The New, New City

briv

Senior Member
Joined
May 25, 2006
Messages
2,083
Reaction score
3
From the NY Times:

The Architecture Issue
The New, New City

08shenzen-600.jpg
Sze Tsung Leong for The New York Times
NEW SHENZHEN ENCIRCLES OLD: In the center, one of the city?s original urban villages, with its signature ?handshake buildings? ? so close together you could reach across to your neighbor.


By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF
Published: June 8, 2008


?Don?t tell anyone,? Rem Koolhaas said to me several years ago as we headed down the F.D.R. Drive in New York, ?but the 20th-century city is over. It has nothing new to teach us anymore. Our job is simply to maintain it.? Koolhaas?s viewpoint is widely shared by close observers of the evolution of cities. But not even Koolhaas, it seems, was completely prepared for what would come next.

In both China and the Persian Gulf, cities comparable in size to New York have sprouted up almost overnight. Only 30 years ago, Shenzhen was a small fishing village of a few thousand people, and Dubai had merely a quarter million people. Today Shenzhen has a population of eight million, and Dubai?s glittering towers, rising out of the desert in disorderly rows, have become playgrounds for wealthy expatriates from Riyadh and Moscow. Long-established cities like Beijing and Guangzhou have more than doubled in size in a few decades, their original outlines swallowed by rings of new development. Built at phenomenal speeds, these generic or instant cities, as they have been called, have no recognizable center, no single identity. It is sometimes hard to think of them as cities at all. Dubai, which lays claim to some of the world?s most expensive private islands, the tallest building and soon the largest theme park, has been derided as an urban tomb where the rich live walled off from the poor migrant workers who serve them. Shenzhen is often criticized as a product of unregulated development, better suited to the speculators that first spurred its growth than to the workers housed in huge complexes of factory-run barracks. Yet for architects these cities have also become vast fields of urban experimentation, on a scale that not even the early Modernists, who first envisioned the city as a field of gleaming towers, could have dreamed of.
?The old contextual model is not very relevant anymore,? Jesse Reiser, an American architect working in Dubai, told me recently. ?What context are we talking about in a city that?s a few decades old? The problem is that we are only beginning to figure out where to go from here.?


The sheer number of projects under construction and the corresponding investment in civic infrastructure ? entire networks of new subway systems, freeways and canals; gargantuan new airports and public parks ? can give the impression that anything is possible in this new world. The scale of these undertakings recalls the early part of the last century in America, when the country was confidently pointed toward the future. But it would be unimaginable in an American city today, where, in the face of shrinking state and city budgets, expanding a single subway line can seem like a heroic act. ?In America, I could never do work like I do here,? Steven Holl, a New York architect with several large projects in China, recently told me, referring to his latest complex in Beijing. ?We?ve become too backward-looking. In China, they want to make everything look new. This is their moment in time. They want to make the 21st century their century. For some reason, our society wants to make everything old. I think we somehow lost our nerve.?


Holl has reason to be exhilarated. His Beijing project, ?Linked Hybrid,? is one of the most innovative housing complexes anywhere in the world: eight asymmetrical towers joined by a network of enclosed bridges that create a pedestrian zone in the sky. Yet this exhilaration also comes at a price: only the wealthiest of Beijing?s residents can afford to live here. Climbing to the top of one of Holl?s towers, I looked out through a haze of smog at the acres of luxury-housing towers that surround his own, the kind of alienating subdivisions that are so often cited as a symptom of the city?s unbridled, dehumanizing development. Protected by armed guards, these residential high-rises stood on what was until quite recently a working-class neighborhood, even though the poor quality of their construction makes them seem decades old. Nearby, a new freeway cut through the neighborhood, further disfiguring an area that, however modest, was once bursting with life.


?If you take Venturi?s ideas about the city,? Holl said, referring to Robert Venturi?s groundbreaking work, ?Learning From Las Vegas,? which called on architects to reconsider the importance of the everyday (strip malls, billboards, storefronts), ?and put them in Beijing or Tokyo, they don?t hold any water at all. When you get into this scale, the rules have to be rewritten. The density is so incredible.? Because of this density, cities like Beijing have few of the features we associate with a traditional metropolis. They do not radiate from a historic center as Paris and New York do. Instead, their vast size means that they function primarily as a series of decentralized neighborhoods, something closer in spirit to Los Angeles. The breathtaking speed of their construction means that they usually lack the layers ? the mix of architectural styles and intricately related social strata ? that give a city its complexity and from which architects have typically drawn inspiration.


