone motivated to help me contact Kurokawa and the head's office of JA, don't hesitate to contact me.
________________________________________________________________
"Impossible is not french." Napoléon
If we want to be convicing, I need with me:
- 1 person able to design (for free) a website
- 1 person specializing in marketing
- a few people knowing the japanese architectural world (if possible with contact there)
but i'd definately be interested in helping to save the tower... however, i am not an ubelievably great web designer, have no knowledge of marketing, and am nowhere near japan...
i guess i could work on a website...
(lletdownl is going to be pissed cause i'm supposed to be working on ours)
to save it would require turning it to a museum perhaps rather than maintain its original function. economically it simply doesn't pay to have that much wasted floor space, especially when nothing is gained spatially, experientially or otherwise by wasting said space. worse, from my perspective, it is all wasted in the name of an idea, not for people...
as an icon it is worth preserving....but how to do that? this is not a nation with a preservation movement to speak of...
maybe someone will make a 20th c. park to put icons of the last century that are otherwise going to be demolished...like the meiji-period park that now holds the lobby of FLW's imperial hotel...
about kurokawa being a politician, he was humiliated at the polls when he opened his mouth and said some rather offensive and infuriatingly inane things that served to prove he is a smart man who should never be put in the charge of other people's lives...or so the analysis goes. basically people decided he is a spoiled rich kid with no understanding of reality and hence not to be trusted...however he is fascinatingly eccentric and popular for his odd view of the world on the talk-show circuit...as a politician though, he was seriously and totally lambasted. it was very sad to watch...
wouldn't the fact that it is a 20th century icon add some economic $$$ to it? i suppose it depends on what the developer has in mind for the site. if it's just max out the total buildable area for spec office, then, yes, they would need to tear it down, but it's seems as though there would be some way to capitalize on its existing status as a "great work of architecture." can anyone say boutique hotel?
it is a condo building, owned by residents (and not accessible to the public) right now. i don't know how it has been bought up, or who owns the place, but it seems someone wants to take it down to make more money, and perhaps gain some more living space.
i like the idea that any building should not be treated as precious as long as something better takes the place of the old...i doubt that will happen in this case, but still...it isn't THAT good. sorry, kisho.
my feeling is that japanese people are not romantic about the past the way westerner's are. there will be some who would pay premium to live in cramped space with slightly fewer modern amenities (cuz the apparently flexible system is not actually so flexible)...but for the most part japanese have had their fill of cramped living spaces for high costs and want NEW cool buildings rather than old (and lets face it quite UGLY) ones...
maybe it could work as hotel for archi-tourists, but what would rent need to be to make it actually worth it? the land prices are going up round that area now, so the payoff would have to be quite high to compare with tearing down and rebuilding more efficiently...
my partner and i were looking recently at doing a remodel and addition to beautiful traditional japanese home in high class part of city...but payback if built to max means only a yield of 2.4 percent. No bank would underwrite that kind of deal. Anything less than 4 percent is not worth it, really, and preferably more. In this case it meant demolishing the old wooden house...which we didn't want to do. so we dropped it. Owners of nakagin felt they could not do same, i suppose...i can understand that. unfortunately the capitlaist way is not always the best way to make a city...
to me the will of the hyper-free market seems to be a very recent phenomenon. it really goes unquestioned even amongst the more enlightened, but has only been around since reagan and thatcher. in terms of urbanism (and i mean real urbanism, the way cities change over time, not suburbs), it's been deadly on many levels. it casts an absolutely non-critical eye on the city in the name of maxing out FAR. i do believe these economic trends are ultimately cyclical, or at least evolving, and that this period of economic growth will not be looked on very positively by future generations for the amount lost on short term, largely selfish gains.
One subtle thing I'd like to mention is that I don't think it's really that there isn't an attatchment to buildings from the past per se. I think most people don't really understand how crappy a lot of housing is in Japan. The country was thoroughly destroyed after WWII. They had to build a lot of buildings fast. The whole country become a laboratory for Le Corbusier style modernism with a twinge of Metabolism.
Most of the buildings are of low quality built quickly to house a burgeoning economy's populace. If the housing was aesthetically pleasing, I don't think people would necessarily see new housing as better.
I do think that nakagin is important historically, but I don't know if preserving it in a high growth area like Shiodome is very practical.
