OMA wins competition for the Taipei Performing Arts Centre
After a two-phase international competition (with offices such as Morphosis, Abalos+Sentkiewicz, MVRDV and Zaha Hadid), OMA has been awarded the first prize in the design competition to build the new Taipei Performing Arts Centre.
The project, led by Rem Koolhaas and Ole Scheeren, is based on 3 theaters (1 x 1,500 seats – the round one, 2 x 800 seats – cubes) which are plugged into a central cube cladded with corrugated glass. This scheme puts all the stage accommodations of the 3 theaters into the central cube, allowing for more flexibility as theaters can be used independently or combined, expanding the possibilities for experimental performances – an art which is very strong on the country. This new arrangement of stage and seatings includes a public circulation that exposes parts of the backstage to the public.
And now, my comments on the form.
I know that some of you will freak out with this, but if you have been to Taipei you´ll know that the local architecture is very figurative (ie: Taipei 101 as a bamboo stick/pagoda), so I think that this potent geometrical shapes we see on the models are the result of that, adapting to the local culture.
Also, this new disposal of the service/to-be-served spaces on a “theatrical” configuration brings to my mind the Seattle Public Library and how it changed the typical library approach, resulting on a new experience.
But still, it doesn´t blow my mind as other OMA projects have done in the past. Or am I missing something?
Related articles:
94 comments »
You are not missing something. this project is awful.
Not only awful, but looks severely dated.
It’s an awesome project.
It’s ugly.
a run down from previous works..
actually, i´m eager to see the section of this project. i think it would tell us a lot. i´ll try to get it.
It finally happened… OMA’s principal has gone senile.
I think we need more information on the project to make a judgement, afterall it should never be about form otherwise neil denari or zaha hadid would have won.
It would also be nice to see the other entries and some information on them to speculate on the judging of the design; where there other factors that informed the decision to chose OMA’s design? It would be interesting to know.
The shape of this building reminds me of OMA’s work in Dallas: http://www.arcspace.com/architects/koolhaas/wyly_theater/wyly_theater.html
oma come back!
congratulations guys!is very nice!
Yikes. Is that globe supposed to be the wrecking ball?
i like it, of course we would need more drawings and images, but it reminds me the amazing project for the bibliotheque nationale in paris, that didnt win at the end. i’ m sure they are referring to that particular design and that OMA will develop the same idea further.
the night visual however is awful. but i love the side view of the maquette model. its fasinating!
yes i think we need to see the plan and section first. i think koolhaas must have some surprises
http://konyvtarepiteszet.klog.hu/?p=176
the above mentioned library project of OMA
For me, the genius of OMA’s TRÈS GRANDE BIBLIOTHÈQUE was that volumes were formed by a reductive gesture. Yet other Rem projects use an additive method (Jersey City), but this project seems to be torn between the two methods with a confusing and awkward result. The TGB competition was also held 10 years ago- maybe it’s time to move on…
The basic cuboid volume is very similar to the Wyly Theatre, I agree with Scott, and one addition to this may have worked, but not all of them. Would definitely welcome further material (and design development).
The model has something, but I am not convinced . . . . . . . .
This reminds me of Rem’s early work and also archigram’s plug in city, and of course even venturi scott brown w/ that large exterior monitor. But I have to wonder, if built, what will be the fate of this building in fifty years? Is there a predicted life span before it’s totally demolished?
wow, this is horrendous. I can’t believe someone can actually come up with this after all the good (and bad) things that are being done nowadays.
it would ‘ve been nicer to have some more drawings.. still good… nice one
As a Taiwanese I think it fits the urban context in Taiwan.
Mix, flexibility, and not necessary beautiful in someway.
I also look forward to see the section.
sucks!
i think the entry is really queer,even though it does fit the context arround, but it doesn’t mean it’s part of the nightmarket.
imagine you stroll along the streets and suddenly enter the performing arts centre of taipei, isn’t that really strage?
just great project
I think I’m gonna be sick.
