dezeen

Baroque is back!

Baroque was back but,…
Baroque is out for more than two years!!

all that theory explanation just shows a very limited vision and knowledge of history. just a mere discourse on proportions, mixed with some 80´s postmodern cliches, and that tries to make the project work.
just the last paragraph makes sense for me: there they admit the physical and sensual approach, condensig materiality on the intervention object.
i think it´s time to unmask these operations, eventhough i respect their trajectory.

tired. just tired.

omg…is that thing….beige?!

Id like to see their set of “rules” and wether or not they were rigidly adhered to. Just because its by someone famous and is great eyecandy eveyone will love it, despite the fact the ideas it is utilising are totally done and overused resulting in a peice that is really somewhat uninspired and formulaic.

Am i the only one who is SO over hadid?

if i want to see bendy organic computer trickery Id rather look at Lars Spuybroek, at least his stuff has a firm conceptual grounding.

What is that?

wow!!

Gorgeous************

;)) Peace*

a lot of better architects in the world……is boring every week the same zaha….
zaha always is the same …….different theory ……..the same work for alll is like a recipe……..

Baroque is back since 15 years…haven’t you read Greg Lynn, Francois Roche, Ocean North… ?
I am waiting for the Post-modern critiques, these young arrogant students from tired Western faculties. Full of shallow critiques, as empty as the impotency of their projects. Blind to the Eastern and globale rise in architecture, stucked into their archetypes. Fetichists, self-righteous and idolatrous to obsolete concepts that they cannot even grasp.
I am wating for the caravan of means spirits. Waiting for their pebbles, deseperatly trying to stone Zaha Hadid’s office work, with nothing but their post modern pessimism.
Je peux les entendre venir avec leur croassements, ces petits branches au cerveaux congeles par des ideologie de bas etages. Ils vont encore nous sortir leur minimalisme, leures longues listes d’idoles des annees 90’s.

Passons…

I’m not a fan of parametric architecture at the best of times… but seriously read the description or design process for this. How about I just scribble a squiggle, build it and then make up some incomprehensible mathematical logic behind it that no-one in their right mind would bother testing regardless (or care) and say that’s how I did it? Who’s to know any better?

Ultra responsive architecture? I beg to differ.

At least it is sexy, however in that kind of design I think it fails the litmus test of parametrics if you don’t at least prove the effect of different algorithmic rules in different situations, with more than a single end result. (aka in different forms of the villa as it says). And if you want to rebut that… what is the point if the difference is barely noticeable?!?! From what I can tell the first two (and the last one) are just mirrors of each other, and the middle two are exactly the same as each other, but hardly discernibly different from the other one? What’s the point?

Some kind soul should stage an intervention and get Zaha off the piped cream. She really is bloating up on it!

Palladio would have loved this knick-knack. The Villa Foscari never used to have anywhere decent to hang out the washing.

Love the juxtaposition!

stunning - no need for the lengthy explanation

Congratulations, another exquisite built form. Beautiful!

However, I would like to see Zaha push herself harder though, in context, function and concept. Sexy forms are becoming too easy for her (and fellow architects in the computer generation).

Don’t mind seeing a few more sexy objects from her, but she need to move on fast, say in the next two years or so. I can’t see this can go too far.

blob blob blob
or should i say swish swoosh swash
like zorro
zaha was here!!

(and for the baroque is back comment…? why?)

Palladio + Hadid? Hell yes! A beautiful project which I can’t wait to see pictures of the installation.

Is this becoming (in a deleuzian sense) or just imitation?

Even though, this project make more sense than other Hadid’s recent formal adventures.

I love the mixing of the futuristic and the old, like Kubrick’s final visual in 2001 with the Dave’s gradual death.
This sculpture is both an appropriate scale and usage of Hadid’s skills. It commands a harmonic quality. Before I read the article, I knew these were musical proportions, so that reads extremely well.
However, the bit about DNA is bull. In this case, the Rules or the harmonic curves used as a basis for creating Aura are the genotypes and Aura is simply an amalgamation of a process. If the rooms changed proportions and those were used for different sculptures, I could see an environment argument for a change in phenotype.
I highly doubt, this process could be repeated to create another sculpture without complete variation. The colors certainly were derived objectively from the wall colors, not any harmonic DNA sequencing set. The reflective comment almost seems insulting to one’s intelligence.
Aura is nothing more then a beautiful object derived from a classical system of proportional architectural rules using current technology juxtaposed within an antique setting derived of similar rules for celebrating the villa’s quincentennial.

