Sticks and Stones

Jean Nouvel, the bold French architect known for his innovative works such as the Torre Agbar tower in Barcelona, a precursor to London’s very similar 30 St. Mary’s Axe, has received architecture’s top honour, the Pritzker Prize. Informally known as the ‘Nobel prize for architecture’, a jury chosen by the Hyatt Foundation awarded the $100,000 grant and bronze medallion today. Previous winners include Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, Zaha Hadid and the first winner in 1979, Philip Johnson.

Critical and commercial success in architecture is increasingly coming from architects who do not have a ‘house-style’ and Jean Nouvel is no exception. Like David Chipperfield, the British architect who won the RIBA Sterling Prize 2007 for his Museum of Modern Literature in Germany, Nouvel believes the surrounding environment essentially dictates the design of a building. “The story, the climate, the culture of the place,” he said. “The references of the buildings around, what the people in the city love. The wind, the colour of the sky, the trees around - the building is not done only to be the most beautiful,” he said. “It’s done to give advantage to the surroundings. It’s a dialogue.” However, he does not design buildings simply to echo their surroundings. “Generally, when you say context, people think you want to copy the buildings around, but often context is contrast,” he said.

Nouvel’s projects are diverse; from designing luxury homes for Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie to building the Concert Hall Lucerne in Switzerland, his work has challenged the way in which architects approach architecture. He claims anything from the monumental and the civic, to the residential and vernacular can be realised successfully by an architect with an appreciation of the surrounding environment. The jury said of Nouvel’s industrial Guthrie Theater, which has a cantilevered bridge overlooking the Mississippi River, “the theatre both merges and contrasts with its surroundings.” It added, “It is responsive to the city and the nearby Mississippi River, and yet, it is also an expression of theatricality and the magical world of performance.”

I recently visited Madrid and stayed at Hotel Puerta America, a conceptual hotel where each floor is designed by a high profile designer. Norman Foster, Zaha Hadid, David Chipperfield, Arota Ishozaki and Jean Nouvel are just a few who have experimented with hotel design as the operators, Silken, claimed the project ‘had no budget’. Nouvel’s floor, the top one, is perhaps the most impressive. It is wildly romantic; stunning Japanese influences and a heady sense of artistic involvement, the design is a world away from the environment, a dusty residential area of a metropolitan Madrid. Forgiving the experimental nature of the project, it seems Nouvel has stuck to the ‘context is contrast’ mantra very strictly. Where other designers who have a ‘house style’ merely put their signature curves and deconstructive lines (in the case of Zaha Hadid) on their floor, architects such as Foster and Chipperfield, who are driven wholly by an environmental and social sensitivity to architecture, and no house style, chose to echo their surroundings. In the case of Foster, the palette of Spanish artist and friend Chilleda was employed; the dusty sienna brown worktops working symbiotically with the yellow ochre leather of the furnishings. It seems both Nouvel and Foster have gained success differently by echoing and contrasting the environment to provide feelings of excitement and familiarity respectively.

This year’s Pritzker Prize winner is yet another example of a successful architect who is very different to his contemporaries. Not restricted by an ‘ism’, not a disciple of a school, just a servant to society and its needs. I feel excited and privileged to be living in a time where architecture really is becoming all about social concern.

No Comments

Today was a momentous day for British aviation and the airline industry, as Heathrow’s long awaited, and desperately needed Terminal 5 opened for commercial flights.

Whilst the day is a great accolade for the Terminal’s sole occupant, British Airways, it is a triumph for airport owner BAA. The project was delivered on time and on budget. Further more, all the UK taxpayers out there will be glad to know that it was funded entirely out of private money. Compare that to the Millenium Domes and Wembley Stadiums that used other people’s money to deliver something over-budged and late. Of course 2012 will be the real Doomsday for UK tax-payers when the Olympics, a purely prestige project for Ken Livingtone’s (and his others cronies) ego takes place.

So from today, millions of Brisith travellers, and international visitors to Britain will be able to enjoy their holiday or their business trip just a little bit more thanks to the new terminal. Even those not using it directly will benefit from the increased capacity in the other Heathrow terminals as airlines move around. (Though the teething problems associated with this move may be problematic).

All that remains now is for approval for Heathrow’s third terminal to be given, so that the UK economy will see a viable future, with a key part of its infrastructures expanding to meet demand.

UPDATE 18:31 GMT - I mentioned that teething problems may be problematic, but did not envisage this sort of trouble. The BA Operations Director has just announced that fligts out of T5 today will be hand-baggage only. He apologises (as he should) but does not say who is to blame.  Given the supposed extensive testing of the new terminal, with images of thousands of bags circulating the T5 system being shown on the news only weeks ago, one has to wonder how successful these tests were. A way to have avoided all this fuss if BAA and BA weren’t too keen on extensive testing would have been to make all outgoing flights from T5 today free, so that no-one has a major ground to complain if they are public volunteers. The cost of that may have been in the region of £10m, but given the £4.6bn terminal, it seems a small price to pay.

No Comments

For the last thirty years one of the loudest way to demonstrate wealth was by building a McMansion. These ostentatious homes could be built on a budget while retaining a grand appearance. Building with pre-fabricated materials, not hiring an architect, and skimping on design by only having the face built in stone - or even out of composite that looked like stone, cut costs dramatically, allowing people to build houses that looked more expensive than they were.