This is what architecture should always be. It makes me dream.
When An office copies his own style, it s stupid,,,for example: Frank Gehry ,,,,In this case it s even more horrible,,,because OMA makes a very bad remake of it s own style in a very superficial way,,,There is no innovation,,,,no contextualization and no poesy….there maye be some formal radicalism,,,,SO this building is shity,,,just like most of the new projects of OMA,,,,,
At list the comments are interresting
this is just as bad as our OCAD building here in toronto… but the world is filled with ugly things and people just eat it up. go figure.
clown noses in architecture are SOOOOOOOOOO 80’s
Count the number of responses so far…Everyone wants to talk about it. Other projects don’t generate this kind of chatter.
the elevation looks like krusty the clown by simpsons! very ugly!
I want to see the others.
Anyone expecting anything less than typical signature starchitecture from this competition has another thing coming, as it wasn’t anonymous entry or anything like that. I almost wonder why anyone else bothered entering. You could guess Zaha/Oma were going to be shortlisted before the comp started.
I’m a bit disappointed but won’t slate it too much until I see the inside/section. I find OMA has some good ideas surrounded in a purely (subjective) post-modern ugly aesthetic.
Chris,
That´s maybe why Taipei wanted an OMA…
a.the model is beautiful, mysterious
b.at the moment we can only make a comment on its external appearance as its all outside and no information is offered to its interior
c. cedric price haunts Rem like you wont believe
Fr those who are interested in the jury list, please check out the following site:
http://www.tpac.com.tw/html/main_e.html
brooklyn
I believe the site is chosen by gov, not the office.
My question is “Why ‘ART’ should be pretty?”
I agree with you its strange to find a night-market just next to the ‘Performing ARTS Centre’, but are there any thesis describes its as improper? In this crowded city, this kind of collage maybe isnt that aberrant!? or ‘ART’ is also a curious concept to the people there!?
OMA can also design beautifully to please your eyes, but I believe its not their way to response the context.
Nice! A mix a Dee and Charles Wyly Theather, with ZKM, and the projection room of the Educatorium.
The spanish project of Abalos+sentkiewicz is amazing….
Check it out
http://www.plataformaarquitectura.cl/2009/01/29/abalossentkiewicz/#comments
I don’t know who was the Jury but they really mist a great inovative project.
James
Don’t worry, we’ll upload this project very soon, so you all can comment about it
It is terrible, Mr. Koolhaas should be able to do better, or should I say the committee should have better taste. The proposal is so historical it remind me of the 70s buildings in Netherlands. It is too complicate, and the forms are, in my opinion, randomly chunked together.
It is meant to be a performing arts centre, not space station on Mars.
I did something similar when i was 17.
@martin
what an arrogance. you certainly must be a genius to compare you with rem koolhaas.
tsk
OMA project have OMA aesthetics, so if you like OMA you will like it. Abalos project have Oscar Neimeyer aesthetics, and I dont think that is too innovative. Neimeyer is a hundred years old, and his style is Le Corbusier driven!
Garcia, please stop judge object based just on aesthetics, shape. it so superficial!! what importance do styles have anyway.
there are concepts, ideas behind these projects. try to focus on them instead.
Niemeyer is Niemeyer and Le Corbusier is Le Corbusier!
You mixed together 4 different Architects from 4 totally different contexts, experiences and backgrounds, that have 4 extremely different approaches to architecture.
gosh
What I have here are images so what I judge is, voila!, images! So when they build it and when I see sections and more info on the projects then I get to conclusions. And Mr. Carlo is you dont think aesthethics is important then what is important for you? The socio-economical facts, well we dont have them so stop pretending being a pseudo intelectual and respect others opinions.
im work in shilin..
it’s ugly…
i hate the ball
Hey Guys,
R u honestly been so predictable like this?
R u actually criticizing the “looks” of this project?
We are talking about a guy who ‘wrap up a graphic’. No one talks about if the Seattle Library is ugly or beautiful. Is much more then that, is a graphic in a mesh!
