“This isn’t your grandfather’s Wall Street.” — Bloomberg Business
According to a statement issued on Tuesday, the design of Two World Trade Center, which was formerly the province of Foster + Partners, is now being handled by Bjarke Ingels' firm BIG and will likely house employees of both 21st Century Fox and News Corp. The media organizations inked a non-binding agreement with developer Larry Silverstein that places them in the tower, which as of now is slated to be the second-tallest tower in the four-tower World Trade Center complex. The proposed move is significant not only because many of the towers still boast significant amounts of unleased space (the two companies would occupy 1.3 million square feet of the tower's 2.8 million total available), but because both 21st Century Fox and News Corp. represent a new type of tenant for the traditionally financially dominated area. According to Bloomberg, Christopher Jones, vice president of research at New York's Regional Plan Association said, “People were expecting financial companies to be a substantial portion of the leased space” in the new towers, but the actual tenants have been heavily media-oriented. In One World Trade Center, the building designed by SOM, media giant Conde Nast is a major tenant. The shift from Foster + Partners to BIG could be said to underscore this shift from tradition to a markedly more high-energy, media-conscious take on the 21st century.
The new tenancy has prompted BIG to alter Norman Foster's design to accommodate a heavier media presence. While the specific details of the new design are still officially under wraps, it's possible that BIG will alter the bottom half of the tower to create a more interactive, collaborative environment, perhaps in keeping with its recent design for Google HQ.
The founder of BIG, Bjarke Ingels, recently gave a notably enthusiastic, media-savvy presentation at the 2015 WIRED Business conference. Norman Foster's public appearances, including his TedTALK, are lively and infused with graphics, although they do not feature the kind of platitude-laden theatrics of Ingels' recent presentation.
83 Comments
Wow. This is fascinating. Not only is Architecture "aligned with capital", but certain architects are aligned with certain types of capital.
Foster's pinstriped suit says it all. Message received, Norman.
Wow, how quickly Foster became a "dinosaur." A few years ago he was the futurist. He should have gone with the no tie, unbuttoned collar. But it is perfect that the architecture of media companies goes to BIG.... Because his words do hypnotize me.
I've been dissapointed in BIGs rhetoric and design lately, let's hope they do something architectural and not another diagram or some sci fi nonsense. That Foster design was weak sauce..... Always thought the WTC could have used the OMA CCTV building.
^ yes, OMA would've been a better choice.
Wow, how quickly Foster became a "dinosaur." And the new Apple HQ? What does that say about Apple?
It says what apple's store designs say. It says that Apple's brand is the star. Its not into big architectural ideas or big architecture personalities. Apple initially released images of their HQ design without announcing who designed it...as if to suggest that Apple designed it. Foster is better than BIG at receding into the background of a generic mix corporate glass and metal.
my god those lapels are huge. and that knot . . . how much does that weigh?
nice post Julia and to the qoute from Bloomberg about this not being your Grandfathers Wall Street is very aligned with one of those strange Epiphanies i had today........................as I exited the G Train in Brooklyn to go to a meeting in one of those cool hip upstart kind of warehouse office buildings I saw this poster - said something like: Robot - in the future Banks own your money. At that moment i cycled quickly through one of the jobs i was working on whose clients do things very differently and come from a country that in the last 60 years has been the strongest in providing a counter culture to the west and capitalism - Putin's little country of Russia......i imagined hipsters drinking happily discussing their critique of the system,all screen writers patting themselves on the back for making such profund statements about society....then i saw the next poster also: Robot - Identity Deleted (or something) - film culture, art culture, freedom of speech, freedom of expression - and the comfort of knowing you can criticize the system and remain alive.....then thoughts on my two themes for my under construction website enter my head - virtual vs physical. and it hit me clearly, like seeing the light - we are comfortable or become comfortable, not complacent, comfortable, feel accomplished when we feel we have expreased our critique about society in the form of some virtual fiction. we feel like we stood up for something. we go - hey what an art piece to question such oppression. we feel so good we forget we still do everyhing exactly the same: 9 to 5, ATM cards, buy shit, give a shit about fashion, use capital, dream of capital, and ignore its control........its as if freedom of expression absorbed in the virtual (thoughts, art, internet, social interaction) -- its as if that was good enough to distract you from the machine you are in. nevermind that freedom of expression is a cog in the machine. all the while those who understand power like Robot : own your money and delete your identity.......this all happened within 30 feet of walking, as went through the turnstile and up the stairs i thought - maybe that is why the Russians and parts of South America are so violent sometimes, they don't buy into this freedom of expression in a cloud as a solution or counterpoint to reality - they are still aware of the physical..............not your grandfathers Wall Street, lets just water down the very power that water downs existence into quantities, make wall street hip and the Smithsonian hip lets just distract everyone with illusions of a happy existence in a cloud......not your grandfathers wall street, but your grandfather is still running the damn country - but we are off to write poetry and prance around in flowers.
