I'm not sure if I understand. "which one looks cooler"? You have a webpage with random buildings from Shanghai and a webpage with random buildings in America. What is the comparison?
Besides, my comment on Shanghai had nothing to do with "cool" but of the massive destruction of entire parts of historical Shanghai for highways and skyscrapers. That's not so cool.
In addition to a better cultural response, I'd like to see something more climate-responsive than a glass box. That solar cooker is going to require huge amounts of A/C to keep habitable. Here's one "energy star" idea for a store...
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
You have to be kidding! Chinese architecture is decades ahead?! Is that why all the famous buildings of the Beijing Olympics were designed by westerners?!
There are many talented american modern (not post-modern, get your terms right) designers. The USA has not stagnated since colonial times. It would seem you are forgetting the birth of skyscrapers here among other things.
If you look at Shanghai, you will see the architectural rape of a city, It's a disaster not something to be proud of.
Don't quit your day job for that of an architectural critic.
Perhaps it is you that need to get your terms right, Modern Architecture's period ended in the 1950-60 with the end of LeCourbusier, Gropius's Bauhaus, and Mies Van Der Rohe, some carried over further with Oscar Niemeyer, but after that the postmodern design picked up. Modern is more formal, and Postmodern contradicts that, Styles of Robert Venturi, Phillip Johnson, Frank Gehry, I.M. Pei (from China), A.M. Stern, Stephen Holl....etc. The swooping style you see from Morphosis, and Frank Gehry are considered Postmodern, certainly Taipei 101 is, (C.Y. Lee from China, Architect)
(This was all covered in my first year of Architectural History while I was in Architecture School)
The Bird's Nest may have been masterplanned by a swiss architect, the concept was by Ai Weiwei from China. And record drawings by a Chinese firm. All the smaller venues were designed in China by Chinese, including my friend in Hong Kong.
My day job....
Let's just say I've done drawings on projects by Michael Graves, Morphosis, Sasaki, and Zaha Hadid.
In addition to a better cultural response, I'd like to see something more climate-responsive than a glass box. That solar cooker is going to require huge amounts of A/C to keep habitable. Here's one "energy star" idea for a store...
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
Perhaps it is you that need to get your terms right, Modern Architecture's period ended in the 1950-60 with the end of LeCourbusier, Gropius's Bauhaus, and Mies Van Der Rohe, some carried over further with Oscar Niemeyer, but after that the postmodern design picked up. Modern is more formal, and Postmodern contradicts that, Styles of Robert Venturi, Phillip Johnson, Frank Gehry, I.M. Pei (from China), A.M. Stern, Stephen Holl....etc. The swooping style you see from Morphosis, and Frank Gehry are considered Postmodern, certainly Taipei 101 is, (C.Y. Lee from China, Architect)
(This was all covered in my first year of Architectural History while I was in Architecture School)
The Bird's Nest may have been masterplanned by a swiss architect, the concept was by Ai Weiwei from China. And record drawings by a Chinese firm. All the smaller venues were designed in China by Chinese, including my friend in Hong Kong.
My day job....
Let's just say I've done drawings on projects by Michael Graves, Morphosis, Sasaki, and Zaha Hadid.
It al depends on definitions of the terms used. For example you would have to state what period of Philip Johnson's career you are referring too. Frank Gehry is considered a deconstructivist, etc...
I'm not sure what school you went to, but if your history class clumped Robert Venturi & the rest together, that would be disconcerting at best. I hope in any case that they never referred to anything as being in a "swooping style"
The Bird's Nest was designed by Herzog & de Meuron, Ai Weiwei was a consultant only. It goes without saying that there was a chinese firm to do drawings. As I said I was referring to the famous buildings. Obviously they were going to use as many chinese architects as possible, which they did for the smaller venues.
I find it interesting that you do not address any of my issues with your post: your claim that chinese architects are decades ahead, the supposed stagnation of american architecture and stating that the Shanghai skyline is a positive while ignoring the destruction of historical parts of the city.
By the way, the point of you having been a draftsman for different firms would be?...
