Ocaña de España / Manuel Ocaña

Im not sure I get this proposal….

I just dont agree with the line `The waste of professional energy while trying to manipulate the public opinion is always illegitimate an unsustainable.`

Im well aware there´s an abundance of people out there that prefer `kitsch` over well considered `art`. We as architects are professionals though and its our job to execute well considered design decisions which we have come to understand as the best solution after years of academic research and practical experience.

I understand this “Hippo-critical oath” is intended to invoke a discussion, but its content is rather arrogant. I take my job seriously and I believe I have a vision which I want to promote. At least now I know its all in vain…

the so called “hipo-critical” oath seems like it was written to incite a discussion or a rather heated argument instead of announcing a manifesto or something like it.

and i think the lady is annoying too. so random.

I believe Yung Ho Chang would enjoy these images.Architecture is not the focal point. Just like real life. Hehe.

having a model for scale: good idea. Having that model be some hot chick prancing around in a loud dress and/or bikini: a completely irrelevant and simple-minded idea.

i thought the project is about the girl, not about the huts around…

So public opinion in Toledo is that two stories of fake, theme-parky rock looks good? That’s a shame.

It’s nice to see such a humble and unselfish kind of architecture.

They talk about being the medium to the society, and not try to impose ones thinking into the whole society. Thats just the contrary to most of the architects in the last century have thought.

Once and for all someone is forgeting their egos for a little bit, and try to make people happy with their dwellings.

that was funny! –>”(that can be related to the oceans of fake, Hello Kitty´s fossil or a pre-Columbine Mickey Mouse could be references)”

Where are the guy with the speedo?

Holy smokes, Ayn Rand would have a fit. :-)

does SHE come with the condo. . . yuk yuk
:P

don’t know if it is funny enought.. but i must say.. kinda different and lievable, a very cozy project… whe you see at first sight.. “wow! lots of rock an all.. how do they do something like that? who can do something like that nowadays!?” but then you see the detail sections.. =//

but still a nice example of a lievable project!

Over-rationalization of a rather banal project.

Interesting, but quite strange to have boulders as the ground floor. The model would have worked in 3 or 4 images, but not in MOST of them! I don’t love this project, but it’s a start.. I think architects should begin to manipulate the public opinion.. Take N.America (Canada and USA). It seems that most of the general public hasn’t seen or been in an “architect” or “designer” created place/space. Do we want developer-based “desgin” to be the norm, or do we push for something different, better, new.??

Or when public opinion is an order.

and we as the public order to get rid of this thing, and not only from archdaily…

Interesting thesis.
The outcome is what you would expect, but I’m glad the architect followed through with the manifesto.

Luckily, Elver’s linked website contains only renderings of unbuilt projects – in Panama.

the girl!

this would be like going to a dinner by some up and coming nuevo-Spanish style chef, and all he’s interested in doing is showing off his waitress.

1. In architecture, public opinion is not a proposal. It is an order.

It is not!, Architecture is for people indeed, democracy works, but is not always the best option; so, if public opinion likes some statements, architects most know if these are correct, or wrong, or is the best option.. it will continue as a proposal

2. Architecture represents what society presents.

And also what society aim for, architecture since ancient times is a big point in aiming for next generation.

3. Architectural language is a social prerogative.

Or, what the new society will need, or will aim for, just thinking about the past, without preparing the future is irresponsible and just adjusting to the existing design without further proposals to improve, it is irresponsible

4. Architecture is importation from the collective thinking. Talking about exportation is arrogance.

Absolutes are arrogance too; it is both, collective & inner, and the results from those is what society is.. thinking only in collective is lack of self proposals.

5. Statistics is not data. It is law.

Incorrect!, why it must be a law?, if statistics says most of people kills another being, it must be a law? if 90% says buildings must be design only for men, it must be a law?, wrong.. Plurality is not always correct, as the simple example: “if everyone jumped off the bridge, one must jump?”

6. Bureaucracy is not an obstacle. It is an allied.

Not an allied, either an obstacle, only a formality.

7. Communal opinion is more valuable than the architect’s judgment.

Same as point 5, if communal opinion says is correct build houses whitout windows, it should be correct?, i think not, architects learn and study what is better for something, what is the porpouse of things, communal opinion must be heard, but if the community can’t explain what they want, or what they need their opinion is just useless. And architectes there must look to find what really society wants, and needs.

I am completely aginst the way of thinking they have stated, although the building look interesting and well made.

I think that finally the very issue of this thing (after riding Rionzs opinion… very nice, thanks) is that if architecture is about tecnical evolution or abstract design evolution.

In my opinion, it’s about technical evolution, it’s about cience.

Not about style and fashion(design)

It’s kind of boring thinking about architecture like that, but it’s more realistic.

to me, design is just a concequence of the time you’re living.

I wish my concierge was that hot….

it’s a big mistake to present a new arch.object using nice models (girls, womens or mens). It’s a cheap gimmick. You can use this method to advertice underwear, cars or smth.

When you advertice a new architecture, the atention devide between arch.forms and a pretty model. It’s not good.

there’s another way to present architecture: it’s natural life scenes or real documentary in a real living area or house; then models are the real people, who lives and works here. The documentary photo.

the architecture is realy nice and interesting. It looks like a little community. It’s a little bit narrow area, a lack of private space, but people, who want to live in a little humman anthill – it’s good place :-).

The exterior – only stone decoration looks a bit simulated, not so realistic, that I could believe in that. Anything is OK. Very good and nice work.

interesting cynical manifesto…very student sounding. theme parks are cool and if that is what the developer wants how do you make sure it looks good in fifty years? will the rocks need repainting? are the floor plans generic enough for resale? are walls and ceilings detailed to last? if this project is demolished in ten years how much of it can be recycled? is it energy efficient? even though it’s a theme park the architects got to make some interesting spaces. how often do any of you get to do that? does anyone out there know how to do classical architecture in a vernacular language and actually build it?

nothing special about this project !

you could realise this from the women posing in every picture :p (this is a technique used usually to hid the uglyness of something)