Love the theory more than the design itself!!

zaha should concentrate on smaller scales like this. her style works much better in furniture and installation than in huge architecture.
but it´s right: zaha is zaha is zaha is zaha…….. kind of boring

Thanks Michael. That’s a real critic. You are right to put back this minor project in scale.
Yes it is true, most of the comments are definitly insulting to the profession. If architects cannot afford to be more intelligent in their critics, we can imagine a sinister future: A little bit like the sewage that has become the WWW, a battlefield of minor egomaniacs, all shouting, never listening, never reading, never seeing with their own eyes. Just blindfolded into their minuscule pretentions, thought by some mediocre professors in tired faculties of architecture.
Yes they are tired, tired of their own impotency…
Post modern cretins…

zaha is a new elsie de wolfe who said once: Oh, it’s Beige! My Favourite Colour!

Wow, Zaha really brings out the invective! While not a fan of her work, I find this quite striking and beautiful and a perfect fit for its environment as a celebration of physical form.

Hey Arthur, Why So Serious?

Why not ?

“I am alive and you are dead”
P.K. Dick

Funny M! But still people, this is art.. Lashing out on someone that doesnt suit your taste is pretty rude. I agree with Arthur. What will the world of architecture be if there are no people who break the rules, such as Zaha or Gehry, etc. Free your mind for the greater future. Innovation comes out from imperfection, nobody can do things perfectly. If you see that Zaha’s work is not that good or hideous in a sense, the big question: “CAN YOU DO BETTER??” if you can, please POST somewhere so we can see and compare.

Btw, Zaha’s work this time.. Superb.. Beautiful..

Palladio - Zaha (1-0)

Taffy for Transformers.

I agree with Lim!

* very nice sculpture >>> she can learn from herself and stick to sculptures as sculptures, not to live in..
* does she cooperate with schummie because of the blablabla?
* KILL YOUR IDOLS >>> bye bye Zaha..

I just don’t get all this comments against Zaha’s job. None of them has a decent critic to this piece of design. They all just aim to go against Zaha at any cost, even being ridicolous. This is just a simple experiment in creating something in-between architecture and sculpture that puts into contemporary words Palladian theories. I think the intent was to be, in a way, “neo-baroque” and I don’t see anything wrong in this approach.
The concept is simple and effective and, besides the ornamental words used in the text, I’m pretty sure you can easily create multiple variation from whatever parametric setup it comes from.
If you don’t like the result consider that just like your personal opinion and, please, don’t be so selfish to think that your point of view is the only truth. I also do agree with Lim: if you all feel so superior…I look forward to see your ingenius creations and to read your names in the next pritzker prizes awards.
Otherwise think twice before writing stupid comments and invest more time in learning how to improve your design skills. Maybe you will get something acceptable.

hey lim,
this isn´t in any way breaking the rules…it´s just another obsolete one. and proven to exhaustion.
you mention gehry and zaha. actually just functioning as the opposite.

So basically the “conceptual” back for this piece is taking proportions used by Palladio to make curves, they layered them on tracing paper, picked what they liked, changed them a bit to make it read better and used a computer to 3D it? I mean the stuff about mathematical algorithms is nonsense, surely to transform one curve into any other curve a mathematical equation can be applied? Should this be the case any Palladian DNA is completely irrelevant.
I always feel these sort of Concepts are pretentious, over thought to perhaps cover their own insecurities that observers may not be convinced with, in this case, “inspired by music”, why can they not be completely honest?
The simple phrase is much more accessible, you can see the fluidity and identify a tempo and pitch, these extra words just detach the architecture from the everyday person who doesn’t see any need to understand what a lorentz attractors equation is.
To be honest I would enjoy the intallation much more if it wasn’t being made to be bigger than it is. I think Zaha has forgotten she is an Architect not a sculptor, architecture is meant to be functional and readable to its inhabitants.

i’m not convinced that any musical or scientific justification is required for such a beautiful object. neo-roccoco maybe, neo-beaux-arts maybe; but in the end, who cares about pedantry?

Again Tito, I don’t think this design was meant to break any rule. Zaha and Gehry already broke the rules several years ago. I think the real meaning of this sculpture is to explain how the digital process can translate a classical set of rules into something different and contemporary. It’s not a revolution but just a way to bridge two ages taking the imput from classical theories and coming up with a contemporary output.
That’s it! It’s so simple. Only because it’s a Zaha design it doesn’t mean it must be a breakthrough, it could also be just a nice design that confirms her skills providing a subtle connection between two cultures.

