Monday 8 September 2014

Monika Sosnowska. Tower


[Photo via 860-880 Lake Shore Drive]

Mies van der Rohe's 860-880 Lake Shore Drive apartments, shown above around the time of their completion in 1951, are two of the most influential towers in 20th-century architecture. Predating by seven years his Seagram Building in New York City, 860 and 880 consist of uniform facades with small, vertical I-beams in front of steel plates and clear glass.


[Facade detail | Photo via 860-880 Lake Shore Drive]

A basic expression of floor-to-ceiling glass and decorative steel meant to evoke the structural frame behind it subsequently became the go-to design for Mies and other architects in the 1960s and later, especially for office buildings. Today's urban environments of glass skins (now taut, with silicon joints rather than decorative projections) would be unthinkable without this trailblazing pair.

Monika Sosnowska Tower
[All photographs of Tower by John Hill]

860-880 are the source, and modern architecture is the subject, of Polish artist Monika Sosnowska's Tower, on display until October 25 at Hauser & Wirth on West 18th Street. The artist has taken the facade – everything in front of the structural steel, fireproofing and floors – built it at full scale and then distorted it beyond recognition. Well, almost beyond recognition.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

Walking into the large gallery space, the first view of Tower is the one above; the 110-foot-long piece is so big that I could not capture it in a single photo. My first thought was "beached whale," and while I can't say if the artist intended such a resemblance, the form and the inversion of the subject (from vertical to horizontal) does give the impression that modern architecture is dead or dying, much like a whale washed ashore is dead or dying.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

Tower's modules are those of the original facade, the rectangular window bays between the decorative I-beams, with a large pane of glass above a smaller, operable pane. Of course, glass is missing from the piece, but if we straighten out the bent construction in our minds, the regular, rectangular grid is there, vertical on one side (photos above and below) and horizontal on the other (top installation photo).

Monika Sosnowska Tower

Comparing the top view of the installation to the one above – photos from alternate ends of the piece – shows the most distinctive experiences of the piece. Where the steel is coiled tightly, as in the above photo, Tower is like a tube, a restricted view where the end is barely visible.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

But at the other end (photo below), the steel unfurls, as if the tension of the coil at the other end could not be contained. Here, the piece exposes itself in all its gruesome complexity.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

About halfway down the 110-foot length of the piece, the steel transitions from what I described as vertical to horizontal. This transition can be seen in the below photo, with the vertical windows on the right and the horizontal windows on the left (look for the intermediate mullion between large pane and operable pane to get a sense of the orientation).


Monika Sosnowska Tower

Looking at the facade detail of 860-880 near the top of the post, one question that may arise is: Why is Tower all black when Mies's original is black steel and gray aluminum? This is a good question, not only because Mies is quoted as saying "God is in the details" but because the pair of towers were replicated at 900-910 Lake Shore Drive with some minor changes, one of them being an all-black metal exterior. So with Tower's all-black appearance, Sosnowska is referencing not only the original but also its copies, be it right across the street or elsewhere around the world.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

It's easy to go on analyzing Tower in terms of the architecture of modernism (or the destruction of architecture, à la 9/11, that the mangled form also brings to mind), but intellectual perspectives on the piece are not needed to appreciate it. The thing is so big and so gnarly that it just impresses out of its size and form: the way the pieces bend as well as the way they overlap each other; the way it occupies one half of the gallery, cutting a diagonal across the room and inviting visitors to walk around it; and the way it's hardly concerned with beauty or order.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

Tower invites speculation about how it was made. While a book specifically on the piece will be released in November, one needn't see that to know it was a complicated and intensive undertaking, akin to constructing a building, both in terms of mechanical muscle and the coordination of labor needed to move the project from scale models to full size.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

So if you're in New York City between now and October 25, be sure to head to Hauser & Wirth to take in Monika Sosnowska's Tower to experience it for yourself.

Monika Sosnowska Tower

Sunday 7 September 2014

Sonic Forest

Christopher Janney's Sonic Forest: Civic Celebrations opened across the street from the Center for Architecture on Friday evening. The grid of interactive pylons will be up only until September 11, but for those who can't visit by then, one of Janney's permanent pieces, Reach NYC, can be experienced on the N/Q/R platforms of the 34th Street/Herald Square station. Below are some of my photos and video clips of Sonic Forest.