In Dubai, for instance, what might once have been the product of 100 years of urban growth has been compressed into a decade or so. Given such seismic shifts, even the most talented architects can seem to flounder for new models. No one wants to return to the deadly homogeneity associated with Modernism?s tabula rasa planning strategies. The image of Le Corbusier hovering godlike above Paris ready to wipe aside entire districts and replace them with glass towers remains an emblem of Modernism?s attack on the city?s historical fabric. Yet the notion of finding ?authenticity? in a sprawling metropolitan area that is barely 30 years old also seems absurd. How do you breathe life into a project at such a scale? How do you instill the fine-grained texture of a healthy community into one that rose overnight?


Cities like these, built on a colossal scale, seem to absorb any urban model, no matter how unique, virtually unnoticed. A project that could have a significant impact on the character of, say, New York ? like the development plans for ground zero ? can seem a mere blip in Beijing, which has embarked on dozens of similarly sized endeavors in the last decade alone. ?The irony is that we still don?t know if postmodernism was the end of Modernism or just an interruption,? Koolhaas told me recently. ?Was it a brief hiatus, and now we are returning to something that has been going on for a long time, or is it something radically different? We are in a condition we don?t understand yet.?


For architects faced with building these large urban developments, the difficulty is to create something where there was nothing. If much of contemporary architecture depends on sifting through the cultural and historical layers that a site accumulates over time ? whether neo-Classical monuments or Socialist-era housing ? what can be done if there is nothing to sift through but sand?


In a recent design for a six-and-a-half-square-mile development in Dubai called Waterfront City, Koolhaas proposed creating an urban island inspired by a section of Midtown Manhattan. The design linked a dense grid of conventional towers to the mainland by a system of bridges. A series of stunning ?iconic? buildings ? a gigantic, hollowed-out Piranesian sphere at the island?s edge; a spiraling tower that winds around an airy public atrium ? were intended to give the city a distinct flavor. Koolhaas said he hoped, in this way, to infuse this entirely new development with something of the feeling of an older city. But while the outlines are intriguing, he is still coming to terms with how to create an organic whole. In the early stages of the design, Koolhaas experimented with somewhat conventional models of public space: a boardwalk along the island?s perimeter, a narrow park cutting through its center, classical arcades lining the downtown streets. But the majority of Dubai?s inhabitants are foreign-born, and the arcaded streets could easily suggest a theme-park version of a traditional Arab city. Koolhaas is painfully aware of how hard it is to escape the generic.


?A city like Dubai is literally built on a desert,? Koolhaas conceded when I asked him about the project. ?There is a weird alternation between density and emptiness. You rarely feel that you are designing for people who are actually there but for communities that have yet to be assembled. The vernacular is too faint, too precarious to become something on which you can base an architecture.?


Koolhaas says he hopes that the plan will gain in complexity as the buildings? functions are worked out; he says he was thrilled to learn that the government wanted both a courthouse and a mosque on the island. ?Another option that I personally find very interesting,? Koolhaas told me, ?is the modernist vernacular of the 1970s ? buildings that once you put them in Singapore or Dubai take on totally different meanings. Some of the modern typologies work in Asia even though they are totally dysfunctional in America. Typologies we?ve rejected turn out to be viable in other contexts.?


The challenges of building what amounts to a small-scale city from scratch are compounded by the realities of working in a global marketplace. An architect of Koolhaas?s stature may be grappling simultaneously with the design of a television headquarters complex in Beijing, a stock exchange in Shenzhen and a 20-block neighborhood in Dubai, as well as a dozen buildings in Europe. The intense competition for these commissions means that architects are often forced to churn out seductive designs in weeks or months, tweaking their models to fit local conditions.


Several years ago, the London-based, Iraqi-born architect Zaha Hadid received a phone call from a Chinese developer asking if she might be interested in designing a 500-acre urban development on the outskirts of Singapore. Hadid had never met the developer before. She was soon working on the master plan for ?One North,? a mixed-use development with a projected population of about 140,000. Located on what was once a military site, Hadid?s design conjured a high-tech mountainous terrain. Dubbed the ?urban carpet,? it was intended to blend office and residential towers and highways and public parks into a seamless whole. Against the rigid lines of the traditional street grid, the sinuous curves of the freeways suggested a more fluid, mobile society. The rooftops, whose heights were subject to stringent regulations, looked as if they were cut from a single piece of crumpled fabric, giving the composition a haunting unity. ?We wanted to create a complex order rather than either the monotony of Modernism or the chaos you find in contemporary cities,? Hadid said.
Yet once construction began, the design of the buildings was left to local architects hired by the developer. As the towers rose in clusters scattered across the site, it was difficult to read the formal intent. With more than 20 blocks now complete, parts of the city look surprisingly conventional.
Hadid revived the concept several years later, when she won a competition to create a 1,360-acre business district in a former industrial zone on the outskirts of Istanbul. This time, the context was more promising: a hilly landscape at the edge of the sea flanked by older working-class neighborhoods on either side. To allow the development to grow in a more natural way than at One North, it would be built in phases that would begin at the waterfront and spread inland, eventually connecting to the street grid of the older neighborhoods. In an effort to preserve the texture of her original concept, Hadid developed a series of building prototypes, including a star-shaped tower and a housing block organized around a central court, and staggered the heights of the buildings to reflect the existing terrain.
If Hadid?s plan is formally inventive, it is still unclear whether it has escaped the homogeneity that was a hallmark of Modernist urban-renewal projects. Its sheer size coupled with the fact that the shapes of the buildings were conceived by a single architect means the result may well be more uniform, and ultimately more rigid, than Hadid intended.


