MORRISON ACADEMY, TAIPEI CAMPUS
Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus, Linkou District, New Taipei City
Contorted building volumes foster the interlacing of public spaces at an urban scale inside and outside the school, blending the enclosed campus into its surroundings.
The site is a plot with red earth elevated 2.5 meters above the surrounding on the Linkou Terrace. Meandering volumes and vernacular materials are the designer’s response to the red earth, babbling brooks, and Linkou’s wind.
Fair-faced brickwork in the facades, graduated grating by parametric design, and offset retaining walls made of corten steel panels mirror changes in weather and the land. At night, glowing lights from inside the building articulate the dynamics and rhythms of the environment.
The existing elevated topography is partially removed and partially preserved, with one side linking the campus and the city and the other reserved for sports. The semi-open space and landscaped facilities support a connection with nature.
Contorted building volumes foster the interlacing of public spaces at an urban scale inside and outside the school, as outdoor materials overflow into the buildings to engage the indoor plazas.
“We control with these openings, so the school is connected to other urban spaces.”
ADA Awards for Emerging Architects: Interview 07
Curator Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
Finalist Rung-Jing Jou (JOU), Yen - Hui Hou (HOU)
CHI: Congratulations to you both and Grow Architecture. You have delivered a rare work by emerging architects in scale and complexity. What’s the most impressive aspect to you in this project?
JOU: Americans have a different vision on school campus, so it’s something beyond our living experiences. It turns out to be a challenge. For example, I studied in public primary school, which included a huge playground, long corridors, and classrooms. In comparison, American schools are almost completely indoor with a very open sports space. It’s very different from our semiopen spaces at school in Taiwan.
CHI: How many options did you have on school location? How long was the project overall?
JOU: It took us five years from site selection to completion. The location was either in Kuandu or the current site in Linkou.
CHI: Why did you start the studio?
JOU: After we won a competition for Kuei Shan School in Beitou, we decided to start our studio with additional two employees.
CHI: You take both interior design and architecture projects. How are they similar or different to you?
JOU: We hope architecture can shape spaces, so this process, in principle, is the same as interior design.
HOU: I engage more with interior design. Human behaviors in space, such as perception, sense, or acoustics, are easier to influence and create indoors. In this project, for example, I extend his ideas on architecture to indoor spaces.
Dispersed openings in the spacious atriums lend views to vibrant activities across different floors.
CHI: I heard that Jou used to manage a gallery/café in Tainan. How does this experience influence you?
JOU: It influences interpersonal relationships the most. I personally do not interact with people much. When I managed the café, though, I needed to chat with customers and observe their needs. When people visited the gallery, I also needed to take care of them. That period is helpful when I communicate with clients or work with colleagues now.
CHI: What’s your design strategy in this project?
JOU: American schools are quite binary, indoors or outdoors. We think the building can be more than a fully air-conditioned structure. It would be pity if students only move between points, without any connections with the surroundings. Our approach attempts to overturn indoor and outdoor spaces. External walls extend to indoor spaces via some curves and intervals. When it happens, indoor spaces become an urban area. These openings can filter out some elements, and welcome other external landscapes or natural components in.
CHI: Can you give us an example?
JOU: For example, this opening is actually a staircase. It looks like a hole from the façade, and bricks turn indoors here. When students walk there, they may discover that it seems to be connected to the outside. This area looks like a plaza or arcade, but it’s actually a skylight. We use BIPB to filter out heat, and introduce comfortable light. Louvers also filter out wind, but I don’t want the building to be closed. Through these openings, it can connect with the community. Traditionally, American schools implement very tight access control. I hope to create a safe distance between the school and the community with its inherent two-meter topography changes of the site, and connect the school and the city by design.
CHI: You have mentioned the role of topography. Is there any example to extend the topography indoors?
JOU: The site is special in its topography. There is a two-meter difference in height. A part of land is elevated by 2.5 meters. Therefore, there are many half-a-story designs in our master plan to introduce natural light.
HOU: This skylight is an example.
JOU: Yes. Here is a skylight with cover, but there is a skylight without cover. We hope students can come to this sunken square at the corner between two volumes.