So please, don’t be so naive in throwing rocks on something that you still can’t understand.
Wait and see…
architects love to vomit, and we could re-read the period of now as a pathology of vomiting. Could we consider the vomit as a politic answer, even a critical answer, according to the strategy of the worst.
”Design as a Crime” revealing by the genese of its vomit the place and the situation of the crime.
Do we have to pay OMA, to pay the murderer to acomplish his crime. YES, but only 30 pieces of silver. It s the price of the crime.
I agree there is no architecture here on which to comment. It’s pretty graphics and a loose sense of a sculpture that the building wedged into at some stage to follow.
its the worst that i have ever seen from OMA please tell me that Rem didnt do this crap!!!!
Looks like a giant hamster cage with hamster ball stuck to it.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
YOU’RE KIDDING, RIGHT?
Coop Himmelbau from hell
i applaude the project for reintroducing a physical model as a design tool. for all the aesthetic junkies in the audience, i guess you were looking for sexy renderings with supermodels in the foreground. i applaud the winners for simplifying the design in a time which rewards architects for overproduced graphics. k.i.s.s. keep it simple stupid.
toothpicks holding up a boba
did you know sphere is the new cube?
I would like to see the other entries and some information on them to speculate on the judging of the design.”Therefore the aim of this project is to establish a world-class professional performing arts center for arts lovers, whether they are creative artists, performers, or audiences” Could we expect the design iconic or worldclass & artistic?. Each entries that submitted in the competition has a unique design & i hope or maybe someone could upload all the design/images that enter the competition so that we could judge them in our own. Even how bad, ugly or different your design was, its in the hands of the jury that makes you 1st prize. I would also like to ask a question, where is green architecture in the design? it is one of the criteria for judging.
don’t judge a book by its cover
Finally a project to stair!
David,
responding to your comments:
i have been to Taipei, and yes, you are right, i think this may be just a way to addapt to local visual culture
so, finally it becomes necessary, more than in other works, to have a look to how this is inside, how this being works
All I wonder is What would OMA do when Rem is finally gone?
It is not that he is designing everything,don’t get me wrong. But they have permission to re-use the features of a Koolhaasean modernism. Will they still have permission or the rethoric to sell every project with the “this is a Koolhaas building” brand?
Regardless of wether this is a ground breaking building according to world standards, finally Taipei is getting a building from a worldly recognised architect, When I was talking to one of the judges David Tseng I told him go for Rem, we need some good old Dutch design in Taipei.
I doubt that I would have swayed him in any way but I am happy that my compatriot will have one of his designs build in the city where I live.
I guess its understandable to say the form has no aesthetic sense at all, just like stacking chunks of foam together. However, it must have a precise consideration of structure and spatial arrangement, at least I have never seen anything like that being built in reality before.
Lets wait for the plan and section to really start commenting.
球球～～
象徵夜市賣的丸子嗎～～
鴿子籠
http://www.wretch.cc/blog/bang504/14952555
I live in Taipei, and while the 101 is bleh…, this one is awful. I don’t think “adapting to local culture” is an excuse for this boring cube and the useless sphere tacked on.
I agree, if you say its related or adapting with economic crisis i would believe..
It seems the taiwanese architectural community is having a hard time changing the urban landscape in Taipei; the mix of faux classical collums, quasi modo mausoleum style and other perfectly ugly and badly maintained buildings is still the norm. Taiwan is in need of looking towards the outside to raise the level of architecture and certainly getting it from architectural offices like OMA Mecano and T. Ito. Like with so many things, in Taiwan people like to go 90% of the way and often fail miserably in the last 10 %.
Therefor to have a building designed by an office like OMA is a godsend in this architectural desert. Having seen most of the other entrants the judges have gone for the most striking design. To simply say boring stupid or awful is by far not enough in the this context.
uhh…..this is ugly….
It is creative and looks like a space shuttle, but it is just wierd….dunno what to say!