Indeed, contemporary architects? urban plans may be less tied to location than they would like to admit. When a Chinese developer approached the New York-based Jesse Reiser and Nanako Umemoto to design a 1,235-acre development in Foshan, on the Pearl River Delta, they (with a Chinese partner) came up with a system of urban ?mats?: a multilayered network of roads and low-rise commercial spaces, topped by a park surrounded by residential and commercial buildings. The park followed the contours of the roadways below; sunken courtyards allowed light to spill down into the underground spaces. Last year, the Chinese project fell through, and Reiser and Umemoto reworked the idea for a developer in Dubai. The layout was reconfigured to fit the new waterfront site; souks were added as a nod to local traditions. The result is a remarkably nuanced view of how to knit together the various elements of urban life, but it also seems as if it could exist anywhere.


The walkable, mixed-use neighborhoods celebrated by Jane Jacobs may seem impossibly remote, but encouraging signs of a more textured urban reality can still be found. Take Holl?s Linked Hybrid in Beijing, for example, which has a surprisingly open, communal spirit. A series of massive portals lead from the street to an elaborate internal courtyard garden, a restaurant, a theater and a kindergarten, integrating the complex into the surrounding neighborhood. Bridges connect the towers 12 to 19 stories above ground and are conceived as a continuous string of public zones, with bars and nightclubs overlooking a glittering view of the city and a suspended swimming pool. ?The developer?s openness to ideas was amazing,? Holl says. ?When they first asked me to do the project, it was just housing. I suggested adding the cinematheque, the kindergarten. I added an 80-room hotel and the swimming pool as well. Anywhere else, they?d build it in phases over several years. It?s too big. After our meeting, they said we?re building the whole thing all at once. I couldn?t believe it. We haven?t had to compromise anything.


?But what makes it possible is the density. The Modernist idea of the street in the air that became a place of social interaction never worked in Europe. Beijing is so dense that I can keep all of the shops functioning on the street, and there?s still enough energy to activate the bridges as well.?
Holl is continuing to explore these ideas in another megaproject, this time on the outskirts of Shenzhen: a zigzag-shaped office complex propped up on big steel columns that make room for a dreamy public garden. The density in much of Shenzhen can make Beijing look spacious. The imposing skyline of glass-and-steel towers, plastered with electronic billboards, was built mostly within the last decade, part of the boom that followed foreign investment in the area, when it was declared a special economic zone in the early ?80s. The Chinese government initially allowed many of the small villages that lined the delta to hold on to their land. As land values rose around them, the villagers remained in their increasingly populated districts, where they built cheap, and often instantly decrepit, towers that were so close together they were dubbed ?handshake buildings?: you could literally reach out your window and shake hands with your neighbor across the street. The villages are poignant testimonies to the hardships that young workers, recently transplanted from the countryside, face in the new China. Many live packed a half dozen or more in one-bedroom apartments. But if Shenzhen is an emblem of what can happen when free-market capitalism is allowed to run amok, it is also an example of the spontaneous creativity that occurs when people are left to fend for themselves. On a recent visit, the alleyways, dark and claustrophobic, were thick with shops. Elderly people played mah-jongg on card tables in the street; two young children sat at a small desk doing their homework in a tiny storefront that doubled as their bedroom.


Wenyi Wu, a young architect working for a Chinese firm called Urbanus, led me around the area. The firm has been studying how people carve a living space out of seemingly inhospitable environments, hoping to develop an urbanist model more deeply rooted in the spontaneity of everyday life. He took me to a small museum Urbanus designed on the outskirts of the city. A series of stepped galleries stand at the base of a hill between an urban village and some banal housing complexes above. A series of long ramps pierce the building, joining the two worlds. More ramps encircle the exterior, so that you have the impression of moving through a system of loosely connected alleyways. The idea was to transform the unregulated character of the urban village into something more formal and humane ? to extract the essence of its character without romanticizing the squalor. The circuitous paths of the ramps echo the surrounding alleyways; the layout of the galleries suggests the footprint of the migrant workers? housing but on a more intimate scale.