It al depends on definitions of the terms used. For example you would have to state what period of Philip Johnson's career you are referring too. Frank Gehry is considered a deconstructivist, etc...
I'm not sure what school you went to, but if your history class clumped Robert Venturi & the rest together, that would be disconcerting at best. I hope in any case that they never referred to anything as being in a "swooping style"
The Bird's Nest was designed by Herzog & de Meuron, Ai Weiwei was a consultant only. It goes without saying that there was a chinese firm to do drawings. As I said I was referring to the famous buildings. Obviously they were going to use as many chinese architects as possible, which they did for the smaller venues.
I find it interesting that you do not address any of my issues with your post: your claim that chinese architects are decades ahead, the supposed stagnation of american architecture and stating that the Shanghai skyline is a positive while ignoring the destruction of historical parts of the city.
By the way, the point of you having been a draftsman for different firms would be?...
I didn't address your issues, because you miscontrued my point completely, I did not say Chinese Architects were decades ahead, I said Chinese Architecture is, meaning the Architecture in China, and what the people accept. The stagnation in this country is the fact that people seem to like to adhere to the look of Colonial Williamsburg when they develop new shopping centers, suburbs, and so forth. Real progressive design is not genuinely latched on to here, when it is more there. My point was to the previous poster talking about the "californication" of China, I had only pointed out that this has been going on for a long time now, China is not covered in Pagodas and that was my point, is this country covered in Gerogian Architecture? No, but if you look at the development in China, you will see a much larger concentration of the more progrssive architecture, that is why I am saying they are decades ahead.
Deconstuctivism is a subset of Postmodern. Technically we are both correct, but Modern is a much more specific style, where Postmodern is more broad. Just don't tell me that I was incorrect with my term.
I pointed out that I am a desgner for a firm that works with other prominent architects in that Architecture is my day job....Anyone can be a critic (I just choose to actually build buildings), as a designer I have to be a critic. Anyone can critique anything, it is just a matter of credbility.
I didn't address your issues, because you miscontrued my point completely, I did not say Chinese Architects were decades ahead, I said Chinese Architecture is, meaning the Architecture in China, and what the people accept. The stagnation in this country is the fact that people seem to like to adhere to the look of Colonial Williamsburg when they develop new shopping centers, suburbs, and so forth. Real progressive design is not genuinely latched on to here, when it is more there. My point was to the previous poster talking about the "californication" of China, I had only pointed out that this has been going on for a long time now, China is not covered in Pagodas and that was my point, is this country covered in Gerogian Architecture? No, but if you look at the development in China, you will see a much larger concentration of the more progrssive architecture, that is why I am saying they are decades ahead.
I pointed out that I am a desgner for a firm that works with other prominent architects in that Architecture is my day job....Anyone can be a critic (I just choose to actually build buildings), as a designer I have to be a critic. Anyone can critique anything, it is just a matter of credbility.
I did not misconstrue your point as your point was not clear or very well thought out to begin with.
It would have made more sense for you to say architecture in China then given that many of the prominent buildings are not designed by chinese architects. If you really did mean architecture in China however, your comments about the Olympic architecture made no sense.
There has been progressive architecture here throughout the years. China until recently has only had old buildings and bad communist architecture so by definition they have been decades behind. Are they now decades ahead? Given the massive destruction of historical buildings and the poor, to say the least, urban planning, I'm not sure how you could quantify it that way. Look past the signature buildings and you will see a lot of really bad design.
I'm not sure what you do exactly, but as a design architect, I don't know of any prominent design firm that farms out their design work to other firms. So I'm not sure how you working for a firm that does work for design firms gives you credibility.
Most of the people posting here are clueless about Chinese architecture of past or present. First, China has some of the most architecturally modern cities in the world. Virtually every major architect of note in the world currently has, or has completed, projects here in China so hats off to the Chinese for looking to modernize their country with the best talent from around the world. (But shame on them for so easily abandoning the old, and even ignoring it.) Secondly, many Chinese buildings do in fact incorporate some traditional aspects of Chinese architecture into them. A perfect example of this is the absolutely stunning and magnificent Hyatt Regency in the Pudong district of Shanghai. There are many many other excellent examples.