CHI: Many spaces like this seem to scatter on campus, and create a rhythm. If previous seams are at the interior scale, this seam is at the urban scale. Sensitive students may notice that this material is the same as outside. In other words, external walls and urban views are brought in.
HOU: I start to think about this issue again after you mentioned about it. This project brings a lot of urban elements to indoor or semi-outdoor areas. This scale is different from ordinary schools.
JOU: The building serves as a filter. Linkou area is prone to fogs, gales, and downpours. We control with these openings, so the school is connected to other urban spaces.
Grow Architecture
Established in 2013, the design operation starts from the observation of the context, exploring the possibility of space occurrence in the context of time and environment, and by integrating all aspects of space creation, it sorts out the true appearance of the building. The works cover campus buildings, institutional buildings and residential spaces.
The preserved elevated topography is crafted into a sports area. Here, connection with the nature is achieved through the generous semi-open sports field, light-hearted skywalk, playset blending into the landscape, staircase, and ramp.
Private house, Pingtung City, Pingtung County
Through the lines in the interior, “XX” offers a re-scripting of the relationships between family members and a response to the city. The inside and outside of a home is reorganized with triangles, the longest walls possible, and the most skewed windows.
”XX” is a renovation project involving a house built in 1989. The site is situated along a 4-meter alleyway in Pingtung City. Thirty-one years later, the client wishes to remodel the 2nd floor into three ensuite bedrooms for the daughter, the son and his young son. This brief leads to the core question explored in the design: how does one, through spatial composition, preserve the existing co-living context while accommodating independent adult lives?
We place an X over the rectilinear floor plan to form four triangles meeting at the center, each with its own independent exterior wall. The indoor walls are adjusted as needed and generate a variety of diagonal spaces. Meanwhile, their interaction with the existing orthogonal post-and-beam system engenders a unique fluidity that endows each room with a distinct charm and discernable personality.
Looking from the outside, the only clues to the X-shaped floor plans are the asymmetric locations and shapes of the windows. These unusual apertures soften the existing slanted roof laid with traditional black ceramic tiles as part of this family makeover in the suburbs of Pingtung.
Existing windows are relocated, their shapes and transparency varied according to their relationships with the garden, neighboring buildings, and enclosures.
The living and dining rooms on 1F form a spacious public space; moru glass obscures chaotic sights in the alleyway while ensuring privacy for the occupants.
Details of window
Zigzagged floor-to-ceiling windows in the corner further extend the space to the outside.
Moru
In contrast with the limited natural light and isolation of the private rooms, the design of the public space strives to allow its occupants to experience the changing sun. Moreover, shifting viewpoints at the zigzagged floor-to-ceiling windows also lends the space a duality of privacy vs. transparency.
Details of window
Moru
Some features of the 1989 house are preserved at the client’s request. They include the purple marble staircase with its ebony railings. The purple marble is picked up on 2F as flooring and continues to the confluence of entrances into the private rooms — the center where four triangles meet.
The diagonal walls extend inside-to-outside to either form an acute angle on one side and an obtuse one on the other, or two acute angles with one in the bedroom and one in the bathroom. All entrances to private rooms are established with perpendicular angles.
The windows vary according to internal requirements and the external environment: curvilinear clear glass for the son’s room and a standard square window for the youth’s room. Each of these rooms with varying angles has one exterior wall opening, from whence sunlight is introduced to accentuate the qualities of each triangular space.
These unique inconsistencies offer an outlet in daily life that catalyzes renewed departures from the conventions in life. Examples include an ordinary rectilinear tissue holder placed on a triangular shelf, or a toilet door opening at a 42-degree angle.
An X-shaped floor plan inevitably yields some acute angles often deemed difficult to use. When the partition walls have been completed and the acute-angled corners are materialized, one comes to the realization that it is indeed these corner spaces which are is holding everything in place, from the space inside the private rooms, personal articles, to the intimacy and love between family members.
Section
(bottom) Section B Garage Vestibule Hall Living Room
Rooftop workshop Terrace Laundry balcony
“Each room can have a long façade. The X shaped layout creates independent but interconnected spaces.”