I'm not a particualr fan of kurokawa (I wrote several papers on him in college) A lot of what he does seems zeitgeisty which makes it inevitably anachronositc. There's plenty of the 'machine for living' aesthetic in this country, I don't think there are very many people who can tell the difference between good and bad architecture from that time.
They did preserve that school that Frank Lloyd Wright made, so there is some preservation movement here. But really, most of what is made here, would you want to preserve a Maekawa building?
what is the value of the kurokawa capsule building now? are we more interested in its historic value than actually living in it? maybe its a good opportunity to test out the metabolist organic principles. how well do the modules adapt? can they be reconfigured in a new design?
they already have a module on the ground floor sitting outside the front door... you can peep inside the capsule through the window...
kunio maekawa did some very good buildings. i would preserve a few. they are in fact probably easier to adapt than the nakagin cuz they are based on universal space rather than custom eccentric fitout ala metabolism...
corbusier in japan? i dunno. capitalism in japan? oh yeah, big time. they aren't the same thing, though they are often conflated acidentally. not everything that looks like a box is descended from corb.
jafidler, i totally agree, and i cringe slightly to realise how much the market is pulling cultural strings...thatcher and reagan certainly epitomised that idea, though they did not come up with it...the greater good does get lost in this system sometimes...but i think i will take it over the other kinds of tyranny available for our enjoyment.
anyway...money being valid reason for demolishing the building aside, i do think architecture in japan is about the CITY, not the icons. icons here are all lost the moment they are created, swallowed by the noise surrounding them. the noise drowns the ego, but urbanisitically the city is hoppingly rich. can't say the same for Milan, for example (a favorite city of mine, but for different reasons than for tokyo)...in many ways i find the destruction of nakagin tower a kind of proof of the value (or dangers) of a messy life. and of the risks involved in planting an ego-penis thing in a land that thrives on constant, churning, change...
as you state JUMP (and sorry to see this thread dead for several months), i think Tokyo trend always was more about the city than the icons, as far as i understand (never been there) is a city which renovates itself every 10 to 15 years, and i assume "urban longevity" is not an aspect that the "urban culture" of Japan treasures.
as Minsky says, intelligent systems allow shiftness and change, so in that sense i had always seen Tokyo as a very complex "intelligent" system, which had been almost always ahead of several other urban organisms around the world.
anyone knows what's the latest with the demolition of the building? (i mean i could be pro keep the building, but understanding or trying to understand how THIS city works, i see pointless to try to keep the "ICON" as JUMP mentions)
can't they just unhook all the capsules and move them somewhere else? wasn't that the original point? perhaps they could hold an auction, and we could each buy a capsule, have it shipped wherever we want, and live in it. a "berlin wall" (i.e. "i own a piece of the wall) approach to historic preservation if you will.
ha... that would be funny to see, but maybe ur rigt and the building is not proving its original concept/technology...
if the serpentine pavilions are being auction every year, why not famous architectural icons?? i mean VITRA is not the only collector of STARchitecture in the world, im sure there's loots of people with tons of money who wants to buy themselves a building to start/continue their colection
Oct 21, 08 6:37 pm ·
·
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.
Nakagin Capsule Towers to be demolished!!!!
The Nakagin Capsule by Kurokawa is to be demolished!! This must be stopped!
http://www.inhabitat.com/2007/05/04/modern-prefab-nakagin-capsule-towers/#more-4071
I'm appalled. I'm sure we all are. What can we do? Anyone have a specific suggestion?
<GAG> scope the first response on their forum:
I can understand why they want to demolish this 1972 pile of washing machines. Take a look at some of the attractive new architectures in Dubai for example.
I hope he's being sarcastic.
Apu, that has to be sarcastic, right? I was LMAO.
I saw that too, Apurimac. I'd take the Nagakin tower of most of Dubai any day.
I mean I'd take the Nagakin tower over most of Dubai any day.
wish i'd found that housing precedent at the beginning of the semester, its most funky.
