Comments on: ORDOS 100 #28: F451 Arquitectura

By: Woopy

Woopy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:19:43 +0000

I think gray is right when he talks about the social aspect. its horrible building such a themepark for the superrich in the middle of nomansland. it seems to me like a field of experimental working, without any limits in the urbanplaning procedure. the urbanplan looks in fact like those suburb desasters of the 60′s made in the States. but the architecture is good. i think there is a superrich-guy behind who allows the architecs to play howewer they like to. we have similar examples in history like the weissenhofsiedlung in stuttgart, just that there the architectural style is quite mor equal from a project to the other, thats why there appears a structure with continuity. in the desert they dont care… look at dubai

By: Julio Fernandez

Julio Fernandez — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 13:18:37 +0000

From Starchitects to McTecture

By: Lucas Gray

Lucas Gray — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:18:49 +0000

I am just not sure a suburban development can be considered a good response to environmental or cultural conditions. I am not saying the architecture is bad. On the contrary – there are some fantastic works of sculpture being showcased in this process from talented teams of people from every corner of the world. The creativity is something to be proud of.

How can you design a house when you don’t know what is going to be on the lot next to you? And why are we building 100 giant luxury houses in the middle of the Mongolian dessert in the first place when the world if facing the worst economic collapse in 80 plus years?

I guess I’m saying the work is good but many of those houses could be plopped down in any climate and still look pretty. Its the social implications that don’t sit right with me.

By: Partick Bateman

Partick Bateman — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:15:16 +0000

Strictly respecting the master plan
———–

haha that’s a good one.

the masterplan is a low density suburb in mongolia. its completely without merit whatsoever. this whole project is utterly awful. architectural follies foisted upon the mongolian desert with no relation to each other. its an architectural zoo.

it is ridiculous to think that these architects are designing all these projects in isolation.

individually some of these buildings are quite good and architecturaly some are interesting. but when you group all these buildings together on this pathetically suburban masterplan each building will have to interact with its neighbour, a concept that none of these projects address.

for gods sake, a residential masterplan should be all about creating the right environment, conditions and interconnectivity to establish a vibrant, interesting, modern community.

it’s not about designing an architectural museum that people happen to live in.

By: Woopy

Woopy — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:41:43 +0000

i see the problem with the context all people have looking at the ordos project. but insn’t it a sad thing, today thinking that the context is what architecture is all about? the context defines the “body” from the outside, its the cultural, ecological, economical, social….-background that consitst the context. people feel lost when they got no fence and boundaries around them. ordos should represent a new architecture which shows the individuality, it glows from its inside, defining the outside…that’s waht I think could be the context of this megaproject…but in fact we see that many architects which are part of it, feel lost, they never done a project like this, so then isn’t it like a examination to see which architects are able to provide an architecture that comes from themselves? They can no longer hide behind the context, using the quote to defend themselves, the quote of other authorities

By: zarza

zarza — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 04:56:18 +0000

I am not sure what is meant by ‘lack of context’ as the ‘situation plan’ and the renderings do provide at least some. I concur with the ‘thumbs up’. As noted, the clear documentation goes a long way in selling it to me. It is a thoughtful and careful response to climate, spatially intriguing… the renderings seem a bit ‘cold’ in portraying what could be a jewel box inside.

By: sisifo

sisifo — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 01:39:22 +0000

yeap, its a really nice project, beautifull , it seems to be nice architecture.

thumbs up.

By: alejandro

alejandro — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:59:31 +0000

I think of it more like the zombies paradox: the living dead.

Although I understand your point about no context being a context in its self It´s nevertheless sick in nature, is not what architecture should do or urbanism encourage.

By: hj

hj — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 22:45:54 +0000

the lack of context is also a context.

By: Lucas Gray

Lucas Gray — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:46:40 +0000

I am not crazy about the Ordos projects. There is no response to context (because there is none) which leaves the projects without meaning. They are all visual gimmicks and abstract explorations. I think its great for the developer that its received so much press and will surely be an architectural vacation spot for years to come. I just feel there is much better architecture being made today that is getting lost behind the tsunami of press flowing out of the Mongolian desert.

By: Troy Lemieur

Troy Lemieur — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 20:24:23 +0000

Finally, a project with beautiful, consistent drawings that convey the idea of the building they way they’re supposed to. This is an example of good design without the “selling points,” or corny gimmicks and literal visual metaphors to get it to sell.