I am very disappointed….because all i see is a traditional tapei building with a giant meat ball on the side……its just that i feel something is missing..And for some reason this design looks familiar from some furniture design and some other designs mixed…??
Maybe time will help this architecture look better in my mind!
One of the most interesting projects of OMAs for a while(I hate most of their latest stuff)…Uggly yet enticing… A bit like some odd invention dedicated to an unknown purpose…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM4PzLSqKL0&feature=related
This video featured about this project in a Taiwanese TV program. It shows something about the concept of this building. I think the answer why this project was chosen would be shown after watching this.
Totally agree with you!
We all think it’s terrible! Shame to have it in Taipai city….
a Taipei Citizen
PS. I reprint your post in my blog and marked with the link and its origins, if it’s not ok, pls let me know, thanks!
Some comments regarding ‘ugly’ or ‘beauty’ really dont get to the core of the issues- firstly, OMA ride the edge of what is normally, conventionally consideredt to be beautiful. They do this by pushing hard for an idea and expressing that idea without being tempered by any preference, or taste. Issues within a design that do not fall from a logical ‘hyper-rational’ process, are then usually expressed as an arbitrary notion (see youtube joshua prince ramus lecture on seattle public library). In doing this, OMA’s work is aggressive and a bit of an affront to what we normally expect from architecture. Strangely though, as time passes, I find our ‘taste’ catches up to OMA and what we thought was ugly, ends up being beautiful. But by the time you do find a previous project beautiful, he has already produced something new on the edge of acceptability!
In terms of a firm quating its own work, I think this project references cardiff opera house most. Everything from the precineum and ‘back’ is expressed as a factory. The seating is resolved to suit the needs of its configuration- with the exception of folding, this project is very similar except also that this is three theaters plugged into a tripple factory. The three seating areas are resolved typologically and thats what you get. Wait five years, you will love it!
Anyone found the sections? I am glad that the innocent tax payers are going to pay for it. So innocent. I would fail a student, who submitted me encrypted sections.
looks like a robot with a VERY BIG nose
http://www.mymodernmet.com/profiles/blogs/taipei-performing-arts-theater
other entry..
apart from a few rational minds here that asked for plans and sections, i don’t know how many of those who said this project is straight ugly based on just a few still shots are architects, but i don’t think many get it. architecture is not just a superficial aesthetic presentation, but also has to deal with spatial and formal coherence. in fact, i think it’s more the latter than the former. not that i’m a oma groupie, but among all contestants, i only get an idea of what the interior space feels like from oma’s interior perspectives.
http://forgemind.net/xoops/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1111
guys, OMA plans & sections are all up on the competition’s website, go to http://www.tpac.com.tw/html/main_e.html then follow the links to the ‘judging result > designs of the winners > first prize’
contextually this building has no merit but is a vital link for what it can bring to taipei economically as well as for the performing arts profession nationally and internationally.
I, for one, welcome our new OMA overlords ;)
Tuché Mr fugazi,
Not only do you use a great name as a pseudonym but you also present a very pleasing discussion. More structure and substance less surface and visual candy! Your criticism on the types of buzzwords that you hear when contemporary architecture is being discussed pleases me a lot.
If you haven’t already read this book, I strongly suggest that you read “The eye of the skin”. It’s an easy, pleasantly read book, which uses literal parallels not only to sound intellectual but also to discuss architecture in a more intuitive experienced way.
It isn’t enough to simply say “I don’t like it,” or “I like it.” By resorting to meaningless statements like those, you’re voiding all architecture education (I’m assuming you received.)
It’s fine if you feel this project isn’t great, maybe just try to elaborate on why next time…
damn ugly! really not sure how can OMA fooled the judge with four funny shape attached to a box scheme. This scheme is only wonderful for people who pay for the show. Look at those poor passer-by, feel sorry for them.
I think this is a really great project.
I don’t find it particularly awful, reminds me of the bauhaus plastic experiments, might be good once they build it maybe.
Links to this article »