Other architects, hoping to build in ways that reflect an emerging vernacular, are taking a similar approach, looking at more modest and more informally constructed urban neighborhoods for inspiration. Shumon Basar, a London-based critic and independent curator, recently described a number of small, unplanned settlements in and around Dubai. The dense and gritty neighborhood of Deira, for instance, has little in common with Sheikh Zayed Road and its fortified glass towers. Built mainly in the 1970s, Deira?s low concrete structures and labyrinthine alleyways are home to a lively population of Southeast Asian workers. Similarly, the thriving, traditionally Muslim middle-class neighborhoods of Sharjah, the third-largest city in the United Arab Emirates, were built without the flashiness of more recent developments. Basar wonders if, despite their modesty, these areas could form the basis for a fresh urban strategy based neither on imported Western models nor on clich?s about local souks.


As Holl told me recently in his New York office, working on a large scale doesn?t mean that the particulars of place no longer matter. ?I don?t think of any of my buildings as a model for something, the way the Modernists did,? Holl said. ?If it works, it works in its specific context. You can?t just move it somewhere else.?


But is site specificity enough? ?The amount of building becomes obscene without a blueprint,? Koolhaas said. ?Each time you ask yourself, Do you have the right to do this much work on this scale if you don?t have an opinion about what the world should be like? We really feel that. But is there time for a manifesto? I don?t know.?



Nicolai Ouroussoff is the architecture critic of The New York Times.


LINK
 
?In America, I could never do work like I do here,? Steven Holl, a New York architect with several large projects in China, recently told me, referring to his latest complex in Beijing. ?We?ve become too backward-looking. In China, they want to make everything look new. This is their moment in time. They want to make the 21st century their century. For some reason, our society wants to make everything old. I think we somehow lost our nerve.?

Ain't that the truth. Though I will say I will always prefer the humane streets of the North End or even JP to the soulless towers in China.

But see, here's the thing. They say this is the 21st century city but it really isn't. This is the 20th century city, the Le Corbusier City of Tomorrow. We won't know what the 21st century city will look like for probably 40 years. The 21st century city will be much more different than this (though I'm not even going to start to predict what that will look like.)

This isn't a new phenomenon. The 19th century city with railroads and Dickensian factory work and slums didn't come about until the the last half of the 1800s and didn't really go away until after the First World War. The 20th century city of cars and suburbs (and towers in the park) didn't come about until the last half of the 1900s. The first 50 years of a decade are where the theory and the technology are developed to make the changes for the last half.
 
There is so much wrong with this article, I don't know where to begin. There are factual errors, exaggerations, half-baked theories, sophomoric speculations, half-truths, unwarranted conclusions ...

Everything but genuine insight ...

How did this guy get his lofty position?






It really hurts to read such trash.
 
This is mostly a "look at how much better they are than us" type rag. The truth is all that growth is going to come back and bite them in the ass (it already did as we can see from the China earthquake).
 
wow ablarc, channeling Sharon Stone today?
Ever been to Asia? Or you don't care to see most of the world?
The rapid growth of cities in China, and elsewhere, is providing many opportunities to manage challenges in design, transportation, pollution, land use, and other arenas of planning, that's all the article is saying. And these challenges are leading to some very original realizations that planners in other large polycentric cities, like most American cities, can actually learn from. Yes, planners and architects can learn from places besides Europe. So the author and the editors had to stylize the article a bit to get people's attention (and the wrath of the xenophobes evidently).
Looking forward to your next overly stylized bombastic post,
a630
 
Yup, asia rules. No doubt about it. Yes, most of the new development is commieblocks, but as ablarc said, the function is what matters, not the structure, and if it has ground floor retail, high density, and a walkable environment, even if its in ugly concrete towers, that's good for me. Europe may have a prettier structure (aka form), but in Japan, which the architecture is pretty much all concrete "shoeboxes", the function is brutally effective with street level retail everywhere and great pedestrian activity.
 
This is mostly a "look at how much better they are than us" type rag. The truth is all that growth is going to come back and bite them in the ass (it already did as we can see from the China earthquake).