Why have respect for someone (like BIG) that exploit loopholes to not pay overtime. Fuck both of them.
exactly /\ when working wall street becomes more hip than financially gainful you know its all over.
not your grandfathers wall street is the equivalent of a McDonalds Happy Meal with a super fun toy.
"bruh, I became an investment bank to enjoy the high stressed pressure environment of watching numbers do things, not for the money!" - Hip cool Banker
"So it's just a game, a lot of fun, and this money you move has no power, doesn't affect other's lives?" - future journalist not on Wall Street
"That's not what I'm about man. I'm about the moving of funds as a talent, like playing a musical instrument." - Hip cool Banker
"So you don't care where the money comes from and where it goes?" - future journalist not on Wall Street
"bruh, chill man. I'm here enjoying the moment, we have a reality show, I'm on TV, facebook, my blog is blowing up, everyone cares about me, the processed gluten free meals here keep me on my game, it's cool man. We're all happy kids here having FUN? Not your stiff grandfather's wall street..." - Hip cool Banker
"You mean where you could find the people who move mountains by moving funds, who changed policies that change millions of lives. A symbol of the system in one space is now just a media mirage? Where is your grandfather" - future journalist not on Wall Street
"Bruh, out playing golf or something with the President, what does he know about money?" - Hip cool Banker
The think that bothers me is I know many of my class mates that worked or are working at BIG and get paid shit, work very long hours, get crappy assignments, and so on. While I understand doing this at a small firm where there is little money, BIG is raking in the dough and sending it back to Denmark. Don't get me wrong - it is their responsibility for working there, but come on Bjarke, at least pay fast food wages...
If I have USD 1000 to buy a coat, I'll buy an 'Aquascutum', not 'H&M'... but the funny question is why not buy a DKNY.
'Yes' is more, architect is a whore.
I was thinking the same thing about those lapels, no wonder he lost the job.
As for Bjarke's Miami Vice retro look... God, I'm so superficial!
Foster: corporate
BIG: corporate with a twist (literal)
They're both excellent architects, but the reverberating symbolism of this change is enormous, in my mind.
I really hope rumors of BIG - or ANY ARCHITECT AT ALL - underpaying and overworking interns are false. It's just appalling.
The interesting thing here is that the new WTC is mostly media and not financial. Oddly, I feel nostalgic for the old Wall Street of steel, trains and automobiles, reflective of the U.S. economy (and architecture) of the time. Now America sells movies, Internet companies and "design" I,e, style as Europe once did (no doubt why all of the main voices in design now are European). Perhaps that's what strikes me about BIG.... Especially as it seems to be working a lot with media companies now. Kind of prefer the dour honesty of Rem to the sunny, happy maybe underpaying sinister ness of BIG.
how could Bjarke be exploiting or underpaying labor...he's so happy and charming! Next thing you are going to be saying there is no Santa Claus.
It's interesting how many people become defenders after meeting him. Utopia is here if we believe in it! Said every megalomaniac ever..... Time to burn down modernism and bring in the new thing! People just don't learn from history.
we are comfortable or become comfortable, not complacent, comfortable, feel accomplished when we feel we have expreased our critique about society in the form of some virtual fiction. we feel like we stood up for something.
there are countless precursors for this in history.... Media as either instigator of change or media as diversion from reality and action. Art as catharsis and amusement vs. Art as illumination.
It's troubling that clients seem to think that a change in programme necessitates a change in architect. I'm not sure if that's entirely the case here, but I see it plenty in the work my office does. Client will see the market shift and rather than pay additional services to rework a design, they start from scratch with a new firm.
There seems to be an increasing degree of type-casting even within a specifc type like offices: firm A only does corporate office and interiors, B only does government offices, C for spec development core+shell. My impression is that this is a post-1990's phenomenon, I imagine due to the need for easy filtering as globalization made multi-national architects more accessible to any local client. Instead of hiring the best multi-specialty local firm they can hire the WORLD'S BEST designer of mid-rise towers for financial companies. It's a mix of laziness and misunderstanding on the part of clients, and facile marketing by certain architects.
