Eisenmann's Holocaust Memorial is already showing signs of age 2 yrs out. There are cracks in 400 out of 2700 (roughly) of the concrete slabs. Guardian
i think the memorial will be more successful as the concrete cracks, and continuous to change appearance to document time...the cynic idealist in me hopes that the cracks will not be fixed...
perhaps (as our dear stephen lauf might say) it will "historically reenact" the carrying away of the pieces of say...the berlin wall or the john lennon painting in prague--where tourists will tote away the fragments back to there homes as little memorials...thus dematerializing the whole structure. wasn't this peter's ultimate intention anyway--at least figuratively?
i think your right it wasn't necessarily a dematerialization of the object, but rather what it is as an object field. i think eisenman's proper example was how an italian newspaper had to place text on an image of the memorial to illustrate what it was--i suppose what i was eluding to was that the objects themselves breaking down might further this...
and isn't the keep sake/memento a proper precedent for a memorial anyway?
personally i love the prepetual monument by a german artist who goes around all over berlin and installs little hand-made placards into the sidewalk commemorating the former domicile of a holocaust victim...not sure if it's a link but its sort of a continuation of libeskind's original holocaust museum mapping.
also, i think bombing them is suppose to be impossible, because each stelae has an anti-graffiti coating.
i appreciate your efforts to sustain the dematerialization metaphor, but the leap you're making kinda pales to the environmental impact of the 'thing'. besides, the metaphor needs a preconceived sense of what the thing is about - and Eisenman is a repeat offender when it comes to offering cryptic justifications for indulging his formalist urges; i know few people outside of the trade who appreciate, let alone understand, what he claims to be trying to accomplish.
the thing is great because it's blank. and ready to receive. graffiti coating be damned.
yeah, i know what you mean about eisenman's cryptic justifications, but i still think this thing, even though massive is a field and at some point it does dematerialize...once your inside it or close enough your right it is impossible to see it as anything else but a series of huge objects.
but i sort of like the idea of these things eventually disappearing into the pockets of people...just imagine if this whole site were carted away across the global in the pockets of millions of tourists and then redeposited as a global remembrance service.
wasn't there a memorial after WWI where the thing eventual returned to the earth the whole event of the memorial was a preformative act of healing? i guess that doesn't reason well with the "never forget" ideology of holocaust memorializing.
perhaps the cracking and spauling of the concrete will eventually allow for your bombing...which will no doubt be monitored closely by the german authorities.
correction by the way gunter demnig's stolpersteines are all over germany...amazing i thought it was just berlin.
i thought of a similar idea prior to the seeing the NYT story. it was for the world trade center memorial --where the steel from the WTC structure would be used to make markers for each victim all over the world...
i actually tracked and recorded each address of each victim in the united states through the internet...but then i saw that article in the new york times on gunter demnig--i dropped it because i think his project is much more powerful and resonant as he designs, crafts and installs each and every piece...
to get back a little to the start of this: nam henderson, yes, after only two years. in fact, as soon as two months in a lot of cases. it's a function of the concrete's drying process and the internal stresses that this creates, in combination with weather, use/traffic, sun/heat, etc. concrete cracks when poured in large areas, whether that's sidewalk or forms like these.
the best you can do is introduce control joints to 'tell' the concrete where to crack. or let the cracks happen where they may. letting them happen according to environmental conditions and internal stresses is certainly more poetic, but often is not perceived as intentional.
we can hope that eisenman's cracks are intentionally in random locations, but we can't assume that he could have kept them from happening.
just to add a little to steven's control joint explanation--to try and prevent the internal pressure from creating cracks, he might have added an expansion joint, but then there would have been a long bifurcating line across the block with some sort of gasket or caulk--not as formally pure as the blank, plain faces of these megaliths currently.
i was there one week after the opening, and some corners where also already damage, and of course cracks, actually is natural if u understand the nature of the material, i guess the reporter triped out, this is exterior-exposed poured concrete, what do u expected with the xtreme temperatures during winter and summer in berlin??, anyways i agree with the idea of the cracks actually adding to the "aging" of the memorial, i dont mind them... one thing is a crack, other is that it looks old...
as LeCorbu will say: Life is always right, Architects are always wrong
18 Comments
like my former structures professor would say:
"there are two types of concrete: concrete that has cracked and concrete that will crack."
But after only two years.?
I am not saying it's Eisenmann's fault but whoevers's it is.....
Shame at least make it ten?
i think the memorial will be more successful as the concrete cracks, and continuous to change appearance to document time...the cynic idealist in me hopes that the cracks will not be fixed...
as tempting as it is to take pot-shots at Peter, i'm w/ Cris. no getting around it, and if he's sizing things right, it will weather nicely.
the Guardian should back off.
