Peter Zumthor released new renderings for his LACMA redesign last week, and boy are people not impressed! We talk about the "undercooked" look of Zumthor's snaking concrete inkblot plan for the museum, and experiment with a new segment devoted to ranting on the podcast. You've been warned.
Listen to episode 76 of Archinect Sessions, "Raw Rendering Ranters":
This week’s podcast is sponsored by AIA Advantage Partner, BQE Software, and the makers of ArchiOffice. ArchiOffice is the only Office and Project Management Software built with the needs of architects in mind. It will help you manage people and projects, while you focus on designing great architecture. Our podcast listeners can get a fully functional 15-day trial of ArchiOffice at www.bqe.com/Archinect.
Shownotes:
Sunshine and noir: Peter Zumthor's new Los Angeles County Museum of Art – the Los Angeles Review of Books piece on LACMA, referenced by Donna
Donna's rant: Working Life: Does Taliesin’s collaborative and pedagogical domesticity suit the 21st century?
Ken's rant: Ben Derbyshire from HTA Design voted President Elect of the RIBA, with reference to previous RIBA discrimination case filed by Elsie Owusu.
Amelia's rant: @BirdsofVenice, the best satirical architecture Twitter to date (even better than @KoolhaasCheer)
21 Comments
I'm glad it doesn't look like every other bland shiny condo rendering... Zumthor, Ando, TWBTA are a different breed
They all do shiny renderings. Not a different breed.
The problem with Zumthor was the design, not the rendering style.
Never said they don't do renderings. But it's not the be all end all, and usually comes at the end. If you see other projects, they release renderings (usually from a safe distance) and then work from those.
And the level of detail and thought is on another level (I don't get that middle one though, seems off). The LACMA is looking nice, what exactly do people want...
Pertinent to Ken's rant in part: https://www.architecture.com/RIBA/Professionalsupport/SiteSignboards.aspx
???
Sam, thanks for that link. I think it's cool that RIBA does this, wish the AIA would, but it still cracks me up to think this is a Presidential platform issue.
Seems like he should be able to check this off his list in his first week of office.
Zumthor's museum design would be an embarrassment in any Studio class. That the Los Angeles Establishment is drooling to have it, as they did the now hated Andersen building in the 80's proves they know zero about Architecture and everything about branding.
We know so little about what Zumthor thinks about the future of the global art institution or the changing nature of art and art display. Firms like SANAA, OMA, Piano, BIG, DS&R, H&deM and others have some very clear ideas about how Architecture can functionally support artists and curators in their efforts. Many firms do research and theorize about this stuff. What does Zumthor do? What does Zumthor think? Its a mystery to me. I have very little sense of what Zumthor thinks about a range of contemporary architecture and urban issues.
Lol, Zumthor wipes his ass with Bjarkes boy band head. This project looks like a fail though....but his work is so subtle and material driven that it may be nice when done...just wish he hadn't relied so much on the tar pit metaphor. His work is usually too complex to be reduced to one BIG gesture. Terrible lapse of judgement.
Everything is complex. Reality is complex. But an Architect is supposed to be a leader in this process. That requires some dialog and explanation of the function and theory behind the building. Mysterious and moody images of light and shadow isn't enough. I'm sure the materiality will be nice but Zumthor uses materiality as a crutch while ignoring a range of urban, technological, sociological, political, economic aspects of Architecture.
And by the way, the tar blotch shape is the "BIG" gesture.
The project is just out of his wheelhouse - too large, unfamiliar climate, an outsider trying to put something in LA that makes no sense at all. A bunch of yes men trustees thinking this artful architect can produce a refined piece of architecture while lacking all of the necessary understanding and resources to do so.
Stick to programs the size of the zinc museum and move on.
It doesn't seem up to a Getty level but it's a nice simple work, maybe I trust Zumthors previous craft, in spite of its seaming simple idea. Guess that's the power of reputation and precious work.
All of the criticism seems to be critics filling in a narrative where the architect doesn't. Weird that architects are now responsible for narrative and branding than building..
"The tar shape is the BIG gesture"
Yeah I know. That's what I meant. His work is usually much more than a single gesture...this one seems to be all about that one move.
You're welcome for the link Ken, and I agree that this is a very strange issue to run a presidency platform on, although I've not followed any of it.
I'm really interested to see what Ben Derbyshire will do as the new president. Site signs aside.
Hat tip to @tedgrunewald on twitter for this link to the additive history of the Met.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7oJrJJoTSaI&feature=youtu.be
Interesting that Steven Holl does a lot of watercolor renderings and handmade models, though his work is much different. Actually feels more like a Holl project. i like it.
Maybe the reason Zumthor doesn't like renderings is exactly related to the critical reaction... The more you give them, they more they look for problems that don't necessarily exist. Focusing on models and sketches challenges the critic to critique the building instead of single rendering perspective
Chipperfield puts a strong emphasis on materiality and craft, but he works through precise renderings. When designs are so minimal and intended to be well crafted, sometimes the "special moment" is as subtle as a texture or a reveal, or a light fixture. Physical models are rarely detailed enough to communicate this. They are almost always abstractions, especially when they're built out of wood or some other monochromatic material.
Chipperfield has been very successful at communicating his design intentions through renderings without falling for the generic graphic tropes like photoshopping loads of happy smiling people in.
Think i'm getting old school in my age
^Terrible by today's rendering standards!
Now that one makes sense.
+1 to chigurh - personally (as an open zumthor fan boy), this one's trying to take the scale and subtlety of kolumba and blow it up to a scale that it's just not holding together at. it's too big and relies on one "move" too much. already, between the first versions and this one, elements like exterior stairs, sculptures, etc. are encroaching on the design in a way that's going to continue to erode the purity of the gesture. this would have worked at 1/5th the current size.
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.