Maybe that's not the case here. Maybe BIG is just cheap...
They should have put the project on CoContest.
Modernism did its job well... Separation of functions into separation of trades--branding, engineering, architecture, plumbing, etc....
I just realized the obvious (as it is on BIG's website)... They are a branding firm.
Lightperson,
Branding is in everything. Essentially, branding is all about strategic positioning.
Its not really an insult to say that a design firm is doing branding. And when I remember that there are plenty of shitty PR/Branding firms out there still with absolutely zero sense of good design, I hope designers can take some of their business.
Branding is in everything. Essentially, branding is all about strategic positioning.
Branding is marketing. Marketing is everything. Unless you believe in something else.
Unless you believe is something else? Like vague innuendo? Is that what you believe in?
there is a difference in process when you start with a brand and then work toward architecture. Usually what it looks like on a postcard has nothing to do with it. I would speculate that Bjarke and branding friends and pr team hold the position that architecture has somehow failed. But BIGs version of modernism is just another offshoot, hyper marketed and branded--like the Internet, an endless series of meta references that go nowhere. Perhaps this kind of thinking started with the cctv building as a kind of logo, but that seemed appropriate as an apparatus of a totalitarian regime, and unique as a piece of architecture. Though it will house Rupert Murdochs Fox, so I guess there are similarities.
There are more similarities between BIG and Taco Bell than between BIG and good architecture.
Lightperson,
Architecture was able to respond to the skyline, while still responding to the needs of the office worker. Does the charisma of the Chrysler Building on the skyline somehow compromise the experience of the average occupant?
And this "marketing" thing didn't start with CCTV. Nothing really started with CCTV. Its an interesting building, but it stepped into an already existing context of globally reaching architecture icons. If we want to find the beginning, it might be in Learning from Las Vegas. Although even Las Vegas's architects and signage designers learned from other places how to grab the attention of fellow human beings with big, bold, memorable architecture.
http://www.jamesmaherphotography.com/articles/28-chrysler-building
The Chrysler Building is a perfect comparison in values .... The integrity of design is just as pronounced in the detailing of the exterior as it is in the faraway shape and those lights. I'm not saying we should go back to Art Deco... But maybe we should go back to Art Deco. Or maybe techno-art deco. I doubt BIG has the audacity to try something so subtle as detailing. There is a kind of great straightforwardness in it.
My guess is that BIG will offer some kind of vertical green space, which will justify a logo type form.
Lightperson,
You've hit upon a great point.
"The integrity of design is just as pronounced in the detailing of the exterior as it is in the faraway shape and those lights."
This is how so many of these large modernist behemoths fail imo. There's not enough attention paid to the pedestrian scale, it's all about the iconic form on the skyline. Whatever style or styles we end up embracing, they need to take in consideration the actual pedestrian experience, which Art Deco did extremely well. Be assured there will be green smear over part of this building.
I wonder if we're talking about branding so much because we're talking about it on the internet. If we were all sitting around a table in a BIG-design building, we might be discussing the actual experience of the space.
For me, BIG's approach is as much about urban amenities like roof terraces, pools, public spaces etc. as it is about creating memorable icons.
You mean private green spaces --- if a city provides public green space, what is the point of all that exactly? Maybe it's nitpicky, but of that is the only concept your offering, it seems hollow to me, like a classic marketing diversion.
You don't really need to go inside to know what it will be like: there is never any mention of the inside because they are similar to any other modern condo.
Lightperson,
Things like green roofs, steps, paths, seating, pools, viewing platforms etc might seem very basic, but in an urban context they can be leveraged to create interesting public spaces.
The high line can be described as merely a crowded strolling path with a few places to stop and sit. But people love it.
David, it certainly goes back way before Vegas...The temples and cathedrals of antiquity were also marketing for religion...Architecture as Advertisement or PR is as old as Architecture...The difference now is that the "axis mundi" is not at the center of any particular place of significance...Its at the center of every place.
jla-x, placelessness isn't new either. Look at the history of cartography, exploration, religious pilgrimages and then tourism. We've always had an idea about what a place was like before and after visiting that place. I've never been to the Pyramids of Egypt but I have an idea of what they're like. I've not been to paris yet, but I have an idea of what a classic Parisian cafe looks and feels like based on stories and pictures I've heard and seen.
What is all of that twisty nonsense... Looks like somebody likes laser cut models. Certainly not as generous as the high line. Though it is public, so 5 points for slitherin.
