Peter Zumthor’s victory as the Pritzker Prize 2009 laureate comes with a lot of debate and discussion about the future ( and present ) of architecture. As Christopher Hawthorne instigate this debate in his article for the Los Angeles Times ( in which he says that “His win is a triumph for the idea of architecture for architecture's sake.”) , Zumthor’s award will definitely question the suffocating and absorbing “spectacular” architecture that has multiplied all over the world. Although Hawthorne defines Zumthor as an architect with no social concerns, I believe that his major social contribution to architecture ( and to the world ) is not to be involved in an architecture of spectacle that is so much about waste and so much about visual elitism.
Having Zumthor’s award put Swiss architecture in the spotlight, I would like to propose a reflection on the next ‘BIG THING” in architecture that is coming up: The International Fair in Shanghai, 2010. More specifically a reflection on the winning design for the Swiss Pavilion.
I recently had in my hands a copy of the Intelligente Architektur magazine, a german publication that showcases designs that have excellence in details/ technology. I was extremely impressed by the proposal for the Swiss Pavilion designed by Lee + Mundwiler Architects - www.lm-arch.com -(a well thought out use of conventional doors + sustainability + color + rhythm ). It is also a socially engaged and responsible project and a design that even proposes that the material used to be donated to the host country as a symbol of friendship and mutual respect.
My surprise, however, came when I found out that this project was not the winning design – it is actually the third prize winner. Instead, the winning design is a massive concrete building with a Disneyland kind of approach.
I was impressed by the choice of this design, considering the damage/cost of a concrete construction, and considering the amount of time/money/effort that has to be put in order to build such TEMPORARY pavilion in Shanghai. Maybe the fact that the main sponsor of the pavilion is a concrete company has somehow played an important factor in the choice of the winning design. Still…
Looking at that pavilion, I wonder about the so famous tradition of Swiss architecture, so much praised for being focused on detail, innovation, and technology. Is this tradition being victimized by the desperate demand of spectacle and political/financial opportunism ?
Looking at Zumthor’s Swiss Pavilion for the Expo 2000 in Hanover, and comparing it to the soon-to-be Swiss Pavilion, I can’t help but thinking about exactly when we lost track of rationality.
The Swiss did not give their greatest architect, Le Corbusier, a chance. Maybe they were never rational to begin with.
But thats too simplistic, and general. You touched on a crucial point, the sponsor being a concrete company. Many things in the history of architecture have had political workings behind them (Corbu not executing the League of Nations competition entry he won unanimously). I would not necessarily blame architects alone, the whole thing is corrupt.
nevertheless, i love those Swiss projects, only beaten by South American ones.
and do not be surprised come Shanghai 2010 and you dont here much about anything, i barely remember the Zaragoza expo (when was it?!), and it was highly publicized before its time came
i do nopt see why the attention to details...particular sensibility in the approach to detail...is more "socially engaged/engaging" than flashy extrovert spectacles ... which really are more "socially engaged/engaging" being that a crass sprctacle is very likely to get more attention.
this is merely giving the inherently aesthetic a moral sociology as a base in order to endow it with some discursive respectability. but really, this respectability is unwarranted. furthermore, zumthor's architecture is very spect-acular in its overt preclusion of banality (i.e each visible bit asks not to be an oblivious fragment of banality).
the argument that zumthor's architecture might induce more pleasure, calm..be a richer experience...and is therefore more "engaging" might be valid on a purely individuallistic level...but it can only really be "socially engaging", as architecture and not a mere housing of function, once it elevates itself to spectacle.
thankfully, zumthor's fetish is not function and ecology diagrams and architectural insinuations thereof. so, its difficult saying that zumthor is spectacular. so it comes down to what kind of spectacularity you respect, aesthetically...then once u go for it, you find yourself in need of a respectable reason...short circuiting back to second paragraph.
Why was an LA firm - Lee + Mundwiler - designing the Swiss pavilion to begin with? I never understood why countries don't look within their own borders to find an architect to give life to their pavilions. Same for Foster + Partners designing the Dubai (or was it the UAE?) pavilion.
yeah google! "Stephan Mundwiler is an architect born 1962 in Switzerland. He graduated at SCI-arc in 1995 and lives and works in Santa Monica, California. Together with his partner Cara Lee, he is principal of Lee + Mundwiler architects with projects in the US, Switzerland and China."
