Final Wooden House / Sou Fujimoto

Architects: Sou Fujimoto Architects
Location: Kumamoto, Japan
Project Team: Hiroshi Kato
Structural Consultant: Jun Sato Structural Engineers
Lighting: Hirohito Totsune
Contractor: Tanakagumi Construction
Design Year: 2005-2006
Construction Year: 2007-2008
Site Area: 89,3 sqm
Constructed Area: 15,13 sqm
Photographer: Iwan Baan


I thought of making an ultimate wooden architecture. It was conceived by just mindlessly stacking 350mm square.

Lumber is extremely versatile. In an ordinary wooden architecture, lumber is effectively differentiated according to functions in various localities precisely because it is so versatile. Columns, beams, foundations, exterior walls, interior walls, ceilings, floorings, insulations, furnishings, stairs, window frames, meaning all. However, I thought if lumber is indeed so versatile then why not create architecture by one rule that fulfills all of these functions. I envisioned the creation of new spatiality that preserves primitive conditions of a harmonious entity before various functions and roles differentiated.

There are no separations of floor, wall, and ceiling here. A place that one thought was a floor becomes a chair, a ceiling, a wall from various positions. The floor levels are relative and spatiality is perceived differently according to one’s position. Here, people are distributed three-dimensionally in the space. This is a place like an amorphous landscape with a new experience of various senses of distances. Inhabitants discover, rather than being prescribed, various functionalities in these convolutions.

This bungalow no longer fits the category of wooden architecture. If wooden architecture is merely something made from , then itself surpasses the architectural procedures to directly become a “place where people live” in this bungalow. It is of an existence akin to primitive conditions before architecture. Rather than just a new architecture, this is a new origin, a new existence.

Cite: "Final Wooden House / Sou Fujimoto" 23 Oct 2008. ArchDaily. Accessed 25 Jul 2014. <http://www.archdaily.com/?p=7638>

36 comments

    • Thumb up Thumb down 0

      It can be very beautiful, innovative but quite uninhabitable. Have not thought about the danger of blows to the head and other body parts?

  1. Thumb up Thumb down +4

    nice “concept” house, but:
    not a shelther so not a house
    a lot of wasted material, energy and non-sustainability.
    it’s a curious one design, local and nothing more
    with a lot of aesthetics, artitic qualities
    with regards
    gerson

  2. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    gorgeous exterior, however, the interior’s reminiscence of cave like dwelling looks to be a hard hat environment…conceptual and uninviting but nonetheless sensual and beautiful.

  3. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Sou Fujimoto is probably one of the most talented and propositive architects of nowadays, we should followed Sou´s future work,

    Congratulations for the WAF award!

  4. Thumb up Thumb down +1

    to gerson: “not a shelther so not a house”
    -If you look closely you’ll see that those openings are covered with glass, therefore it is an enclosed shelter and therefore a house…

  5. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    this house is amazing!
    I love that someone like Suo Fujimoto has really captured the true Japanese aesthetic concept of bringing nature as close to our homes as possible…

  6. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Hi. Interesting work and photos, especially at night. But…a little bit claustrofobic I think))Very good place in nature. I wish you a lot of inovation concepts.

  7. Thumb up Thumb down +1

    This awesome. Jenga, for sure. Great use of space with in the “treehouse”. Would make a fun place to “get away” to read or hang out with friends.

  8. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    Absolutely fascinating, exciting, rich, fantastic Jack-o-lantern__ can’t imagine roof glazing detail.

  9. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    I am an architecture student, i had exactly the same design and concept for one of the projects, my professor just didn’t approve it! here goes the difference being an “architect” and an “architecture student”!

    • Thumb up Thumb down +1

      If you think that everything is the same, it’s impossible that your teacher would disaproove it. Maybe you presented your work in really not aesthetic or diswelcome way..

  10. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    to many tree ‘die’ for this small ‘house’
    but.. this ‘house’ is cool & fun
    like it

  11. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    muy interesante , me quede pensando mientras miraba las fotos, presupuesto chico, pocos metros,
    mmm esta bueno

  12. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    obviously like your web site but you have to check the spelling on quite a few of your posts. Several of them are rife with spelling issues and I in finding it very bothersome to tell the truth nevertheless I will certainly come back again.

  13. Thumb up Thumb down -2

    Another useless piece of junk from him – except this time it is dangerous! People really need to evaluate his work more critically.

  14. Thumb up Thumb down 0

    BETTER YOU LIVE IN THE CAVE..MORE NICE THAN YOU MAKE SOMETHING FROM WOOD LIKE CAVE. YOU HAVE CALCULATE WOOD VOLUME FOR THIS? KEEP GREEN BRO,

  15. Thumb up Thumb down -1

    Apart from being an ‘architectural’ statement, I fail to see the point of this exercise. Its wasteful, uncomfortable, inefficient, and by itself not particularly attractive. One might well have stacked up some Lego bricks and that would have been a lot less wasteful. I am not an architect, so I would be curious to know what are the criteria for awards given out for projects such as these.

Share your thoughts