…another blob vs. box discussion… how boring…can’t we talk about something interesting?

Looks really beautiful actually.

The text is excessively pretentious. Who writes this embarrassing stuff?

this is perhaps the most contextual thing zaha has done in a while. sexy!

fucking hot!

Fantastic manufacturiing work, great proove of current level of building technology. If all the architect who insist on classical motief could materialise this precision to his/her imagination everything should have been much easier to debate. This piece is a proof of what industry in totality can and will be performing more in this direction, wheather WE will or not.

It is more confromting to architect who join the wings of Koolhaas as this piece is far from what OMA has been doing, in terms of the way the piece is assenbled to the reality.

I see this an an manifest, a warning shot to all architet who are concerned of reinventing (inovating) his.her work. Truly this is not the first warning shor which Zaha has pulled out of her bag. Moving museum was another one of those shots.

the best

Such a pretentious and meaningless text for such beautiful images.

The Texts and The Design…. That is a part of the game…

I think it’s not modern, not contemporary. I think it’s very very old shape, very old idea, very bad result, because it’s just a free skectch, the result is nothing, talk about mathematics, music, it’s just a draw in the dark…we have to find another point of view about what is modernity…This chwing gum design…

Only that nobody could make a chewing gum moment fixed like this, had skill to produce exact thing. No body…

Even with the explanation, I see a huge disconnect between the pieces and their environment. The sculptures are beautiful but their Palladian proportions are not evident; for one thing, the rooms are all very tall and the sculptures are all short. If the description had stated that these pieces were to beautifully contradict Palladian proportions, the whole project would have been more digestible. In relation to its description, I believe this experiment was a failure.

i’m happy with this work of zaha! at least it’s is not furniture or architecture =) she should become a sculptor. the world would be a better place

nice.

crap as always….

Though, the theory is quite interesting, I personally don’t believe that the use of the same harmonical proportions as music or as Palladia uses creates connections with the space in which the object is placed. I also don’t believe that the items will be as good as presented in this way (read: images) .
The Fact that we still are looking at renderings, and judging them instead of the real object is also not good.

What I’m stunned about is that people are judging an item what isn’t even placed in its originated place. It are also no photographs.
We are looking at “paper” Architecture, How can we judge an object if we even can’t look at it in different angles, touch it etc, see how the real light works on the object. how the fresco’s of the villa are reflected in the object. It is meant as an object in the three dimensional space, not as a painting.

This is a personal frustration of mine, but Architects these days are too much trying to stunn people with flashy renderings. I don’t buy it.
But though, I would like to see the object and give my judgement.

Palladio my ASSSS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

http://www.irish-designers.com/press/press/House_magazine.pdf

http://www.irish-designers.com/press/press/star.htm

Lovely shape and conceptual juxtaposition. However, this is NOT architecture nor design. This is sculpture, something Ms. Hadid is quite comfortable with. Her attempts at architecture are mediocre to be kind. It still amazes me that a complete jury gave her the Pritsker. Architecture can (should?) be sculptural, not the other way around.

one could think Zaha has a computer program that generates her fractal works every time, and its not a very good program.
in the quiet words of Homer Simpson: “boooring”

Zaha has done a great job with the wallpaper in the room.
Looks a bit old though.

It’s an interesting concept, Palladio contrasted against Hadid. However, the piece would be interesting for about 3-5 minutes before you’d want to move on…

It’s beautiful, but it’s a cake thing, you can have it anywhere with the same results. Imagine it inside a Corbusier’s house..

i dont get…how can expression of moving thinks stay still??nonsense

What I find quite interesting is all the discussion these zaha swooshes (of which, I agree, we can’t get enough!) are generating. People are even discussing the definition of architecture itself!! I think we’ve all fallen into the game: these things have been done to trigger discussions, test reactions, take positions (classical vs. postmodern, architecture vs. art, etc.) I find that much more valuable than just building another boring middle-class house; zaha is really pushing the edge in architectural thinking, and this discussion is proof of it!

complete rip off of vincent stahl’s work:

http://vincentstahl.com/

Palladio would like it..? mhmh

baroque is dead and it must be obvious. its so called “return” is like return of the living dead…it’s 2008 after all and we need to kill that zombie…again