It's not growth's fault, it's corruption and shoddy construction. Even if there was low growth and shoddy construction, that will still bite in the ass, just like low growth Boston with shoddy Big Dig tunnels and UMASS Boston buildings (that garage that collapsed in the 1970s, as well as the garage that's non accessible now) and no maintenance on the Longfellow bridge. Don't jump to conclusions without thinking things through first, growth doesn't cause anything except growth.
 
Barb, your highly biased... what in the hell does UMB have to do with anything?

I know what growth causes. higher gas prices and middle class Americans getting screwed. Globalization is great for the rest of the world and the CEO's of American companies...too bad that its driving their neighbors a half mile away across the track into the poor house.

a630 has the post of the week.
 
I was just making a point that growth doesn't cause shoddy construction, corruption does, and it happens in high growth China and low growth Boston (yes, my example is UMB, that's the relation). And of course I'm highly biased, we aren't reporters, we're forum members with an opinion and opinions stir up debate, and debate is the whole point of "forums", that's the definition of it. So you disagree with me and agree with a630, even though we have the same position? Growth causes high gas prices, but what's your solution? You can't stop growth just for your benefit, the solution is high gas prices causing a switch to more efficient vehicles (like motorcycles, fun, "manly" yet efficient), conservation, and drilling for oil and searching for other forms of energy. Complain about high gas prices? Drive less.
 
ablarc -- Before we have a revisit of the tiresome and all-too-frequent piss tossing, could you put some bread around this sandwich?

There is so much wrong with this article, I don't know where to begin. There are factual errors, exaggerations, half-baked theories, sophomoric speculations, half-truths, unwarranted conclusions ...

Everything but genuine insight ...

I'm of the opinion that the West is only good at exporting its worst habits and character traits. Maybe that's what your saying here? You've never been a broad generalizations guy.

I assume you're just being cheeky here:

^ The wrath of God ?

Right?
 
Last edited:
Actually the New 21st Century City will be greatly impacted by the current surge in gas prices and it seems the change will be quite profound.

btw- BarManch, I disagree with you so maybe I'll poll the forum on whether or not you should be banned.;)
 
OK what do you disagree with me about? Let's have a civilized debate, though I'm pretty sure my position is greatly outnumbered.
 
See, I don't want to get into it because I am biased against people from New Hampshire.

I think the whole state is a big fat tick on Massachusetts back.
 
My stream of consciousness came out, I wasn't comparing barb with a630 I was just co-signing a's comments.

Comparing private investment and public investment is like apples and oranges; UMB is a bad example.

Off topic I know, but the whole 'gas goes up and we're all gonna have to switch and save the environment! cuz cars are evil fossil fuel burners!' is all great and everything, and I agree with it, but at the cost of quality of life? I can't agree with the tree huggers there. I already did cut my driving, by probably 90% or so, for several reasons. That doesn't make me alright with it.

I have a real problem with China modeling their economy after ours and the extensive build out of their highway system. It works here, but they should know better than to follow our system that was in the works 60-70 years ago. They should've known the reprecutions in doing something like that and now we're paying for their dumb asses.
 
Well the buildings in China didn't collapse on their own, the collapsed because a natural disaster. If an unexpected natural disaster hit Boston, I would expect the same damage (proportionally, Boston is smaller) as we wouldn't be prepared for it, just like the buildings in China. Compared to here, where garages, tunnels, and buildings collapse on their own and don't need any prodding from the outside world for it to happen (earthquakes, etc...). Me and my family's driving has been cut by 30%, we can't eliminate some trips but on the way to the supermarket, we buy gas, go to the post office, pay taxes at the town hall, and go to other stores if neccesary, unlike before in which all these trips are separate. I don't have any problem with China's highway construction, they're also building high speed trains (much faster than the US's) and urban transit (30+ subway lines in Shanghai, every mid-sized or bigger city has a plan for at least 1 line by 2010), and discouraging car ownership and leisure driving on the new highways. The expressways in China have some of the highest tolls in the world, unfortunately, people want to drive and you can't stop it even with the current measures. maybe the car tax should be increased, but you knkow, the streets and the busses are all crowded, its just a matter of tons of people in a small area, that's urban vitality (even in modernist structures, they don't feel dead like here perhaps simply because there's just way more people there in a smaller area - only 1/3 of China is actually populated, rest is desert and mountains).
 
Another related article, this time from Der Spiegel:


The Battle for the World's Skyline


By Ulrike Kn?fel, Frank Hornig and Bernhard Zand

A building frenzy is raging in Asia, Russia and on the Persian Gulf. And cities like London and New York don't have the money to compete. Will Western urban landscapes soon look outdated?


For an entire century, New York was the city of skyscrapers, the epitome of the vertical city. It just kept growing into the sky, faster and faster. It was an exhilarating adventure in stone, steel and glass -- and seemingly unsurpassable.


