Questioning Extravagent Architecture
Alissa Walker poses numerous questions about design, including that of buildings, and how it should reflect on the current economy.
While Gehry's point is certainly something to consider, I would say that there's not only room for low and high, accessible and impossible, frugal and outrageous, but a widespread embrace of both. A shift has occurred, and our enthusiasm for the many, many well-designed water-transporting devices for Africa is the same (if not more than) for the handful of zany skyscrapers like the cool, punched-out facade of Rem Koolhaas' CCTV building. That's thanks to all the makers, companies, organizations and institutions who have tirelessly evangelized the value of good design in our culture. And the same amount of credit can be given to Sinclair's gritty, hands-on solution to affordable housing, or Gehry's phenomenal transformation of the tiny industrial city of Bilbao, or Moss' witty wares placed preciously under glass, warning us "do not touch."
But is it indeed immoral to design something overly large, overly decadent, overly expensive in these dark times? Should Hadid be publicly tried for her design crimes? Should the auto designers with sleek yet oil-dependent cars on their drawing boards be damned to design hell? Frank Gehry for wanting his fantastical Atlantic Yards to become a reality? Moss for pushing something like Hella Jongerius' Polder Sofa ($10,615)? The whole of Milan this week for perpetuating such a concept? And where do we possibly draw the line?
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
- Seeing a Bright Side to the Architecture Meltdown - Feb 10, 2012
- Using Adaptive Reuse to Scale the Urban Future - Feb 08, 2012
- So, You Want to be a Critic? - Feb 05, 2012
- Top 8 Facadist Renovations, from Melbourne to Bucharest - Feb 04, 2012
- Bjarke Ingels' Architectural Response To 'Singularity' - Jan 16, 2012


















