Comments on: Housing for New Orleans by David Adjaye, Morphosis, MVRDV, Shigeru Ban and others

By: dqkChau

dqkChau — Wed, 21 Sep 2011 10:19:08 +0000

At my first look, MVRDV's design doesn't make sense, when built for victims of Katrina. But after taking a deep breath, it's the one in millions. With no doubt, their design must be the best in those.
First thing is the "shotgun house", traditional housing of this place.
Second thing is the structure, I think this is the most important, better than "floating house" or "house on piles(ramp)"
Third thing is the boat-like shape when flood come. Why MVRDV don't show the computational fluid dynamic calculation for this model?
Fourth thing is the simple.
Fifth thing is memory, connection to the place.

Last words, I think that this concept could be push further than this.
:D

By: fernando torres

fernando torres — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:26:14 +0000

Thank God you’ve now got david adjaye and we haven’t!
Maybe you printed the wrong picture for his solution ?
It’s a toss-up whether the roof will blow off first, or whether the entire building will be ripped from its foundations as the Architects have conveniently provided a windcatcher for Katrina Mk2.
Are we really expected to believe that Adjaye has provided a solution to New Orleans’ housing problems post Katrina ?
Or is it just another ego trip ?

By: Bear in Amsterdam

Bear in Amsterdam — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 02:45:36 +0000

I am fascinated by the lack of understanding of the MVRDV’s aim which is to fit the people we presently have on earth onto the earth. The dominant culture continues, like a runaway train, to project their own historical viewpoints onto both the present and future. The obvious fact that this will not work is of no consequence in a spitting match, such as these folks spend their lives in. On the other hand, the notion that we would require at least four earths to actually accomplish even a fraction of this vision of life (all of earth’s people living as American’s have become used to) and that if we were able to start with virginia planets, not ones which have already been savagely “mined?”
In fact, the only solutions which have a chance of being useful are those which provoke this sort of reaction.

By: Brian

Brian — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 23:18:17 +0000

The comments on this blog are a perfect example of what is right and wrong in philanthropy today.

There are a lot of “experts” who either know more than the architects or rate political correctness higher than usability.

At the same time, there are people who are willing to give of their time and energy to solve big problems and ask the hard questions, critics be damned.

An interesting thing is that when articles like this are written, the subjects often lurk and see what people are thinking. It’s a great opportunity to ask questions from people that are talented enough to merit Mr. Pitt’s attention. Who knows, maybe more people will learn that they can be snarky and ask smart questions (and get thoughtful, insightful answers), all at the same time.

By: Brooklyn

Brooklyn — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 18:48:53 +0000

Blake,

I’m sure the architects know of the demographic they’re building for. The furniture is only used to articulate the program and scale in the drawings. As for it being modern, it is only because it is whats provided in their archives of 3D furniture. I doubt they would spend time modeling new furniture that is of appropriate price.

As for the MVRDV proposal,

Please find a better criteria of judgment if you are to take such a negative stance.