In "Delirious New York," his legendary 1978 book about the giant city of skyscrapers and its magic, the young Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas raved about what he called the "colonization of the sky."


Even the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center have not diminished the enthusiasm the now world-famous architect has for the skyscraper as a model of success. Despite the disaster, says Koolhaas, the skyscraper is still "about the only type of building that has survived the leap into the 21st century."


Koolhaas is apparently right. The tower has survived as both a form of architecture and a status symbol. The impressiveness of a city's skyline is seen as a reflection of its prosperity. Skyscrapers serve as a physical expression of an economic upswing, and bear witness to an economy's level of adrenalin.


Go East!
From a Western perspective, at least, this is precisely the problem. Economically booming megacities -- such as Beijing, Shanghai and Dubai -- where extravagant skyscrapers are shooting up all over, mean that cities like New York are beginning to look old and outdated, despite attempts to modernize. In Europe, the eastern part is beginning to look more modern than the western part. Cities like Istanbul and Moscow are more dynamic than London, Paris or Milan.


There have never been this many skyscrapers on the drawing boards, with most of them planned for the world's new boom towns. The West is eying this development with jealousy, all the more intense for its inability to compete. The massive downturn in the American credit market has caused the cancellation or postponement of many major architectural and urban-planning projects.


The battle for the best skyline, which has been underway for more than 100 years, is entering a new round. And it already seems to be clear who the winners will be: the Middle East and the Far East. Kazakhstan and Qatar could soon be aesthetically more dominant than Europe or the United States. It is an architectural clash of civilizations. One of the most ironic aspects of this development is that, in many cases, it is the West's leading architects who are driving this transition. Working for newly enriched governments and real estate tycoons, they are now being given free reign to do what would now be inconceivable in their home countries.


An angular building in the shape of a colossal triumphal arch? One designed by Koolhaas was recently completed in Beijing to serve as the headquarters of China Central Television.


A landscape of tall, asymmetrical buildings reminiscent of icebergs? One designed by American architect Steven Holl now stands in the Chinese city of Chengdu.


A pyramid for Moscow that climbs 450 meters (1,476 feet)? Both are the work of prominent London architect Lord Norman Foster, who is also designing the Crystal Island, the Moscow development that will include it. According to Foster, it is the "world's most ambitious construction project."


The All-powerful 'Wow Effect'
The megalomania of this boomtown euphoria demands more than just tall buildings. Nowadays, spectacular shapes and glittering surfaces are in demand, eccentricities that are noticeable even from great distances. The "wow effect" is everything; it translates into structures mimicking lilies, harps, trophies, tents and other unconventional shapes.


Hamburg architect Volkwin Marg, who runs a thriving business in China with his partner Meinhard von Gerkan, isn't fond of this tendency toward representational building. For Marg, these "iconic buildings" lack social significance.


Peter Schweger, another architect from Hamburg, even describes the current trend as "absurd, atrocious blossoms of sculptural architecture." He has also noticed an impact on Western architectural aesthetics, where "buildings are starting to be designed like commercial products that can be aggressively marketed." Schweger describes his own skyscraper designs, such as the reflective Twin Towers he designed for Moscow, as rational.
The investor and the other architect collaborating in the Twin Towers project are Russian, while most of the construction workers are Chinese. At 500 meters (1,640 feet), the larger of the two towers -- with its so-called "panorama needle" -- will go down in history as one of the tallest buildings in Europe.


But not for long.


A Matter of Standards
Schweger has just signed a contract to design a new business park in Moscow. The development will consist of 400,000 square meters (4.3 million square feet) of office space. Compared with its surroundings, though, this almost seems modest. As Schweger puts it, the amount of new construction underway in the Russian capital "is almost difficult to fathom."
Schweger is critical of Russian building standards. "Many buildings are 10 years behind the Western standard technologically," he says. "The developers have no interest in questions of energy efficiency."


There are other good reasons to criticize today's hectic global building trend -- aesthetic, environmental and ethical reasons. But few investors or architects are interested. Instead, they prefer to immortalize themselves and watch their towers grow.


Calling it "too brutal," Schweger says he's not interested in China. Instead, he focusing his design efforts on a collection of skyscrapers in Dubai, which are part of a development somewhat cheesily named "Dubai Pearl."


Building Up
The emirate of Dubai is the promised land for real estate speculators. It is said that half of all construction cranes in the world are in Dubai. But is architectural history really being written there?