Damn shame if they're really gonna demolish it though.
i dont thinks its sarcastic, have a look at the forums at skyscrapercity.com and you will find a peculiar fetishism for the tallest, flashiest crap being built.
i guess some people just have an attraction to big, shiny things.
and this article in Architectural Record April 30, 2007 :
"Kisho Kurokawa can’t seem to catch a break these days. Just days after the Japanese architect lost his bid for the governorship of Tokyo, the Nakagin Capsule Tower, his best known building and one of the few built examples of the Metabolist movement, was given a date with the wrecking ball."
http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/070430kurokawa.asp
There is only one thing we can do on this website. To find funds and organize a "Save Nakagin" architectural design competition. Is there anyone there who have some experience on managing this sort of work?
a competition would be great, la boule! but how would you know where to start with this one? first of all, unlike the breuer library, this is driven by a developer. if it were an american developer i know that an appeal to their architectural history sympathies would get you nowhere; i don't even know what the dynamic would be in a japanese context but i can't imagine they would be MORE sympathetic.
best bet would be to somehow appeal to the potential marketing value in the uniqueness of this wacky-cool landmark structure. habitat's prices have gone through the roof, and it's hip to live there. how to foster that kind of desire for a capsule?
i hope that there is enough uproar that this building can be saved.
BUT, if not, i'll be happy to bid on a capsule on ebay... one of those would be much more neat-o than the prefab guesthouse i was thinking about getting.
that's exactly what i want to do... i'd give anything to buy a capsule...
plus the competition could replace old units with new...
and heck why don't they give a few units to AFH or something...
well anyway, if any of the chicago archinecters are loaded and want to buy a capsule and ship it over here... i'll pay top dollar for a tour, or a nights stay perhaps...
The article specifically singles out earthquake performance, asbestos and too little density as reasons.
An architectural comp on international scale could be good idea - 2 of the 3 reasons could be architectural solutions. The earthquake performance - thats a little heavy
MAPA?
Kurokawa himself proposes a solution:
"For his part, Kurokawa has pleaded to let the Capsule Tower express one of its original design qualities: flexibility. He suggested “unplugging” each box and replacing it with an updated unit, letting the base towers —which he calls “timeless”—remain untouched. Japan’s four major architectural organizations, including the Japan Institute of Architects, support this scheme. But the building’s management remained unconvinced and raised concerns regarding the towers’ ability to withstand earthquakes, as well as its inefficient use of valuable land. The new building will increase floor area by 60 percent."
If you unplugged and sold off the capsules, you could probably get a good way to the cost of making new capsules to plug in.
here is the key: its inefficient use of valuable land. The new building will increase floor area by 60 percent.
The value of the additional area in downtwon tokyo is surely driving the buiding management's efforts...a lot of money to be made...money, money, money...the value of good (great) architecture just doesn't seem to be able to compete...i am sad now...
it would be interesting to know if the base was designed to stand more capsules... perhaps a proposal could be made along kurokawa's lines bur adding more capsules [maybe they're also lighter]. i mean, i don't think height would be a problem [especially if the design was based on flexibility].
anyone in japan could give us more insight? jump? anyone?
funny enough i just went to see the building this afternoon.
it is hard to see in the photo but the building is quite decayed/decrepit, which is maybe not a surpise. It is amazingly like a scene from bladerunner, a picture perfect snapshot of what the future used to look like, but rundown and distopian...
As far as updating it...well there are height limits in Japan, based on shadow laws, solar access, footprint size and FAR. I don't know what the zoning says for this site exactly but am fairly sure it can't be improved in terms of efficiency that would allow it to compete with a 60% increase in floor area. Not merely by adding a few floors to the existing structure anyway...
and i am personally a bit unsure about the structure...it is perhaps OK, maybe not...earthquake laws were made much stricter since the kobe earthquake and i suspect this building is no longer up to stuff anymore...and that whole asbestos thing is a major issue from my perspective...
so what to do? Me, I don't entirely mind that it is slated to go. Cities are organic, and metabolism has left its mark in ways more meaningful than mere buildings...considering that metabolism was supposed to be about change i don't know what the complaint can be when it actually takes place in unexpected ways...from a philosophical standpoint it rings hollow to me...
however i am surprised that it hasn't been bought up by designer-people like habitat in montreal and similar classics in europe have been...japanese culture against old things asserting itself maybe...i dunno...
Me, I don't entirely mind that it is slated to go. Cities are organic, and metabolism has left its mark in ways more meaningful than mere buildings...considering that metabolism was supposed to be about change i don't know what the complaint can be when it actually takes place in unexpected ways...from a philosophical standpoint it rings hollow to me...