...but Foster I don't know, wasn't the office sold to investors (maybe from Dubai or UAE) How do you actually call somebody from Dubai? Dubaian, Dubian, Duban, Dubac, Dubious? questions, questions...
Or from UAE?
Emirati
and the undertones of derisive disparagement behind Dubai-bashing is not unnoticed. but then, some people are more occupied with riding their morally inflamed dildo.
Shanghai Expo -- least environmental project, ever. the impact of this massive event at the riverside in both aspects of relocating local populations and environment is quite sad.
randomized How do you actually call somebody from Dubai? Dubaian, Dubian, Duban, Dubac, Dubious?
anyway,why should a pavillion be designed by a national?
the notion of a pavillion meant to embody a country/nationality should be a comic, possibly ironic, event ... a global architectural version of Eurovision Song Contest.
evanc-I believe you can see it from outside the construction fences. though i am not sure they really want you there. I was there a year ago and you could get fairly close but its still walled and gated. Anyway the site is huge so I imagine if you were determined you could find a way.
I am not sure how much that has changed. They were topping out the Chinese pavilion when I was there and only doing foundation work and framing on some of the other ones. So maybe the situation is different. Good luck and if you do make it post some pics.
dot yeah the UK one is nice. I esp like the seed embedded in the rods..
I saw a pic of the Israeli pavilion in the Boston Globe link from the Archinect news item recently posted, quite liked it from the one photo. Seems almost half buried etc..
Overall though don't think much of the pavilions. Especially the Chinese one. It strikes me as almost Po Mo in the way it apes Chinese pagoda...
INTERNATIONAL FAIR - SHANGHAI 2010 - A Freak Show?
Peter Zumthor’s victory as the Pritzker Prize 2009 laureate comes with a lot of debate and discussion about the future ( and present ) of architecture. As Christopher Hawthorne instigate this debate in his article for the Los Angeles Times ( in which he says that “His win is a triumph for the idea of architecture for architecture's sake.”) , Zumthor’s award will definitely question the suffocating and absorbing “spectacular” architecture that has multiplied all over the world. Although Hawthorne defines Zumthor as an architect with no social concerns, I believe that his major social contribution to architecture ( and to the world ) is not to be involved in an architecture of spectacle that is so much about waste and so much about visual elitism.
Having Zumthor’s award put Swiss architecture in the spotlight, I would like to propose a reflection on the next ‘BIG THING” in architecture that is coming up: The International Fair in Shanghai, 2010. More specifically a reflection on the winning design for the Swiss Pavilion.
I recently had in my hands a copy of the Intelligente Architektur magazine, a german publication that showcases designs that have excellence in details/ technology. I was extremely impressed by the proposal for the Swiss Pavilion designed by Lee + Mundwiler Architects - www.lm-arch.com -(a well thought out use of conventional doors + sustainability + color + rhythm ). It is also a socially engaged and responsible project and a design that even proposes that the material used to be donated to the host country as a symbol of friendship and mutual respect.
My surprise, however, came when I found out that this project was not the winning design – it is actually the third prize winner. Instead, the winning design is a massive concrete building with a Disneyland kind of approach.
I was impressed by the choice of this design, considering the damage/cost of a concrete construction, and considering the amount of time/money/effort that has to be put in order to build such TEMPORARY pavilion in Shanghai. Maybe the fact that the main sponsor of the pavilion is a concrete company has somehow played an important factor in the choice of the winning design. Still…
Looking at that pavilion, I wonder about the so famous tradition of Swiss architecture, so much praised for being focused on detail, innovation, and technology. Is this tradition being victimized by the desperate demand of spectacle and political/financial opportunism ?
Looking at Zumthor’s Swiss Pavilion for the Expo 2000 in Hanover, and comparing it to the soon-to-be Swiss Pavilion, I can’t help but thinking about exactly when we lost track of rationality.
The Swiss did not give their greatest architect, Le Corbusier, a chance. Maybe they were never rational to begin with.