ADA Awards for Emerging Architects: Interview 08
Curator Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
Finalist Pei-Jun Lin (LIN) (Award Winner)
CHI: Congratulations on being shortlisted for 2020 ADA Awards for Emerging Architects. How did you convince the client to accept such an unconventional layout?
LIN: It was a surprise to me as well. Rather than offering this solution immediately, we developed this layout after discussions with the client family. I have known them for a long time, so I believe this layout is necessary to them. This proposal is bold with a purpose. We hope the final design will change their daily routines in some ways. After they move in, changes gradually emerge. This is the best feedback to our time and efforts in this project.
CHI: What does the X-shape layout mean to the family?
LIN: Three generations live under one roof. My clients are brother and sister, each has a life and family. Besides living with their mother, his son is also a young adult. They all want their own spaces, and often stay in their rooms. It becomes our key design factor.
The family has lived in this house for 30 years. With fixed existing concrete column and beam systems and square layout, traditional partitions do not serve the purpose. Since the clients want to divide the second floor into three rooms, X shape really works. In the end, we deliver the best result by redefining relationships between old and new in the house.
CHI: Do you have any reference about the social meaning of a house in relation to the X-shape layout? For example, when John Hejduk transformed layouts into diamond shapes or nine square grids, each space was partial. In comparison, each space in the X shaped layout has a full façade. It’s a complete space composed of triangles. Can you elaborate on the layout and the family relationship?
LIN: Yes. We intend to deconstruct the indoor integrity with the X shaped layout, while the center is still connected for the family. Each room can have a long façade. The X shape creates independent yet interconnected spaces.
CHI: Which details have you put a lot of eforts in this design?
LIN: It’s probably windows.
With such an aggressive approach, we are conservative in adding details. I intend to create clean lines in these spaces. We choose one material for the floor, walls are all painted, and ceilings are all covered, in order to stay balanced. Only windows include more details.
We applied stainless steel and aluminum windows on this renovation project. Special window shapes were adopted to fight against external environments. Local contractors in Pingtung are not familiar with the product, so it is challenging for them to create thinner columns for stainless steel windows. Aluminum windows are typical soundproof windows. We spend more time talking to contractors about how to produce special shaped windows with locally available techniques.
CHI: Typically, our viewpoints are vertical to the façade. However, in a triangular room, our relationships with windows and viewpoints will change. Can you tell us more about it?
LIN: Clients raised their concerns about windows in our discussions. In the past, they only saw chaotic surroundings or other homes through windows behind iron bars. Therefore, they were resistant to windows. However, sunlight was a key quality to space. In order to convince them, I had to balance between openings and privacy. With jagged windows, people would not see directly into home. Moru glass also introduced sunlight with better privacy and view.
Since jagged windows were helpful to clients, we designed other windows and their locations based on clients’ needs. In the end, there were multiple window systems in this project. To ensure privacy, all windows in each triangular space were placed at one corner. It was special to me.
CHI: Can this row of windows downstairs be opened?
LIN: Five of them can be opened to 90 degrees.
CHI: How long did you need to commute to the site each time?
LIN: I left home around 5:50 in the morning, took high speed rail at 6:30, arrived in Kaohsiung around 8:40, took train to Pingtung for an hour, so I met with workers at 9:30. I once missed the last high speed rail to Taipei, so I got off in Taichung, and took bus home. I went there twice a month initially, and increased to once a week later. At the last stage, we stayed in Kaohsiung, so it was easier to communicate with workers should they encounter any issues.
Pei-Jung Lin has found STUDIOLIN in 2014 in Taipei, Taiwan. Studio practices architecture with the idea of “From Establishing the General to Reveal the Specific.”
PEIJUNG LIN
CURATORIAL STATEMENT : CRITICAL LINES
Established in 2012, the “ADA Awards for Emerging Architects” is the most recognized prize for the next generation design in Taiwan.
Founded by the Advanced Developers Association in Taipei, this biennial award strives to support young architects and progressive design culture by promoting their work through exhibitions and publications.
The overarching theme for this edition of ADA Awards is Critical Lines. Responding to how creative practices have been reshaped by the pandemic, the theme seeks to redefine the boundaries between time and space in the new global landscape and to critically redraw lines of spatial, functional, and social narratives through exhibitions.