The cracks are here...and crackheads will follow.
It was the wrong thing to do on 6acres of downtown Berlin (The design not the memorial).
Landman - bring it. that thing would look sweet tagged up.
i agree with simples. Leave it cracked unless it becomes a saftey hazard.
perhaps (as our dear stephen lauf might say) it will "historically reenact" the carrying away of the pieces of say...the berlin wall or the john lennon painting in prague--where tourists will tote away the fragments back to there homes as little memorials...thus dematerializing the whole structure. wasn't this peter's ultimate intention anyway--at least figuratively?
before
after
dematerialization? via a series of 3000 concrete pylons? even conceptually, it's a stretch.
bomb those babies and bring them to life.
i think your right it wasn't necessarily a dematerialization of the object, but rather what it is as an object field. i think eisenman's proper example was how an italian newspaper had to place text on an image of the memorial to illustrate what it was--i suppose what i was eluding to was that the objects themselves breaking down might further this...
and isn't the keep sake/memento a proper precedent for a memorial anyway?
personally i love the prepetual monument by a german artist who goes around all over berlin and installs little hand-made placards into the sidewalk commemorating the former domicile of a holocaust victim...not sure if it's a link but its sort of a continuation of libeskind's original holocaust museum mapping.
also, i think bombing them is suppose to be impossible, because each stelae has an anti-graffiti coating.
on a more serious note:
i appreciate your efforts to sustain the dematerialization metaphor, but the leap you're making kinda pales to the environmental impact of the 'thing'. besides, the metaphor needs a preconceived sense of what the thing is about - and Eisenman is a repeat offender when it comes to offering cryptic justifications for indulging his formalist urges; i know few people outside of the trade who appreciate, let alone understand, what he claims to be trying to accomplish.
the thing is great because it's blank. and ready to receive. graffiti coating be damned.
hadn't heard of that placard thing - got a link?
NYT - article about German sculptor Gunter Demnig and his stolpersteine project.
yeah, i know what you mean about eisenman's cryptic justifications, but i still think this thing, even though massive is a field and at some point it does dematerialize...once your inside it or close enough your right it is impossible to see it as anything else but a series of huge objects.
but i sort of like the idea of these things eventually disappearing into the pockets of people...just imagine if this whole site were carted away across the global in the pockets of millions of tourists and then redeposited as a global remembrance service.
wasn't there a memorial after WWI where the thing eventual returned to the earth the whole event of the memorial was a preformative act of healing? i guess that doesn't reason well with the "never forget" ideology of holocaust memorializing.
perhaps the cracking and spauling of the concrete will eventually allow for your bombing...which will no doubt be monitored closely by the german authorities.
correction by the way gunter demnig's stolpersteines are all over germany...amazing i thought it was just berlin.
i thought of a similar idea prior to the seeing the NYT story. it was for the world trade center memorial --where the steel from the WTC structure would be used to make markers for each victim all over the world...
i actually tracked and recorded each address of each victim in the united states through the internet...but then i saw that article in the new york times on gunter demnig--i dropped it because i think his project is much more powerful and resonant as he designs, crafts and installs each and every piece...
thnx 4 the link.
again, i see your point - just not crazy about the leap from 'disorientation' to 'dematerialization'...seems to be dressing things up a bit...
as for the authorities - a necessary part of the equation. who wants to tag when it's permitted?
to get back a little to the start of this: nam henderson, yes, after only two years. in fact, as soon as two months in a lot of cases. it's a function of the concrete's drying process and the internal stresses that this creates, in combination with weather, use/traffic, sun/heat, etc. concrete cracks when poured in large areas, whether that's sidewalk or forms like these.
the best you can do is introduce control joints to 'tell' the concrete where to crack. or let the cracks happen where they may. letting them happen according to environmental conditions and internal stresses is certainly more poetic, but often is not perceived as intentional.
we can hope that eisenman's cracks are intentionally in random locations, but we can't assume that he could have kept them from happening.
just to add a little to steven's control joint explanation--to try and prevent the internal pressure from creating cracks, he might have added an expansion joint, but then there would have been a long bifurcating line across the block with some sort of gasket or caulk--not as formally pure as the blank, plain faces of these megaliths currently.
i was there one week after the opening, and some corners where also already damage, and of course cracks, actually is natural if u understand the nature of the material, i guess the reporter triped out, this is exterior-exposed poured concrete, what do u expected with the xtreme temperatures during winter and summer in berlin??, anyways i agree with the idea of the cracks actually adding to the "aging" of the memorial, i dont mind them... one thing is a crack, other is that it looks old...
as LeCorbu will say: Life is always right, Architects are always wrong
john, many thanks for the stolpersteine link, fascinating project.
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.