Dubai consists of two peninsulas on its western side and an older section on the eastern side, with a kilometer-long line of skyscrapers in between. The skyscrapers look somehow familiar -- and not accidentally so. Many of the building's architectural elements -- including the bell tower from St. Mark's Square in Venice and the silver arches of New York's Chrysler Building -- are borrowed.


Giant billboards line the highways cutting through the desert. They advertise the names of urban visions to come, names like Arabian Ranches, Emirates Hills, Springs, Meadows, The Old Town -- all in English. Even the names seem borrowed from America.


"Almost everything here is paid for with oil money," says a man employed by the ruler of Dubai, "but not our own." The emirate has little more than a few puddles of oil left, and only 4 percent of its current economic output stems from the oil business. Instead, it has created a real estate bonanza that is attracting billions in investment money that in the past would have gone to New York. The area's slew of real estate fairs -- with names like "Cityscape Dubai," "Cityscape Abu Dhabi" and "The Property Shoppe" -- attest to how eager investors are to invest here.


Building Down
The situation in the West is radically different. In the United States, the current guiding principle appears to be: The more glamorous the utopian vision, the more potential investors are determined to back away from the project.


Until recently, borrowing money -- and even huge sums of money -- was relatively easy. "If I or someone else needed money," says Donald Trump, America's most prominent real estate czar, "all it took was a quick call to the bank, and they'd send the cash over in a car. There was a huge amount of money floating around."


This is how it was -- until the financial crisis hit. The crisis itself was triggered in 2007 in the United States by an overheated market for mortgage loans that private citizens had taken out to buy houses and condominiums. Since then, the banks have been far more tight-fisted. Ironically, it is more or less the real estate industry's own fault that it has now been so difficult to borrow money. The boom is over.


A high-profile casualty of the credit crisis is a complex in Las Vegas called the Cosmopolitan Resort Casino. The shells of the two 180-meter (590-foot) skyscrapers are already up. For the lobby, developer Ian Bruce Eichner had ordered nine-meter (30-foot) robots that would play the song "Disco Inferno" on oversized guitars.


The project is now headed for foreclosure, the Wall Street Journal recently reported. One of the investors, Deutsche Bank, is at risk of losing about $1 billion (?645 million).


Another example is in Los Angeles, where construction on the Grand Avenue Project has been delayed several times. The collection of hotel, apartment and retail towers was intended to revitalize downtown Los Angeles at a cost of $3 billion (?1.9 billion). The complex was designed by Frank O. Gehry, another top name in the US architecture scene known for buildings clad in stylishly shimmering materials.


The work, initially scheduled to begin last December, has now been postponed until next February. The developers, Related Companies, blamed the delays on the real estate crisis. Soon one of the investors -- Calpers, which is California's largest pension fund -- withdrew from the project. Now the developers hope their new primary shareholder, the royal family of Dubai, will take a more patient approach.



Hard Times, NY
Yet another of Gehry's urban improvement ventures has run into difficulties. Gehry was commissioned to transform an industrial wasteland in Brooklyn into a mixed-use architectural pearl. The price tag of the Atlantic Yards project -- which New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg praised as a "colossal achievement of one of the world's leading architects" -- was $4 billion (?2.6 billion). But demand has been unsatisfactory, and Gehry was forced to reduce the size of the largest tower in the complex. According to the developers, construction of several of the planned buildings will be placed on hold.


It's a tough blow for New York. For real estate aficionados, it remains the "ultimate 24-hour American city," a place that attracts the global elite. But it takes some effort and a constant series of facelifts to keep it that way. Where else but in New York is there so must distaste for any form of inertia?


The mayor had a plan to revitalize Manhattan, the heart of the city, with a special focus on the west side. His vision included building a modern train station, which would have required tearing down the well-known arena, Madison Square Garden. But now Bloomberg no longer knows how he is going to raise the $14 billion (?9 billion) the project is estimated to cost.
The original plan also called for an ambitious expansion of the Jacob K. Javits Convention Center, a project that has now been considerably scaled back. And the search for an investor for the new Hudson Yards business district -- a project that even jaded New Yorkers describe as "megalomaniacal" -- recently became nothing short of embarrassing.
Tishman Speyer, a real estate development company, had initially planned to cooperate on the project with German-American skyscraper architect Helmut Jahn. But then it surprisingly withdrew. Now Related Companies has stepped in to take advantage of what may well be a historic opportunity. It could take months before the contracts are worked out and before a series of cliffhangers finally comes to an end. This in a city where the sky has traditionally been the limit.


Old Europe ?
And what about Europe? Will the old world have to start getting used to the idea of becoming a museum -- picturesque, but without any real chance of keeping pace with the iconography-rich growth of other continents?