I agree. Architecture is about evolution. I didn't know or hear about this building until it was being demolished (granted I am a first year arch. student). But, through it's demolition it has become an architectural martyr. A memory of an architectural experience that pushed the envelope but maybe didn't put it far enough. Meaning architecture of the past and present can't predict architecture of the future, only influence it.
I'm more interested in what would be replacing this. Then I'll decide if it should go or not.
oh! i get it....in death, we all have a name!
his name was robert paulson!
his name was robert paulson!
his NAME was robert paulson!
Mark, the Nagakin Capsule Tower is a fairly significant building, even if you'd never heard of it. It's going a little bit far to say that its only famous because its being knocked down.
I don't think there's any chance of preventing its demolition. The land value is just too great. Which is a shame I guess, but like jump says, demolition is part of metabolic change!
Out of interest, does Japan even have rules for protecting modern buildings?
there is a group that does preservation, but not very succesfully.
the imperial hotel by FLW was moved to a disney-type theme park with other meiji era buildings, and there are a few others that have become icons...but preservation for its own sake is i think a slightly alien idea in the japanese psyche...much has been written of the psychology of impermanence in Japan that emerged from hundreds of years of perpetual war, fire, typhoons and earthquake destruction (NOTHING lasts forever here) and all that, but i am not so sure that is the reason. most of all japanese culture is based on consumption, and nakagin has been consumed...
anyway...no, i don't believe there are any rules to speak of re preservation of ANY buildings. certianly I have never come across a building tht was listed grade I or Grade II etc. I think the market is the main thing that keeps things existing...from a certain perspective i suppose that is fine...mixed feelings for me on that end...but in general there is just not much worth preserving here to begin with...
i am becoming far too cynical in my old age...;-)
that's really unfortunate. but i bet they'll never demolish these capsules:
agfa8x, I'm realize I'm coming at this topic with ignorance but I feel like my point does make sense (at least to me).
Architecture (especially modern) is about evolution and how we can take what we learned from one project and put that into the next. The process. Although this building is conceptual and aestheically appealing it apparently did not [or does not now at least] address a real issue architects have to deal with, money and affective use of space. What can we do now to think about ways to build something with the same conceptual/aesthetic success that also addresses these issues? In Frank Gehry's sketchs they talk about how when someone criticizes Frank is fine with starting over. Why? Because he is coming from a higher plane of knowledge.
I'm not trying to say that Nagakin is insignificant but rather that its importance is based off of an idea. This idea won't die unless we let it. To me, architecture doesn't have to be materialized to change the way we think or perseve the world around us. Nagakin presented us with an idea, we loved it, we experienced it, and now it's time take what we've learned and move on. It was beautiful glimpse of a possible future.
i think as you continue to study architecture you will eventually have a greater appreciation for the thing itself and less appreciation for the idea.
"no ideas but in things" - william carlos williams
++
...and thanks for explaining that, jump. The different mindset is what makes Tokyo, Tokyo, I guess. But I never like seeing a good building get knocked down.
hm, yeah. it is a pity...the technology of metabolism has been preserved here with things like plug-in unit baths...
...and typical japanese prefab housing with waterworks in one unit being plugged into a bedroom unit, etc etc, except without the seams and the expression of "units" in the aesthetic...
but the theory of the approach has somehow been lost in the ether...
which is maybe for the better ( ? )... I absolutely believe Christopher Alexander had it right when he pointed out that a city is not a tree (part I) (part II here ), and metabolism was fundamentally flawed for its dogmatic and simplisitc insistence that it should be (like a tree, that is)...
i don't otherwise like much from alexander but this was very insightful when he wrote it in the 60's, and is still relevant today..
anyway, since i read that article i haven't really seen much of value in metabolism as a theoretical approach, and since seeing the buildings it spawned i have even less faith that it works as a system at all. Now it is going down I sort of see it as a building and an idea that was voted on by the people and found wanting. This is not merely about money. It is also about comfort and standard of living, which as far as i can tell must by necessity be lower than it should be simply for the architecture to work as an idea...that makes not so much sense to me.
it is an icon though, and one of the few remaining interesting buildings by kurokawa, in a purely visual sense, and for that i am slightly sorry to see it go...
Mark Anthony, I expect your opinion will likely change in a few years as well. I dont think modernism is quite as you describe it, though it is an interesting and positive take. That frank gehry is ok with change is possibly true, however i seriously doubt that he is coming from a higher plane of knowledge. If anything he is a realist and knows when to push and when to drop issues...but mostly he is just doing his thing and tries not to let theory or opinions get too much in his way...