As to what is truly "Chinese" architecture, the Chinese themselves are their own worst whores when it comes to this topic as most Chinese have very little sense of style, much less a willingness to cling to or respect the past. Many of the locally designed buildings are an abomination. So to locals, adding a glass box to a traditional design would not be perceived as out of the ordinary. As a matter of fact, they would prefer to throw in some garish chrome to the mix.
How do I know all this? I have been coming to China for the past 10 years and have studied the dramatic changes taking place, and just moved here for the next 2 - 3 years.
In addition to a better cultural response, I'd like to see something more climate-responsive than a glass box. That solar cooker is going to require huge amounts of A/C to keep habitable. Here's one "energy star" idea for a store...
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
Most of the people posting here are clueless about Chinese architecture of past or present. First, China has some of the most architecturally modern cities in the world. Virtually every major architect of note in the world currently has, or has completed, projects here in China so hats off to the Chinese for looking to modernize their country with the best talent from around the world. (But shame on them for so easily abandoning the old, and even ignoring it.) Secondly, many Chinese buildings do in fact incorporate some traditional aspects of Chinese architecture into them. A perfect example of this is the absolutely stunning and magnificent Hyatt Regency in the Pudong district of Shanghai. There are many many other excellent examples.
As to what is truly "Chinese" architecture, the Chinese themselves are their own worst whores when it comes to this topic as most Chinese have very little sense of style, much less a willingness to cling to or respect the past. Many of the locally designed buildings are an abomination. So to locals, adding a glass box to a traditional design would not be perceived as out of the ordinary. As a matter of fact, they would prefer to throw in some garish chrome to the mix.
How do I know all this? I have been coming to China for the past 10 years and have studied the dramatic changes taking place, and just moved here for the next 2 - 3 years.
All very true. Unfortunately most growth today is the result of developers who rarely have any sense of design. The only reason famous architects are selected is that the developers hope it will increase the value of their project, not because they truly appreciate the design.
Comments
Um, I don't claim to be an architectural critic, but:
http://images.google.com/images?rls=...N&hl=en&tab=wi
http://images.google.com/images?rls=...N&hl=en&tab=wi
I know which one looks cooler to me...
Jimzip
I'm not sure if I understand. "which one looks cooler"? You have a webpage with random buildings from Shanghai and a webpage with random buildings in America. What is the comparison?
Besides, my comment on Shanghai had nothing to do with "cool" but of the massive destruction of entire parts of historical Shanghai for highways and skyscrapers. That's not so cool.
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
http://www.travelchinaguide.com/pict...xi/xian/caves/
You have to be kidding! Chinese architecture is decades ahead?! Is that why all the famous buildings of the Beijing Olympics were designed by westerners?!
There are many talented american modern (not post-modern, get your terms right) designers. The USA has not stagnated since colonial times. It would seem you are forgetting the birth of skyscrapers here among other things.
If you look at Shanghai, you will see the architectural rape of a city, It's a disaster not something to be proud of.
Don't quit your day job for that of an architectural critic.
Perhaps it is you that need to get your terms right, Modern Architecture's period ended in the 1950-60 with the end of LeCourbusier, Gropius's Bauhaus, and Mies Van Der Rohe, some carried over further with Oscar Niemeyer, but after that the postmodern design picked up. Modern is more formal, and Postmodern contradicts that, Styles of Robert Venturi, Phillip Johnson, Frank Gehry, I.M. Pei (from China), A.M. Stern, Stephen Holl....etc. The swooping style you see from Morphosis, and Frank Gehry are considered Postmodern, certainly Taipei 101 is, (C.Y. Lee from China, Architect)
(This was all covered in my first year of Architectural History while I was in Architecture School)
The Bird's Nest may have been masterplanned by a swiss architect, the concept was by Ai Weiwei from China. And record drawings by a Chinese firm. All the smaller venues were designed in China by Chinese, including my friend in Hong Kong.
My day job....
Let's just say I've done drawings on projects by Michael Graves, Morphosis, Sasaki, and Zaha Hadid.