But thats too simplistic, and general. You touched on a crucial point, the sponsor being a concrete company. Many things in the history of architecture have had political workings behind them (Corbu not executing the League of Nations competition entry he won unanimously). I would not necessarily blame architects alone, the whole thing is corrupt.
nevertheless, i love those Swiss projects, only beaten by South American ones.
and do not be surprised come Shanghai 2010 and you dont here much about anything, i barely remember the Zaragoza expo (when was it?!), and it was highly publicized before its time came
i do nopt see why the attention to details...particular sensibility in the approach to detail...is more "socially engaged/engaging" than flashy extrovert spectacles ... which really are more "socially engaged/engaging" being that a crass sprctacle is very likely to get more attention.
this is merely giving the inherently aesthetic a moral sociology as a base in order to endow it with some discursive respectability. but really, this respectability is unwarranted. furthermore, zumthor's architecture is very spect-acular in its overt preclusion of banality (i.e each visible bit asks not to be an oblivious fragment of banality).
the argument that zumthor's architecture might induce more pleasure, calm..be a richer experience...and is therefore more "engaging" might be valid on a purely individuallistic level...but it can only really be "socially engaging", as architecture and not a mere housing of function, once it elevates itself to spectacle.
thankfully, zumthor's fetish is not function and ecology diagrams and architectural insinuations thereof. so, its difficult saying that zumthor is spectacular. so it comes down to what kind of spectacularity you respect, aesthetically...then once u go for it, you find yourself in need of a respectable reason...short circuiting back to second paragraph.
i meant to say its NOT difficult...etc.
and i'm not comfortable with this phrase: a mere housing of fuction. definitely not "mere housing".
Why was an LA firm - Lee + Mundwiler - designing the Swiss pavilion to begin with? I never understood why countries don't look within their own borders to find an architect to give life to their pavilions. Same for Foster + Partners designing the Dubai (or was it the UAE?) pavilion.
yeah google! "Stephan Mundwiler is an architect born 1962 in Switzerland. He graduated at SCI-arc in 1995 and lives and works in Santa Monica, California. Together with his partner Cara Lee, he is principal of Lee + Mundwiler architects with projects in the US, Switzerland and China."
...but Foster I don't know, wasn't the office sold to investors (maybe from Dubai or UAE) How do you actually call somebody from Dubai? Dubaian, Dubian, Duban, Dubac, Dubious? questions, questions...
Or from UAE?
Emirati
and the undertones of derisive disparagement behind Dubai-bashing is not unnoticed. but then, some people are more occupied with riding their morally inflamed dildo.
I wasn't being derisive towards Dubai at all. All I meant was individual countries should showcase their local architects.
Thanks for the background on Lee + Mundwiler. I still think a firm located in the country would be more appropriate but then again they didn't win.
Shanghai Expo -- least environmental project, ever. the impact of this massive event at the riverside in both aspects of relocating local populations and environment is quite sad.
randomized How do you actually call somebody from Dubai? Dubaian, Dubian, Duban, Dubac, Dubious?
anyway,why should a pavillion be designed by a national?
the notion of a pavillion meant to embody a country/nationality should be a comic, possibly ironic, event ... a global architectural version of Eurovision Song Contest.
what's dubai-bashing in wanting to know how to call somebody from dubai?
frankie says RELAX
I'll be in shanghai next week - does anyone know if it's possible to get to the expo pavilions now, before it's open?
evanc-I believe you can see it from outside the construction fences. though i am not sure they really want you there. I was there a year ago and you could get fairly close but its still walled and gated. Anyway the site is huge so I imagine if you were determined you could find a way.
I am not sure how much that has changed. They were topping out the Chinese pavilion when I was there and only doing foundation work and framing on some of the other ones. So maybe the situation is different. Good luck and if you do make it post some pics.
love the UK pavilion - acrylis rods with led on the tips.
dot yeah the UK one is nice. I esp like the seed embedded in the rods..
I saw a pic of the Israeli pavilion in the Boston Globe link from the Archinect news item recently posted, quite liked it from the one photo. Seems almost half buried etc..
Overall though don't think much of the pavilions. Especially the Chinese one. It strikes me as almost Po Mo in the way it apes Chinese pagoda...
woops didn't catch that. I was referring to the photos in the link above.
Wait for the US one. Its craptacular.
yeah i know
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.