TAER IT DOWN!!!
(You mean this is not a coaster thread? It's an architecture thread?!...)
Oh, sorry. Seriously, a unique structure that needs to be saved.
When I visited I remember they had one of the capsules down on the street for visitors to walk in. Talk about claustrophobia....
That is a shame that they will tear it down. At least they could un-plug and sell off the capsules like someone suggested before wiping the slate clean.
It's especially disappointing when you know there will be a faceless boring box to replace it.
Ok, there is really something to do there.
Is there anyone knowing some people in the architectural field in Japan?
Every fall, there is a student's competition organized by both JA and A+U, the next one could be about minimal spaces (a new capsule for Kurokawa's Capsule's Tower), supervised by Kurokawa himself.
If there is anyone motivated to help me contact Kurokawa and the head's office of JA, don't hesitate to contact me.
________________________________________________________________
"Impossible is not french." Napoléon
If we want to be convicing, I need with me:
- 1 person able to design (for free) a website
- 1 person specializing in marketing
- a few people knowing the japanese architectural world (if possible with contact there)
Don't let the thread sinking in the depth of archinect!
Is there anyone having some precise technical stuff about Nakagin Tower?
did you see the little blurb in record...kisho is becoming a politician
but i'd definately be interested in helping to save the tower... however, i am not an ubelievably great web designer, have no knowledge of marketing, and am nowhere near japan...
i guess i could work on a website...
(lletdownl is going to be pissed cause i'm supposed to be working on ours)
bloody shame. Is there the likelihood of creating a charette to save this?
to save it would require turning it to a museum perhaps rather than maintain its original function. economically it simply doesn't pay to have that much wasted floor space, especially when nothing is gained spatially, experientially or otherwise by wasting said space. worse, from my perspective, it is all wasted in the name of an idea, not for people...
as an icon it is worth preserving....but how to do that? this is not a nation with a preservation movement to speak of...
maybe someone will make a 20th c. park to put icons of the last century that are otherwise going to be demolished...like the meiji-period park that now holds the lobby of FLW's imperial hotel...
about kurokawa being a politician, he was humiliated at the polls when he opened his mouth and said some rather offensive and infuriatingly inane things that served to prove he is a smart man who should never be put in the charge of other people's lives...or so the analysis goes. basically people decided he is a spoiled rich kid with no understanding of reality and hence not to be trusted...however he is fascinatingly eccentric and popular for his odd view of the world on the talk-show circuit...as a politician though, he was seriously and totally lambasted. it was very sad to watch...
wouldn't the fact that it is a 20th century icon add some economic $$$ to it? i suppose it depends on what the developer has in mind for the site. if it's just max out the total buildable area for spec office, then, yes, they would need to tear it down, but it's seems as though there would be some way to capitalize on its existing status as a "great work of architecture." can anyone say boutique hotel?
i'd spend a night there!
it is a condo building, owned by residents (and not accessible to the public) right now. i don't know how it has been bought up, or who owns the place, but it seems someone wants to take it down to make more money, and perhaps gain some more living space.
i like the idea that any building should not be treated as precious as long as something better takes the place of the old...i doubt that will happen in this case, but still...it isn't THAT good. sorry, kisho.
my feeling is that japanese people are not romantic about the past the way westerner's are. there will be some who would pay premium to live in cramped space with slightly fewer modern amenities (cuz the apparently flexible system is not actually so flexible)...but for the most part japanese have had their fill of cramped living spaces for high costs and want NEW cool buildings rather than old (and lets face it quite UGLY) ones...
maybe it could work as hotel for archi-tourists, but what would rent need to be to make it actually worth it? the land prices are going up round that area now, so the payoff would have to be quite high to compare with tearing down and rebuilding more efficiently...
my partner and i were looking recently at doing a remodel and addition to beautiful traditional japanese home in high class part of city...but payback if built to max means only a yield of 2.4 percent. No bank would underwrite that kind of deal. Anything less than 4 percent is not worth it, really, and preferably more. In this case it meant demolishing the old wooden house...which we didn't want to do. so we dropped it. Owners of nakagin felt they could not do same, i suppose...i can understand that. unfortunately the capitlaist way is not always the best way to make a city...
to me the will of the hyper-free market seems to be a very recent phenomenon. it really goes unquestioned even amongst the more enlightened, but has only been around since reagan and thatcher. in terms of urbanism (and i mean real urbanism, the way cities change over time, not suburbs), it's been deadly on many levels. it casts an absolutely non-critical eye on the city in the name of maxing out FAR. i do believe these economic trends are ultimately cyclical, or at least evolving, and that this period of economic growth will not be looked on very positively by future generations for the amount lost on short term, largely selfish gains.
right on...there's more than money
jump,
you make many many excellent points.