Through their work, this year’s nominees thoughtfully reflect the societal and cultural changes in Taiwan over the past two years. In addition to undertaking ambitious public projects, their public and private work also challenge conventional social boundaries defined by traditional customs. The eight exhibiting designs present a range of program types and scales from institutional, cultural, and educational projects to private residences and individual room installations. The collection of work reflects the current architectural debates in Taiwan from multiple and differing perspectives by questioning existing lines of thought and exploring new threads of architectural inquiry.
A NOTE FOR 2020 ADA EXHIBITION DESIGN: DRAWING CRITICAL LINES
CHIASMAFACTOR Shingo Tsuji
A.S studio Kuan-Fan Chen
Kai Architects Ting-Kai Weng
The exhibition design must be an act of minimum intervention that navigates - or even seduces - the visitors to the critical perspective opened by the selected architectural works exhibited. In other words, the background elements such as wall panels and display stands should be kept inconspicuous so that they should not disturb the presented works to speak out about themselves, while there must be sufficient navigation and spatial structure for the visitor’s experience. In order to meet this aim with a limited budget and construction period, we have decided to draw several critical Lines materialized and floated in the air.
As anthropologist Tim Ingold describes, Lines have uncountably many functions that are critical to the construction of our civilization. Once drawn in an empty plane or space, Lines give a particular organization to them through its power to intervene with our imagination. To count a few, they navigate, connect, separate, enclose, penetrate, arbitrate, interfere, (mis)lead, differentiate, blur, split and converge – the functions that reveal themselves in architects’ daily practice. The exhibition design tries to exploit these multiple competences of Lines, by imposing floating linear and simple curvilinear bodies made of different low-cost materials, with corresponding lines drawn on the floor (using standard adhesive sheets).
The floating lines work as a sort of auxiliary lines for architects’ drawing – that is, they loosely enclose/differentiate/connect the presented cutting-edge works, while navigating the visitors and help them draw their own imaginary lines to interpret their implications as well as to understand the issues collectively noticed and tackled by their architects. In brief, they are embodied Critical Lines drawn in the three-dimensional space of the venue.
While functioning as a loose enclosure/navigator/display device, each Line is not given particular meaning and intentionally left open to free interpretation by the visitors as well as the architects. From a macroscopic viewpoint, they could be described as simplified metaphorical representations of the multiple (and often contradictory) lines of thought/limitations/preconditions/ desire that the architects face with in their real-world projects. As such, the floating lines navigate the visitors/architects and cast riddles to them at the same time. By walking through the exhibition space temporarily organized by the floating Lines, the visitors (and probably the architects themselves) gradually become aware of the particularity of each works as well as the issues, perspectives, and desires (i.e., zeitgeist?) tacitly shared by the contemporary young architects.
For the pure realization of the concept, there are four essential rules:
In principle, each line must be made of a unitary material (subtle color/texture variations are acceptable).
The bodies must float in the air so that they visually represent lines, not walls.
Both linear and curvilinear lines must be involved (some of them should better be non-horizontal, if possible).
See it as a flexible system rather than fixed forms, to adjust them to in-situ changes and requisites.
CHIASMAFACTOR Shingo Tsuji
A.S studio Kuan-Fan Chen
Kai Architects Ting-Kai Weng
Time
Venue
Final stage jury
2020.9.13 10:30a.m. (GMT+8)
1F, Museum of National Taipei University of Education (MoNTUE) + Zoom Meeting (Taiwan-Japan)
Atsuko Nishimaki (NISHIMAKI)_ Japan
Jay Chiu (CHIU)
Sheng-Yuan Huang (HUANG)
Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
Shu-Chang Kung (KUNG)
(Part I)
CHI : I would like now to invite Mr. Kung to moderate our discussions today.
KUNG : Sure. Shall we begin by discussing each work one by one and add in comments from our site visit two days ago?
NISHIMAKI : The first time I saw “XX”, I felt moved by the positive attitude it takes toward the site context. The design turns an unsightly scene into something positive by responding to the city with its geometry and unique fenestration while preserving possibilities for varied interpretation. I would also like to hear whether or not you found any useless space or dead corners onsite.
