Comments on: New Shenzhen images from OMA

By: XL

XL — Sat, 15 Dec 2007 23:21:39 +0000

Nazmy brings up a good point, which is the issue of scale. Has anyone got a sense of the size of the cantilever of this “floating base”? HUGE!! If you stop and actually look at the scaled figures in the renderings, you begin to understand its dimension. Otherwise the renderings are hard to parse. they do bear stylistic resemblance to Mies, which is of course completely irrelevant when you consider that the main thing here is the sensation of walking in and under this enormous volume. Its more like 90% piranesi and 10% Mies.

the only dissappointing thing is that programmatic strategy isnt apparent (other than the floating trading floors). Perhaps at XL, we’re beyond program, and 3D urbanism is enough. but then again, we haven’t seen OMA’s requesite diagrams for this one. Not clear one how/if the public square below is programmed either.

By: nazmy

nazmy — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 16:53:12 +0000

as another long time fan of OMA…i think the thinking and work of the office has proggressed beyond the kunsthal and the nexus. this is due to two reasons i think. one is that as pointed out by kanit the size or scale of the projects has grown tremendously…..Rem is now able to put his theory on bigness into actual comissions and constructions aNd OMA is not and office too fond of rehashing old ideas (to a certain extent)

secondly i think the context of OMA’s current projects are radically different than the old projects…..that is why content was published….as a record of the development of ideas within OMA since S, M, L, XL..

having said all the above…i must say that i am continually impressed by the proposals coming out of OMA.

By: kanit

kanit — Fri, 13 Apr 2007 09:16:59 +0000

as a long time fan of OMA (14years), I am often puzzled by their recent works; CCTV, Seattle Public library, Singapore condominium, and even the Dutch embassy in Berlin. perhaps this change is due to the immense size of the office and the new design partners…
– Does any one else miss the old works such as the kunsthal or nexus housing?

By: johnson

johnson — Sun, 28 Jan 2007 20:38:52 +0000

the discussion is pointless just as most of the “trendsetting” architecture by oma, which lives on recycling former architectural movements. this does not make it any deeper than the fashion industry in most terifying form.

By: Santiago

Santiago — Wed, 24 Jan 2007 01:49:36 +0000

there will always be a discussion about “in and out” people… those who are in are able to shake reality by their actions (in this case, projects), those who are out have the responsibility to comment or critize as steady as their thought will let them.

i´m sure there is a lot of bull going around with, as renante points out, the Architectural Quality Standards as their reference. but the fact of the matter is, a building like this, as many others throughout the globe have no reference point. it´s impossible to locate them on a good-bad standard. it´s what it represents in the specific location its seeded that matters. and none of the renders above show anything similar. but by only reading the project´s data can give you a slight idea that the building may have any form possible and still mean the same thing.