Listing 6 blog articles for the tag Daniel Libeskind.
Evolution of the design for WTC 1... then and now.
11 years on and after many fractious debates and redesigns, Skidmore Owings and Merrill – led by David Childs – have well and truly stamped their authority on the final incarnation. The spire is centered, the form filled out (incidentally creating thousands more square feet of lucrative commercial office space), and the base is encased with concrete and steel in an effort to deter would-be terrorists from attacking at ground level.
This last feature tells its own story: One World Trade Center has been the subject of exponential pragmatism, as the metaphor-ridden glass sabre of Libeskind was diluted to incorporate more leasable space – money talks – and security measures to calm the shredded nerves of the populous. The original American symbol of strength – the skyscraper – has become a paranoid giant, wearing a steel crown and the heaviest pair of lead boots imaginable.
Perhaps the greatest irony of all is that, with all these practicalities dissolving Libeskind’s original vision, the most irrational of design features – the 1776-foot height – remains. SOM stole the freedom away from the Freedom Tower, but left the public with one small reminder of why the USA is still a country of liberty and independence... just.
The Angry Architect
Images: © 2011 Studio Daniel Libeskind and Skidmore, Owings and Merrill LLP
Guggenheim Bilbao: The birthplace of Starchitecture?
2. Your process is almost as famous as your buildings.
Perhaps the most infamous example of an architect’s design process is one that never actually happened: Frank Gehry made a cameo appearance on The Simpsons, in which his crumpled ball of paper was transformed into the Disney Concert Hall, and has regretted it ever since. In an interview with CNN he ranted: “That's the ****. Everybody thinks I'm going to crumple a paper. Clients come to me and say crumple a piece of paper, we'll give you $100 and then we'll build it.”
In contrast, Daniel Libeskind milks the myths of design conception for all their worth: his sketches, which may or may not have been scrawled on cocktail napkins, have been framed and sold as artworks in their own right. Either way, when your process comes under as much scrutiny as your buildings, you can be confident you are well on your way to architectural stardom.
How Gehry did NOT design the Disney Concert Hall...
3. Imitations of your creations begin to emerge.
Architecture is no stranger to copying: from classicism to, well, neo-classicism, it has long been accepted that imitation is the greatest form of flattery. These days though, some firms are taking it to another level: last year, it emerged that Zaha Hadid’s design for Wangjing SOHO was being unceremoniously replicated in the eastern city of Chongqing.
Satoshi Ohashi, the ZHA project director overseeing the project, speculated that the counterfeiters may have gotten their hands on digital files containing the firm's original plans. This is an ordeal that will be familiar with many a firm in the digital age, but how often does plagiarism merit international headlines? If that is the case with your stolen design, like Dame Hadid, you probably have yourself a spot reserved in the architectural hall of fame.
Zaha's Galaxy Soho... or is it?
4. You have a building designed by you… named after you.
As I reported last year, the generic glass pillars of banality ascending in the Citylife Milano master plan took the term ‘Brand Architecture’ to a whole new level. The developers in question chose to embellish its “outstandingly iconic buildings” (yes, their words) with … the names of the designers themselves.
That’s right: The Hadid Tower, the Libeskind Tower, and the Isozaki Tower are promoted on the company’s website, explicitly linking the architects and their buildings to the executive lifestyle of their prospective tenants.
Just as Brittney Spears and David Beckham have their own lines of perfume and aftershave, it is now apparently permissible to utilize the celebrity of architects to sell buildings as luxury products. Rightly or wrongly, if a developer sticks your name on the label, you can be sure you have made it!
Citylife Milano: Eau De Libeskind... et al
5. You and your buildings are parodied all over the Internet.
The phenomenon of the internet meme will be familiar to anyone who has spent even a modicum of time procrastinating on social networking sites – LOLcats, Philosoraptor, Trollface and Forever Alone are some of the biggest web-based celebrities out there. Architecture, as a niche sector of online interest, is generally not considered to be ‘meme-worthy’… but if you are famous enough, exceptions can be made.
Zaha Hadid and Frank Gehry in particular have had their fair share of ‘homages’ go viral, some of which are hilarious, others… well, a little harsh perhaps. But hey, it comes with the territory. Some are positively adorable, like this Libeskind-related image: if one of your buildings was ever coupled with a kitten and shared across the information superhighway, you have surely reached the upper echelons of the industry.
Starchitects + Cats = Meme Heaven
This week, the focus shifts east, to the metropolis of Wuhan in central China. A new public building, the snappily named ‘Zhang Zhidong and Modern Industrial Museum’, is under construction, and is the first creation in China by a particularly political member of the Starchitect set: Daniel Libeskind.
The piece has a certain sculptural quality: It appears as an outlandish ornament, placed carefully on an urban mantelpiece fringed with perfectly manicured hedges, circled by identical black cars… this is a museum curio to match the artifacts within.
There is no getting away from the fact though, that like the pre-eminent Zaha Hadid, Libeskind is another perpetrator of ‘Brand’ architecture. Whatever the building’s function may be, and no matter what socio-political context it may emerge within, a Libsekind building conforms to a familiar one-liner: an aggressive, titanium-skinned concrete explosion that yells, “I WILL be an icon of your city! Look at me!”
Hmm, that almost sounds like a dictatorial architectural style… do I smell irony?
Libeskind has argued that, as the project is privately funded, and therefore distanced from the totalitarian regime, this particularly foray into the heart of China is morally acceptable. Most likely, he has listened to his peers on the subject – As Will Alsop succinctly put it, “the choice you have as an architect is, can you help to make a positive change, or do you stay away - in which case the countries are condemned to some terrible architects and nothing moves on.”
Whether Libeskind’s museum constitutes a ‘positive change’ is debatable, but at least he’s remembered whom a country’s cultural buildings actually benefit: The local people, not their autocratic overlords.
The Angry Architect
Page 1 of 1« Previous Next »
© 2017 The Angry Architect