The result was ugly, disproportionate homes. They had glamorous faces but sides built with plywood and very few windows. These homes had large heating and cooling bills. They loomed over their diminutive lawns. They were unoriginal; that cost-cutting decision to not have an architect meant many houses looked alike.

What few people predicted was another format growing around the same time: prefab modular houses, would later rise from its roots as trailer-park centerpieces to the sort of thing Silicon Valley billionaires like Phillipe Kahn want to live in. The difference is of course a dramatic change in style and building quality; but two things remain the same: affordability and convenience.

I was drawn to Marmol Radzinger’s designs for a totally different reason. It seems odd to say these homes are beautiful - they are designed to be purely fuctional and completely ignore aesthetics  - but in their drive to lower costs and reduce the amount of energy needed, the designs bear a striking resemblance to the work of the Internationalist architects of the 1930s - 1970s. The homes are not adorned with pediments and columns, they are purely functional, which ironically forms a style of their own.

Firms like Resolution: 4, Marmol Radzinger, and Jeriko House have designed striking model homes. These can be up to 5,000 square feet and include pools, second floors, and garages. These three firms in particular, along with LivingHomes and Michelle Kaufmann design beautiful modern homes for six, sometimes seven figures. Those on a much tighter budget can also build their own brand new, green, modern homes from Rocio Romero, whose LV homes can be bought, built, and completed for $80,000.

Some of the particularly appealing aspects are the modular designs, which allows for easy extendability and customisation: if you choose to add a library, it’s fairly simple to do so, and that library can be built exactly to your specification. Another recent draw is green technology. Marmol Radzinger offers the option of installing solar panels, and all firms use materials and building techniques which limit the impact on the environment. Most firms build to LEED certification.

In these ways, the firms have turned a cheap, efficient, and highly customisable medium into a luxury good. They come with 20 year warranties, are built to a truly impressive standard with high-grade materials, and by being easily customised are usually unique. The only downside is that as a relatively new phenomenon; you can’t just go and buy one on the street. While appealing because you can build exactly what you want, in densely packed, highly urbanised cities and suburbs, the cost of tearing down an existing house is included. Nevertheless, the impressive qualities outweigh these costs, which is why this option is growing in popularity so rapidly.

3 Comments

Some of the earliest civilisations grew up in Mesopotamia, between the banks of the Tigris and Euphrates, which run through Iraq. Neighbouring Iran has its fair share of ancient history; Persepolis - the great city of the Persians is in south central Iran and is dramatically different to the image President Bush portrays of the country.

Modern Iran is caricatured as an evil state, menacingly stockpiling nuclear weapons to assault Israel and Europe. While the Iranian government should be seen this way, the Iranian people should not.

Like many populations ruled by despotic governments, the people of Iran should not have their name sullied by the actions a government imposed upon them.

James Vlahos of National Geographic took advantage of a new Iranian initiative to welcome tourists - even Americans - to learn about the real Iran. It’s a brilliant way to counter the propaganda from the US.

He visited Persepolis and Esfahan, the latter being an extraordinarily beautiful city. More Casablanca than Syriana. In Esfahan he chatted with locals, explored beautiful and ancient Mosques, and witnessed the real change happening in Iran today: his guide Maziar Rahimi spoke to him of “The young women wearing their scarves far back and more makeup. Change is coming.”

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad remains a serious threat to global security. His nuclear weapons program is not only real but must be halted immediately. However, that does not mean blowing up the parts of Iran James Vlahos visited. We already know of Humvees rampaging through ancient Iraqi towns and the rampant looting in Baghdad. This is what we must avoid. These countries are led by evil men, but they themselves are not evil. An hour speaking with Vahid Mousavifard, an ordinary citizen, an example of the real Iran, would make this plainly clear to all who deign to find out.

No Comments

East Asian architecture is beautiful. Pagodas, stupas, and temples litter the Pacific Rim; each bringing art to an otherwise fully pragmatic form: the building. The planet is covered in a mass of buildings so dull no one considers them significant. They are mundane and purely functional. A roof, four walls, a window or two and a door. There is nothing exceptional or even noticeable about the vast majority of buildings.

So we revere the beautiful ones. The inspirational ones. The ones that demonstrate some artistic thought in their conception. We flock in our billions to these buildings because they are shrines to imagination. They are the realisation of someone’s dream. It is also necessary that our buildings are aesthetically pleasing. We need them to be because we are surrounded by them; encompassed entirely by them.

We celebrate our finest accomplishments in buildings and mourn great losses in them. We dream, we hope, and we pray in these beautiful buildings.

Today one of them burned down. Cinders spewed across Seoul as Namdaemun was engulfed in flames so riotous and menacing that they could not be stopped. When day broke this morning, what was left was a morbid corpse, a reminder of what once stood atop that stone pedestal. The Cultural Heritage Administration said it would take at least three years to fully restore the gate and it would cost some $21 million. It will be rebuilt because buildings like these must be rebuilt.

The quotation that best characterises peoples’ response to this disaster was from President-elect Lee Myung-bak. “People’s hearts will ache.”

1 Comment