According to a study by the Washington-based Urban Land Institute, a large number of major European deals that were until recently in the planning stages are now "clinically dead."


Perhaps Vittorio Lampugnani, an Italian architect who works in Milan and teaches architectural theory in Zurich, is merely trying to comfort himself when he says that he doubts whether cities like Shanghai will remain attractive in the long term. As he sees it, with their "layers of history," European cities "offer the sort of quality of life that will be in demand in the future." This is what Lampugnani calls "enduring cityscapes."


At the same time, a sharp division is naturally emerging. Lampugnani admits that the newly minted architects who opt to go to Asia are essentially building skyscrapers right off the bat, while graduates who stay in Europe can count themselves lucky if their first commission is to design a weekend home for their parents.


Still, he says, "if Europe manages its heritage intelligently," Lampugnani say, "it can be a huge opportunity, not just for culture and the quality of life, but also for the economy."


But, more than anything else, the economy is standing in the way. In Spain, for example, the association representing Spanish construction companies estimates that the number of new projects in 2008 will decline by more than 70 percent over the previous year.


Many European cities are not at all interested in becoming open-air museums. For example, London -- as Europe's most important financial center -- would like to liven up its Victorian grandeur with a few more futuristic landmarks.


When Norman Foster placed a bombastic, egg-shaped tower into the center of the old city early in the new millennium, it kicked off a wave of modernization. For the most part, Londoners approached the update of their skyline with humor, and Foster's skyscraper immediately earned the nickname of the "erotic gherkin."


With plans to construct at least 20 other towers in the coming years, London is enthusiastically planning to build itself into the 21st century. Although few of these projects have left the drawing board, some have already acquired nicknames. One skyscraper project has been dubbed the "cheese grater," and another is the "splinter." Others are called "head over heels," "boomerang" and "walkie talkie."


But even in London, where prices had been headed steeply up for a long time, the real estate industry is grappling with a softening market. Investment volume there is expected to decline by 30 to 40 percent in 2008, and Londoners are no longer accustomed to this sort of slowdown.
Almost all major projects in London are now considered highly speculative. And what about the fate of the controversial "walkie talkie" venture? The investor won't say.


A New World for Architect
Of course, shopping malls rarely prove to be aesthetic highlights, and architecture fans probably won't bemoan the prediction that 40 percent fewer shopping centers than planned will be built in Great Britain over the next five years.


But the decline in new construction also affects more ambitious projects. A London architectural foundation that had commissioned British architect Zaha Hadid to build its new headquarters pulled out of the venture, citing "economic nervousness." When stock prices fall, so does charitable giving, and the foundation relies heavily on private donors.


Although she made it clear that she was disappointed, Hadid has already moved on to other projects, for example, in Dubai and Warsaw. The modern architect has become a nomad. Like the itinerant tradesmen of the Middle Ages, architects go where the work is. A route that once may have taken them from court to court, now leads from continent to continent.


German Builders
Germany boasts 121,000 architects, the largest number in Europe. Although the country is considered one of the more stable markets, major urban projects -- such as Hamburg's HafenCity -- are the exception. Architects are upset that there are so few competitions open to everyone and that the opportunities for young, avant-garde architects to prove themselves are few and far between.


Project cancellations, no matter how discreetly they are handled, are noticed. BMW, for example, decided to cancel plans to build a new "Designhaus," although it now intends to "prioritize" other projects.
It's been only a year since the Federal Foundation for Building Culture was founded in Potsdam, outside Berlin. The new organization has already been sharply critical of the mediocrity of German architecture. Unfortunately, as the foundation's president, Michael Braum, puts it, it's been standard in Germany for quite a while "for owners to want everything, but for half the price."


Distant lands, where developers plan in larger dimensions, seem seductive. L?on, Wohlhage, Wernik (LWW), a Berlin-based architecture firm, made a splash in 2007 when it won a competition with well-known competitors to design the new government district in Tripoli, the capital of Libya. The architecture named their design "Tripoli Greens," combining arabesque minarets with park-like settings. However, construction has been postponed and architect Hilde L?on speaks of "a holding pattern."


As a rule, says L?on, she believes that it is important to work in places where high-quality architecture is in demand. "Some countries simply have some catching up to do," L?on says. At the same time, though, cooperating with controversial regions like Libya's doesn't seem to bother her.


L?on already has her sights set on the next market. It is only a matter of time, she says, before all of Africa will be "the next big thing." In this context, the word "big" is no exaggeration. What a paradisiacal concept for architects: all that undeveloped land for what Friedrich Nietzsche called representative architecture's "eloquence of power."


Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan
 

Back
Top