In addition to a better cultural response, I'd like to see something more climate-responsive than a glass box. That solar cooker is going to require huge amounts of A/C to keep habitable. Here's one "energy star" idea for a store...
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
http://www.travelchinaguide.com/pict...xi/xian/caves/
The 5th Avenue Store in NYC does this.
Perhaps it is you that need to get your terms right, Modern Architecture's period ended in the 1950-60 with the end of LeCourbusier, Gropius's Bauhaus, and Mies Van Der Rohe, some carried over further with Oscar Niemeyer, but after that the postmodern design picked up. Modern is more formal, and Postmodern contradicts that, Styles of Robert Venturi, Phillip Johnson, Frank Gehry, I.M. Pei (from China), A.M. Stern, Stephen Holl....etc. The swooping style you see from Morphosis, and Frank Gehry are considered Postmodern, certainly Taipei 101 is, (C.Y. Lee from China, Architect)
(This was all covered in my first year of Architectural History while I was in Architecture School)
The Bird's Nest may have been masterplanned by a swiss architect, the concept was by Ai Weiwei from China. And record drawings by a Chinese firm. All the smaller venues were designed in China by Chinese, including my friend in Hong Kong.
My day job....
Let's just say I've done drawings on projects by Michael Graves, Morphosis, Sasaki, and Zaha Hadid.
It al depends on definitions of the terms used. For example you would have to state what period of Philip Johnson's career you are referring too. Frank Gehry is considered a deconstructivist, etc...
I'm not sure what school you went to, but if your history class clumped Robert Venturi & the rest together, that would be disconcerting at best. I hope in any case that they never referred to anything as being in a "swooping style"
The Bird's Nest was designed by Herzog & de Meuron, Ai Weiwei was a consultant only. It goes without saying that there was a chinese firm to do drawings. As I said I was referring to the famous buildings. Obviously they were going to use as many chinese architects as possible, which they did for the smaller venues.
I find it interesting that you do not address any of my issues with your post: your claim that chinese architects are decades ahead, the supposed stagnation of american architecture and stating that the Shanghai skyline is a positive while ignoring the destruction of historical parts of the city.
By the way, the point of you having been a draftsman for different firms would be?...
It al depends on definitions of the terms used. For example you would have to state what period of Philip Johnson's career you are referring too. Frank Gehry is considered a deconstructivist, etc...
I'm not sure what school you went to, but if your history class clumped Robert Venturi & the rest together, that would be disconcerting at best. I hope in any case that they never referred to anything as being in a "swooping style"
The Bird's Nest was designed by Herzog & de Meuron, Ai Weiwei was a consultant only. It goes without saying that there was a chinese firm to do drawings. As I said I was referring to the famous buildings. Obviously they were going to use as many chinese architects as possible, which they did for the smaller venues.
I find it interesting that you do not address any of my issues with your post: your claim that chinese architects are decades ahead, the supposed stagnation of american architecture and stating that the Shanghai skyline is a positive while ignoring the destruction of historical parts of the city.
By the way, the point of you having been a draftsman for different firms would be?...
I didn't address your issues, because you miscontrued my point completely, I did not say Chinese Architects were decades ahead, I said Chinese Architecture is, meaning the Architecture in China, and what the people accept. The stagnation in this country is the fact that people seem to like to adhere to the look of Colonial Williamsburg when they develop new shopping centers, suburbs, and so forth. Real progressive design is not genuinely latched on to here, when it is more there. My point was to the previous poster talking about the "californication" of China, I had only pointed out that this has been going on for a long time now, China is not covered in Pagodas and that was my point, is this country covered in Gerogian Architecture? No, but if you look at the development in China, you will see a much larger concentration of the more progrssive architecture, that is why I am saying they are decades ahead.
Deconstuctivism is a subset of Postmodern. Technically we are both correct, but Modern is a much more specific style, where Postmodern is more broad. Just don't tell me that I was incorrect with my term.
I pointed out that I am a desgner for a firm that works with other prominent architects in that Architecture is my day job....Anyone can be a critic (I just choose to actually build buildings), as a designer I have to be a critic. Anyone can critique anything, it is just a matter of credbility.