One subtle thing I'd like to mention is that I don't think it's really that there isn't an attatchment to buildings from the past per se. I think most people don't really understand how crappy a lot of housing is in Japan. The country was thoroughly destroyed after WWII. They had to build a lot of buildings fast. The whole country become a laboratory for Le Corbusier style modernism with a twinge of Metabolism.
Most of the buildings are of low quality built quickly to house a burgeoning economy's populace. If the housing was aesthetically pleasing, I don't think people would necessarily see new housing as better.
I do think that nakagin is important historically, but I don't know if preserving it in a high growth area like Shiodome is very practical.
I'm not a particualr fan of kurokawa (I wrote several papers on him in college) A lot of what he does seems zeitgeisty which makes it inevitably anachronositc. There's plenty of the 'machine for living' aesthetic in this country, I don't think there are very many people who can tell the difference between good and bad architecture from that time.
They did preserve that school that Frank Lloyd Wright made, so there is some preservation movement here. But really, most of what is made here, would you want to preserve a Maekawa building?
what is the value of the kurokawa capsule building now? are we more interested in its historic value than actually living in it? maybe its a good opportunity to test out the metabolist organic principles. how well do the modules adapt? can they be reconfigured in a new design?
maybe one module can go to a museum...
they already have a module on the ground floor sitting outside the front door... you can peep inside the capsule through the window...
kunio maekawa did some very good buildings. i would preserve a few. they are in fact probably easier to adapt than the nakagin cuz they are based on universal space rather than custom eccentric fitout ala metabolism...
corbusier in japan? i dunno. capitalism in japan? oh yeah, big time. they aren't the same thing, though they are often conflated acidentally. not everything that looks like a box is descended from corb.
jafidler, i totally agree, and i cringe slightly to realise how much the market is pulling cultural strings...thatcher and reagan certainly epitomised that idea, though they did not come up with it...the greater good does get lost in this system sometimes...but i think i will take it over the other kinds of tyranny available for our enjoyment.
anyway...money being valid reason for demolishing the building aside, i do think architecture in japan is about the CITY, not the icons. icons here are all lost the moment they are created, swallowed by the noise surrounding them. the noise drowns the ego, but urbanisitically the city is hoppingly rich. can't say the same for Milan, for example (a favorite city of mine, but for different reasons than for tokyo)...in many ways i find the destruction of nakagin tower a kind of proof of the value (or dangers) of a messy life. and of the risks involved in planting an ego-penis thing in a land that thrives on constant, churning, change...
as you state JUMP (and sorry to see this thread dead for several months), i think Tokyo trend always was more about the city than the icons, as far as i understand (never been there) is a city which renovates itself every 10 to 15 years, and i assume "urban longevity" is not an aspect that the "urban culture" of Japan treasures.
as Minsky says, intelligent systems allow shiftness and change, so in that sense i had always seen Tokyo as a very complex "intelligent" system, which had been almost always ahead of several other urban organisms around the world.
anyone knows what's the latest with the demolition of the building? (i mean i could be pro keep the building, but understanding or trying to understand how THIS city works, i see pointless to try to keep the "ICON" as JUMP mentions)
can't they just unhook all the capsules and move them somewhere else? wasn't that the original point? perhaps they could hold an auction, and we could each buy a capsule, have it shipped wherever we want, and live in it. a "berlin wall" (i.e. "i own a piece of the wall) approach to historic preservation if you will.
ha... that would be funny to see, but maybe ur rigt and the building is not proving its original concept/technology...
if the serpentine pavilions are being auction every year, why not famous architectural icons?? i mean VITRA is not the only collector of STARchitecture in the world, im sure there's loots of people with tons of money who wants to buy themselves a building to start/continue their colection
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.