Sonic Forest
[All photos/videos by John Hill]

Sonic Forest

Sonic Forest

Sonic Forest

Sonic Forest

Saturday 6 September 2014

Auf Wiedersehen, Loreley (Corrected)

Update 09-07: Per a comment on Twitter, I was mistaken in my original post at what intersection I was looking at (double D'OH!!), but nevertheless R+L's Loreley is still gone, per the corrected text below.

I'm not sure when the Brooklyn outpost of Loreley Biergarten closed, but when I happened to think I was walking by its location in the shadow of the BQE a couple days ago, it was gone. This is what it looked like when Loreley existed, in a spread from my Guide to Contmporary New York City Architecture:

[That should say 64 *Frost* Street – D'OH! | Photos by Amy Barkow]

Not only is restaurant designed by Rickenbacker + Leung gone, per this Google Street View from April 2012:


But sometime between then and September 2013, the date of this Google Street View, the restaurant changed from Loreley's innovate brick fencing to something with a wood fence, and the city put in a preliminary plaza at the triangular tip where Frost and Meeker meet:


The new restaurant, since mid-2013, is Battery Harris, a "Carribbean-inspired restaurant and bar."

Since the above view, (see my photo at top) taller buildings have taken over the low-rise buildings behind and the city has made the parklet more permanent through the extension of the curbs, but at the omission of the planters and stone benches. Although I didn't take a close look at the construction sign while passing by the other day (the BIS indicates a Place of Assembly permit filed by C. Wall Architecture, which has done plenty of restaurants, so I'd wager on another one here), whatever occupies the one-story building at the tip of the site former Loreley space will hopefully nurture the new but empty public space in front of it...and maybe they can show movies on that big blank wall facing the plaza, rather than putting up a billboard aimed at BQE drivers.

Thursday 4 September 2014

Now Trending: Architecture in the Digital Media Age

The title of this blog post is the title of a panel discussion that was held in SOM's New York office in a couple months ago. While the inclusion of the term "trending" points to the a desire to have architecture function like cats, celebrities, and other viral topics, the proceedings, which can be watched below or here, strike a balance between skepticism and all-out-embrace of digital trends.


[Photo via SOM's Facebook page]

From SOM:
The internet has affected nearly every aspect of our lives. What impact has it had on architecture — and has that impact been negative or positive? In this panel discussion, hosted at SOM’s New York office on July 31st, 2014, three leaders from influential design publications* discuss the myriad ways architecture is presented online; whether the web has diminished genuine, critical dialogue about architecture; and how much thought and energy a firm should invest in its digital presence.
*With Cathleen McGuigan, editor in chief of Architectural Record; Marc Kushner, founder and CEO of Architizer; Alan Brake, executive editor at The Architect’s Newspaper; moderated by Jenna McKnight, digital editor at SOM.

Wednesday 3 September 2014

KRob 2014

October 27, 2014 – 5pm CST, to be precise – is the deadline for this year's Ken Roberts Memorial Delineation Competition, which is celebrating its 40th anniversary. Students and professionals can enter in various categories, with eligibility requirements here and more details on the competition below.



From KRob:
Celebrating 40 years, the annual Ken Roberts Memorial Delineation Competition is the longest running architectural drawing competition in the world. Organized by the Dallas Chapter of the American Institute of Architects since 1974, the Ken Roberts Competition awards prizes to original works that best represent the artistic qualities of architecturally inspired drawings, produced by hand, digital CG or a combination of both.

Hosted by the AIA Dallas Chapter at their offices in Dallas and sponsored by Doghouse Computer Systems, the competition culminates in an award ceremony and event night with refreshments and conversation with the jury panel. This year the jury consists of Frank Ching, considered one of the greatest architectural illustrators of our time and author of multiple books that have become essential to young architects-in-training. Thomas Series owner of Laptop – Rendering, an incredible visualization firm who work with leading architects worldwide, and Cliff Welch, architect and owner of Welch Architects, a renowned contemporary architect in Dallas, Texas.

Having received 385 entries from over 25 countries in the last year, KRob’s visibility continues to grow, with its website receiving over 33,000 visitors each year.

Professionals and students from all over the world are encouraged to enter this exciting competition for an opportunity to win great prizes, gain recognition across the industry and open up new opportunities with the publication of their ‘Award Winning’ work!

