Fujimoto’s goal isn’t just to make spaces—the basic function of architecture—but to make people relate to spaces in new ways. Watching the couple move around the house, approaching everyday activities with the finesse the unusual design requires, suggests he is well on his way to achieving it. — online.wsj.com
The Japanese designer’s “future primitive” structures harmonize nature and built environments, offering radical new versions of walls, ceilings and floors.
15 Comments
Fujimoto's a magician, too: look up his Glass House on Google Street View, and watch as it disappears in front of your eyes as you take one step closer.
Beat that, David Blaine!
The rest of that wsj story is fairly compelling, minus his indentured servants he keeps in his model sweatshop. He may just be getting started in his quest for starchitect status, but please tell me how an unpaid intern can survive in Tokyo without being paid. Of course the master/follower relationship engrained in Japanese culture keeps any one from rocking the boat, but no one without a trust fund or a very robust support network, can work for Fujimoto AND live anywhere else but the model shop.
^ thats why this profession looks the way it does...as ive said before, if the profession favors the privileged, dont be surprised when it also reflects the demographics of the privileged. This goes deeper than just race and sex...its really about the homogenous "socio economic culture/class of the architecture profession. And then we complain about "architecture serving the rich"....most people in architecture see "the rich" as part of their tribe.
That is bad architecture for reasons to numerous to count. There is no reason on earth to celebrate it. Which means a major commission is coming soon.
I thought the picture heading the post was some type of exhibition, not an actual dwelling that people paid him to design so they could live in it. I couldn't imagine August in Tokyo, although I figure these folks are moneyed, so they spend the summer in Bali or something. Funny you should mention houses for cats, archdaily had a good feature this morning HERE! It seems we're getting really good at making architecture superfluous and inconsequential, no one can save us but ourselves though..
It might be useful to think of some of his work more like the case study houses of the past mid-century. Experimental and built for people with an eye for something most may not be comfortable with. I live a block from one of his houses and its brilliant, seriously well built and well considered.
It is too easy to dismiss him with the normal nonsense about starchitects. The serpentine was amazing. Sure it was a bit rusty already when i visited it, but the spatial effect was shockingly good. The previous year's project by Herzog and DeMeuron was also really good, but it did not have the same effect. It was materially impressive but Fujimoto's project forces us to think about what an architect can do. He is a lot like Gehry was in his youthful rebel days in that respect. That he is way out on a limb with some of his work is perhaps why so many orthodox architects get their knickers in a twist, but if we didnt have people like this we would still be building greek temples and hitting anyone mentioning the possibilities of an arch or two quite soundly on their forward-thinking heads.
The thing about interns is a bit shameful in my mind on other hand. Not sure why he is so stubborn about that point. Its not remotely reasonable to work that way.
forces us to think about what an architect can do
For the public this just further demonstrates that architects are egotists not bound by any sense of pragmatism, reality or responsibility. It is damaging to the profession as well as the environment. In terms of forcing us to think, it immediately brings to mind the question why?
"because we can" is the reason behind lots of really stupid things.
its the reason for lots of amazing things too!
no one in the public expects the serpentine to be pragmatic and the clients of fujimoto come to him knowing what they want. They are most likely not wealthy but young hipsters looking for something new and they are cool with the whole thing. I wouldn't worry overly much on that point. Seriously, this is Tokyo, with more than 30 million people here there are bound to be some who don't want to live the way you might offer them. So they go to Sousuke. What's the problem? You can do the homes for everyone else, surely there are enough to go around.
Most of the stuff at menlo Park was not practical either. Why aren't architects allowed to think about what they are making just as much as Edison was? The idea we should only build one way because its the right way is a cultural dead end.
This is how we go from trabeated boxes to arches, to bilbao, and now whatever Fujimoto is doing, or whatever. Its a process and its messy. We should be celebrating this kind of work, just as much as the Wall Street Journal is. Instead we have this odd culture of fear. Where does that come from? I cant understand it, not a bit of it. I'm more concerned that we have this major self-hate thing going on as a profession. Its not healthy.
Exactly how does this project advance the state of the profession or building technology? It's just masturbation by both architect and client.
Why aren't architects allowed to think about what they are making just as much as Edison was?
Who said they aren't? Comparing Fujimoto to Edison is like comparing the Cartoon Network to NASA. Meanwhile they are serious issues in society - real opportunities for creativity - that are all but ignored by architects who prefer to jerk everyone off with this kind of ridiculous bullshit. And that's the kind of thinking we see all to much of from architects.
FYI Edison designed and built concrete houses in a single pour. An elaborate form was erected on site and a conveyor fed concrete from a portable mixing plant into a cavity at the very top. They failed for a number of reasons including cost (5 times the prevailing cost for a conventionally built house) and thermal performance. For the time it was a visionary attempt to mass produce houses.
With all due respect, his work is more about effects, and less about actually "changing the way we live". And the design for the Miami design district sucks ass, sorry to say.
And the thing about interns is enough to make me never want to look at his work again.
The houses he does are interesting. I don't see them as changing the world, but they are beautiful little things the same as designer furniture can be. Like designer furniture, this kind of precious design is never really more useful than something ordinary, it's just more interesting - an enhancement to someone who already lives a good life.
What I see as a problem is scaling up from this. Lots of talented architects do great small residences - but then struggle when they get the chance to do a big commercial or institutional project. Those actually take a lot of thought to balance interesting effects with usability and budget which small residences aren't so sensitive to.
Given his dependence on unpaid labor, it seems likely he isn't competent enough at managing his firm and negotiating fair contracts to take on more work. And if he tries, he'll find that unpaid labor doesn't provide the kind of expertise that big work requires.
Unpaid labor is like cocaine. A little bit can give you a boost - but you really destroy your productive capacity when you depend on it.
BTW his website is useless. I'm inclined to question the judgement of anyone who thinks the internet is just some kind of phone book.
Hmm midlander, Herzog and de Meuron also had a crap website for years. Im not inclined to trust their judgment!
Must be a Swiss/Japanese thing. Same with Zumthor and SANAA.
^I give a pass on anyone who got started before most people knew what a website was. Sou is young enough to be aware of how people use them now. But yeah, there does seem to be a cultural difference where architects from certain regions just don't put much into their website.
If you just google image search the house by name you find lots of images of it looking more like a small house, with curtains drawn and people on the sidewalk, etc. This particular image looks like a play structure, not a house.
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.