Comments on: House in Hiro / Suppose Design Office

By: Chk

Chk — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:46:36 +0000

You can see someone bathing in the bathroom thru the wire-mesh terrace floor. What the?

By: Christine Hightower

Christine Hightower — Sat, 09 Oct 2010 05:27:18 +0000

House in Hiro / Suppose Design Office | ArchDaily: http://bit.ly/cNHtrA via @addthis Is it possible to be in love with a house?

By: Alan J Castonguay

Alan J Castonguay — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 22:16:05 +0000

http://www.archdaily.com/51397/house-in-hiro-suppose-design-office/

By: viera

viera — Sun, 18 Jul 2010 10:59:21 +0000

House in Hiro / Suppose Design Office | ArchDaily http://bit.ly/cyUZbJ

By: Rick S.

Rick S. — Sat, 05 Jun 2010 14:14:41 +0000

Frighten of something? Look at the plot! There’s no place in it without a neghbour’s window within five meters! If you want to achieve any privacy, this is the minimum. In such dense urban conditions, THIS is the traditional way of dealing with housing in Japan. What would you do in their place? I’m curious…

By: migueldeabreu

migueldeabreu — Mon, 31 May 2010 12:04:12 +0000

House in Hiro / Suppose Design Office | ArchDaily http://bit.ly/cyUZbJ

By: Lars van der Werf

Lars van der Werf — Sat, 13 Mar 2010 14:29:39 +0000

En hier wil ik ook wel in wonen. Inspirerend. http://www.archdaily.com/51397/house-in-hiro-suppose-design-office/

By: bLogHouse

bLogHouse — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 13:05:38 +0000

zebra,

could you, please, itemize what do you mean by ‘excellent architecture’ in this case? How would you rationalize the solution for the bathroom? (just spare the ‘client wanted it so’ b.s.)
Don’t get me wrong – I admire Japanese minimalism in all art forms, both traditional and modern, and the ascetic look of exposed concrete. But calling the above ‘excellent architecture’ is a bit of a stretch.
BTW, this house reminds of the tesseract in R. Heinlein’s story “And He Built a Crooked House” in which every room has a window to every other room.

By: TC

TC — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:35:40 +0000

Double posting, I am sorry.

By: TC

TC — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:31:10 +0000

I think you are missing my point completely.
I did not suggest a “bucolic rural idyll”. Luckily for some us, there are many nuances (and options) between 30 sqm in Hiroshima and a half an acre in Iowa. And ma and pa’s shack is not the only alternative to this box either.

Compact living /living with less ? Sounds great, I am all for it – as long as there are real qualities behind these concepts.

There are examples of building in a very dense urban context, and it does not need to look like the doomsday is coming. A “contextual” response does not unequivocally generate good architecture, does it ?

Just a thought : no matter how fine the details or how beautiful the concrete, there’s a little more to architecture and living than this proposal.

By: Adrem

Adrem — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:46:55 +0000

Very controversial project, very interesting discussion, with a special mention for the last comments that have been posted (starting from TC’s one).

By: the big black & white zebra

the big black & white zebra — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 09:10:41 +0000

Missing the context here…
A bucolic rural idyll is not appropriate for a small urban plot between two commercial buildings… the concrete box is a contextual response giving the clients privacy and security.
ergo

By: TC

TC — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:56:22 +0000

Indeed. The only alternative to living in Hiroshima is half an acre in Iowa, and the only other option besides this box is ma and pa’s house. There is nothing in between, is there now ? The two pillars of contemporary architecture…

Compact living / Living with less ? Great, I’m all for it, as long as there are qualities associated with these concepts.

There are plenty of examples of building in a very dense urban environment and it does not need to look (or sound) like the doomsday is coming. I was just expressing my doubts about the tag “excellent architecture” that someone else placed on this particular entry (supposing we all judge this project by the plans and images submitted)

By: SPG

SPG — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 04:50:11 +0000

This strange little cell like building has seemed to get everyone in a flap. What has been overlooked in the comments is that the site is a tight urban space in a crowded urban environment.Obviously not meant to house more than two and I would suggest the owners are professionals who work and live mostly out of home. I see no difference to this type of dwelling than to apartment living in any large city.Bunkers reinforce security and are an excellent bolt hole from modern city life.My only criticism is the low level of light on the ground floor.Otherwise,it’s an intriguing Japanese solution.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:25:26 +0000

TC,
Not everyone lives in Iowa.
‘Sunlight, good orientation, properly-sized windows (whatever that means!) and a decent view’ are pretty hard to come by in dense urban environments like Hiroshima.
Projects like these are important and westerners (like most of the people commenting here i presume) should pay more attention to ideas about living with LESS.
The days of 4 bedroom houses on half an acre of land will end soon. We need to learn from examples like this, not rubbish them because it doesn’t look like ma and pa’s house.

By: the big black & white zebra

the big black & white zebra — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:49:01 +0000

Hey your confusing the pre-requisites for a bucolic rural idyl for a compressed site between two high street commercial units!
In that context what is not to like with a protective concrete box?
The precision of the inside takes you away from all that flappy crap outside…
know what I mean

By: TC

TC — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 20:21:27 +0000

A windowless concrete box squeezed between other boxes has become “excellent architecture”, and why can’t “we” all see this ?
I guess once you get past the poetry of exposed concrete, there is not much left. Funny enough, there was a time when sun light, good orientation, properly sized windows and eventually a decent view were some of the prerequisites for good architecture (and a healthy life, by the way). Now slap some concrete walls on an odd plan and there you have it.

I am looking at the first image and it just gives me the chills. Perhaps not everything an office gets built is really suitable for publication…

One more thing – the fact that a thing like this got the client’s approval does not equate to “excellence” – at least not in my world.
Hats off to Suppose Design Office, which have some beautiful houses in their portfolio – this is just not one of them.

By: the big black & white zebra

the big black & white zebra — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:49:39 +0000

Huh
bLogHouse
I know the client probably got what he wanted, especially with such an outré bathroom design…
I would not design monuments to my ego. Our individual artistic expression is tempered with our clients practicality and wishes. A good mix, and excellent architecture is the result – we can see this is excellent architecture whether we like it or not so the client architect relationship must have been good…
ergo

By: bLogHouse

bLogHouse — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:24:36 +0000

First, how do you know what the client wanted, are you the architect of this house?
Second, would you really design _anything_ a client wants,
even if you consider it inappropriate? Then, to paraphrase
cristopher, this is a classic example of servility overtaking responsibility.

By: Aleisa Mondolfi

Aleisa Mondolfi — Wed, 10 Mar 2010 15:07:46 +0000

66.5 m2. Que pensarán de nosotros en Japón pón http://www.archdaily.com/51397/house-in-hiro-suppose-design-office/