More information can be found at www.krobarch.com

The above poster features Chris Cornelius's winner last year in the professional digital/mixed category. Below are some of my favorites from previous years.


[J. Arthur Liu, 2007 juror citation professional hand category]


[Matthew Sander, 2008 best in student hand category]


[Nathan Freise, 2009 best in show, best in professional/mixed category]


[Brad Silva, 2010 best in physical submission category]


[Dustin Wheat, 2011 best in physical submission category]


[Chris Cornelius, 2012 best in physical submission category]

Monday 1 September 2014

Today's archidose #780

Here are some photos of the Druzhba Sanatorium (1985) in Kurpaty, Crimea, Ukraine, by Igor Vasilevsky with Nodar Kancheli, photographed by William Veerbeek.

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

Druzhba Sanatorium (Igor Vasilevsky/  Nodar Kancheli), Kurpaty, Crimea / RU, 2014

To contribute your Flickr images for consideration, just:
:: Join and add photos to the archidose pool
To contribute your Instagram images for consideration, just:
:: Tag your photos #archidose

Sunday 31 August 2014

Book Review: 2012 Competitions Annual

2012 Competitions Annual edited by G. Stanley Collyer with Daniel Madryga
The Competition Project, 2013
Paperback, 240 pages



At the start of the 1990s, Competitions magazine began publishing quarterly issues with notices and results on architectural competitions. In 2011 the publication went the way of many magazines and is now online-only, though its print output has segued to an annual book that collects the results of some prominent competitions. The second edition, covering competitions in parts of 2011 and 2012, features the winners and runners up for 16 competitions.

Competitions is based in Kentucky, so it's no surprise that the (now e)magazine tends to focus on the United States, but as the back cover attests: "the majority of competitions for real projects in this volume reflect not only the institutional commitment of foreign nations to this process, but the dire economic straits our governing bodies find themselves in." This quote points to an emphasis on "real" competitions versus "ideas" competitions, while indicating that U.S. competitions in the annual are few; in fact only 5 of the 16 projects are located in the United States, 7 if we broaden the criteria to North America by adding Canada. But of course competitions in any locale are geared to entice as many architects from different countries (often pairing up with local architects) to enter, hopefully leading to more ideas and potentially bigger names. Therefore U.S. participation, as the Annual attests elsewhere in its pages, goes far beyond the locations of competitions.


[OMA: Musée National des Beaux-Arts du Québec. Image: © OMA, rendering by Luxigon]

That said, the U.S. competitions tend to be less flashy and with fewer (or no) big names. This doesn't mean these competitions don't have value, but the mix of international/local and famous/not-so-famous in the book broadens its appeal to a wider spectrum of architects and fans of architecture. An example of the international/famous side of things is the Musée National des Beaux-Arts du Québec competition, won by OMA, with Allied Works, David Chipperfield and others as runners up. On the local/not-so-famous side can be found the Atlanta History Center competition, won by Pfeiffer Partners, with Stanley Beaman & Sears, MSTSD and others as runners up. Given Competitions' focus on results in its annual, we do not learn what really happened to these and other "real" projects. In these cases, OMA's design, officially called the Pierre Lassonde Pavilion, started construction in 2013 and is slated for a 2015 opening, while Pfeiffer Partners' winning design was shelved in favor of an arguably inferior design by Atlanta's MSTSD, but not their runner-up entry they did with Kallman McKinnel & Wood.


[Pfeiffer Partners: Atlanta History Center. Image via waltercrimm.com]

But the big question, the elephant in the room if you will, is the obvious one: What is the value of the Annual in the age of Arch Daily, Bustler, and other websites featuring competitions results with plenty of images and text from the architects? The answer is threefold: The first has already been alluded to, as the book includes competitions that these websites do not feel the need to feature (Arch Daily's coverage of the Atlanta competition is solely a 2011 call for architects announcement, for example). The second is that Competitions includes editorial commentary and jury comments, which these websites don't include and sometimes include, respectively. Third is having the winner and the runners up in one place, which makes it easy for comparison and to have a mental picture of reactions to the competition brief, easier to achieve in a book than on separate web pages online; often websites highlight only the winner and/or only it and a couple runners up. Even if every notable competition isn't covered (an appendix with other competitions, some of them ideas competitions, and their winners is included) the thoroughness of the 2012 Annual should be commended.