I didn't address your issues, because you miscontrued my point completely, I did not say Chinese Architects were decades ahead, I said Chinese Architecture is, meaning the Architecture in China, and what the people accept. The stagnation in this country is the fact that people seem to like to adhere to the look of Colonial Williamsburg when they develop new shopping centers, suburbs, and so forth. Real progressive design is not genuinely latched on to here, when it is more there. My point was to the previous poster talking about the "californication" of China, I had only pointed out that this has been going on for a long time now, China is not covered in Pagodas and that was my point, is this country covered in Gerogian Architecture? No, but if you look at the development in China, you will see a much larger concentration of the more progrssive architecture, that is why I am saying they are decades ahead.
I pointed out that I am a desgner for a firm that works with other prominent architects in that Architecture is my day job....Anyone can be a critic (I just choose to actually build buildings), as a designer I have to be a critic. Anyone can critique anything, it is just a matter of credbility.
I did not misconstrue your point as your point was not clear or very well thought out to begin with.
It would have made more sense for you to say architecture in China then given that many of the prominent buildings are not designed by chinese architects. If you really did mean architecture in China however, your comments about the Olympic architecture made no sense.
There has been progressive architecture here throughout the years. China until recently has only had old buildings and bad communist architecture so by definition they have been decades behind. Are they now decades ahead? Given the massive destruction of historical buildings and the poor, to say the least, urban planning, I'm not sure how you could quantify it that way. Look past the signature buildings and you will see a lot of really bad design.
I'm not sure what you do exactly, but as a design architect, I don't know of any prominent design firm that farms out their design work to other firms. So I'm not sure how you working for a firm that does work for design firms gives you credibility.
As to what is truly "Chinese" architecture, the Chinese themselves are their own worst whores when it comes to this topic as most Chinese have very little sense of style, much less a willingness to cling to or respect the past. Many of the locally designed buildings are an abomination. So to locals, adding a glass box to a traditional design would not be perceived as out of the ordinary. As a matter of fact, they would prefer to throw in some garish chrome to the mix.
How do I know all this? I have been coming to China for the past 10 years and have studied the dramatic changes taking place, and just moved here for the next 2 - 3 years.
In addition to a better cultural response, I'd like to see something more climate-responsive than a glass box. That solar cooker is going to require huge amounts of A/C to keep habitable. Here's one "energy star" idea for a store...
Apple could take a page out of I.M. Pei's book and go subterranean, perhaps with a glass cube (instead of the Louvre's pyramid) as a lid. This would be both climate responsive and evocative of traditional farmer's cave homes found in the Shaanxi Province:
http://www.travelchinaguide.com/pict...xi/xian/caves/
There are many types of architectural glass that have very high energy efficiency ratings based on very sophisticated coatings.
Most of the people posting here are clueless about Chinese architecture of past or present. First, China has some of the most architecturally modern cities in the world. Virtually every major architect of note in the world currently has, or has completed, projects here in China so hats off to the Chinese for looking to modernize their country with the best talent from around the world. (But shame on them for so easily abandoning the old, and even ignoring it.) Secondly, many Chinese buildings do in fact incorporate some traditional aspects of Chinese architecture into them. A perfect example of this is the absolutely stunning and magnificent Hyatt Regency in the Pudong district of Shanghai. There are many many other excellent examples.
As to what is truly "Chinese" architecture, the Chinese themselves are their own worst whores when it comes to this topic as most Chinese have very little sense of style, much less a willingness to cling to or respect the past. Many of the locally designed buildings are an abomination. So to locals, adding a glass box to a traditional design would not be perceived as out of the ordinary. As a matter of fact, they would prefer to throw in some garish chrome to the mix.
How do I know all this? I have been coming to China for the past 10 years and have studied the dramatic changes taking place, and just moved here for the next 2 - 3 years.
All very true. Unfortunately most growth today is the result of developers who rarely have any sense of design. The only reason famous architects are selected is that the developers hope it will increase the value of their project, not because they truly appreciate the design.