Temples and cathedrals were marketing perhaps, but the communication was brilliantly embedded in the architecture ..it was an experiential, spiritual form of architecture. The windows, proportions, details all were in alignment... Some say that the invention of the printing press began the transference of communication from architecture to media.
Lightperson, I don't think you're being entirely fair. If you don't like twists or layers, thats one thing, but at least you can recognize that there is more to the design than branding. I'm not even a huge BIG fan, but I feel like I need to give credit when its due.
You mention alignment. BIG is actually working to bring several aspects of the contemporary urban culture into alignment. for example, their designs seem to equally accommodate the mediated experience and the direct physical experience. I wonder how they would do if they had to design a cathedral.
"platitude-laden theatrics"
That kind of says it all.....
That Lego museum seems like their cathedral.
Unless you believe is something else? Like vague innuendo? Is that what you believe in?
davvid, belief systems are link tinted eyeglasses, they color everything you see. Maybe you should take yours off occasionally.
The integrity of design is just as pronounced in the detailing of the exterior as it is in the faraway shape and those lights.
As it should be. This is a primary measure of quality. I'd go so far as to argue that the detailing is more important because human scale is what people really experience.
"...because human scale is what people really experience."
You are ignoring the full range of ways that we experience architecture. I get that you really like details. You make tables and stairs and stuff. But I experienced the stairs you built through pictures you posted on the internet, not by a direct physical interaction.
I agree we can see architecture through images and even judge it that way, but there's a full range of ethical problems when architecture is designed first for the camera.
Clearly Yes is More is a clever marketing device but if you look closer there is nothing there.
I can confirm that the pay at BIG is low. Real low. As in I have a friend that has 1 year experience before working there, she is in her 2nd year there and is paid $24,000. She works six days a week (they get Sundays off - so nice...) usually about 9:30 until 8:00PM. They get a lunch but most are expected to eat at their desk. So that's a 60 hour work week which translates to $8.00 / hour, slightly below the NYS minimum wage of $8.75.
I don't know why she does it and she doesn't really know either. Famous person, good on the resume, exotic projects. I would never do it and she is running her health and social life, but oh well.
The thing that drives me crazy is when I hear his Danish imports like his Partners and Business Dept are getting six figures and drive BMWs to work in the City. WTF?
Yes* is More
*No
Just like the architecture, look under the PR and it's a lot of BS.
Didn't know the numbers knoa - scary. You would think they are getting good fees from Google and 21st CF and so on that they could pay the people who do the design decent. Is it really Bjarke that designs all these buildings? No - and you can tell cuz they look like student work. Glad every single big name architect is screwing the recent grads over to line their pockets. Sad.
knoa,
If she is working for below minimum wage, she needs to report it.
davvid, you have a tendency to reduce everything to absolutes.
Read what I wrote: more important. That doesn't ignore anything. That's what you are doing: taking a portion of my comment out of it's context to start an argument. Don't be asinine.
Davvid I agree with you but if I know how it is, it isn't "required" but "expected". Maybe she is hired for 40 hours but expected to work 60. Not sure if you can report that...
Miles,
I misinterpreted what you wrote and the comparison your were trying to make.
This is a good reason why there needs to be more knowledgable voices in the architecture media. All of the journalists have about 0 years of experience and education in the profession, so firms like BIG and their PR handlers have filled in the vacuum. Interestingly as a comparison, other [unnamed] firms have a family culture that respect workers and pay well. Oddly enough the quality of the work is much better,
I don't know why arch firms get a free pass in exploiting labor. It's not art here. Many have said the feminist issue is also about pay but it's more of a sideshow.... If you want to make it about pay then focus on pay.
lightperson, back to you qouting me - as you noted - no one pays attention to history and why should they? history was sooo slow back then.... now at our speeds - rendering any argument Davidd might have that placelness today is no different than 100 years ago - stupid or naive, at our speeds nothing more than a snapshot is needed to understand anything (presumably)........................if you are into Schematic Design it makes a lot of sense to go from paying $100k to learn how in school to at least getting paid for doing it right?....... the only reason senior guys at BIG make that much is because they have been through the process of putting a building together. the task of designing a building that is buildable is often what an Architect does......now if you are into Branding and schematic design,you do not need a license for that, nor a lot of training - i am not sure you should be really that suprised by your wages.........building technology - what a boring class?
Its too bad that we keep separating out aspects of architecture and pitting them against each other.
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.