HUANG : I felt the original X is very evenly cut, but the rotation and pushing out resulting from preserving the existing staircase creates surprises in every space and, contrary to instinct, there is in fact no issue with dead corners. But I find it a pity to have the small storerooms next to the central column on 2F because it weakens the original concept. The other triangular spaces actually feel even more powerful and original on site.
CHIU : A crossing point results after converting the floor plan from " " to "X", and there is a staircase and three rooms here on 2F. There should have been a tight relationship between the three rooms and staircase, but it felt rather loose on site.
KUNG : Huang said that as soon as the storerooms are removed everything would come to life. It allows the four sides of the rectangular volume to each become independent, while creating a lot of external-facing relationships at 45-degree angles. My original concern was more around difficulties in small spaces resulting from dividing the original volume with an X, but when I walked in, all of
them actually felt like the right transition in scale and quite nice to live in. On the other hand, the handling of the original concept--the crosspoint of the X on 2F--is rather cumbersome and has interfered with the original core of the X.
Moreover, the staircase stays along the 90-degree axis and is kept completely as is because it carries the family imagery from 30 years ago. But I feel it does not sufficiently stand its ground against the crosspoint of the X when you go up to 2F.
NISHIMAKI : I see. Now about the relationship between “XX” and the city. Any thoughts you want to highlight about the relationship between this X and the city?
HUANG : I feel that raising the zigzag windows by 120cm to free up a large adjacent space is the right response, but I really wish something could have been done on the front side facing the alley. The sensitivity is so keen inside that only if the energy of the rotated triangles could radiate out ever so little to galvanize new possibilities in the external space... Well, I had some hopes myself, though I don't really know either... (Kung: I agree, too.)
NISHIMAKI : I wonder if you've seen the "Zo" ( ) before?
In ancient Japan, it refers to the warehouse, which also has black roof tiles and white walls. For a Japanese like me, my first guess upon seeing this building is whether it was a warehouse. So to me, it doesn't feel too much like a Japanese house, but rather like a warehouse from the Chugogu Area (a region above Shigoku and west of Honshu in Japan).
KUNG : Since there are eight projects in total, shall we hear your (Nishimaki) assessment of each?
NISHIMAKI : I have the strongest feelings about “XX”; in addition to its finesse in geometry and detailing, the relationship between the external appearance, internal plans and the city overall is probably also pivotal. Another one is “Morrison Academy”, with its high level of finish. I'm also intrigued by “Life×Life” by its artist's sensitivity and ponder about the angle I should assume in its assessment.
KUNG : What you just said is almost identical to our discussions a few days ago. We can talk more about “XX” in the end. As for “Life×Life”, the smallest work, the idea starts from one's own living space and conveys visions about the inherent closedness inside the conventional Taiwanese apartment, the park across, and outdoor refractions. This is what I think: I believe this work should have engaged more in artistic probe. In other words, he should strive to make powerful artistic expressions about every frame and his life inside: work, sleep and the external environment. Onsite, I felt the concept was all there but it has not reached the artistic threshold yet; as soon as one returns to merely conventional physical or formal maneuvering of partitions, the original intent to experiment gets lost.
Furthermore, I feel this work needs to be more precise. For example, how does one finalize the location of the ceiling tracks in dealing with different modes of living? The relationship between life and the folding angles of the doors and windows? The height of the screens? Not achieving "precision" also deprives the space of the power of experimentation.
NISHIMAKI : Agreed. I am interested in the fact he takes a very common living model in Taiwan as the starting point, but I'm also curious: what is the author's ultimate critique on this phenomenon and the surroundings? What is he trying to convey with his work? It feels like it is still in the experimental stage and short of becoming "architecture".
CHIU : Nishimaki-san, if you were to pick another project to discuss, which would it be?
NISHIMAKI : Next would be "Sport Centre with a Column" . I find the strip windows in "Sport Centre with a Column" interesting; its relationship with the street is quite interesting. But this red structure in the back feels post-modern; powerful symbolism is created when you have something red over a white volume. I'm puzzled by what this red diagonal column is trying to say whenever I look out from the parking lot or the backyard.
CHIU : I like "Sport Centre with a Column" for its tectonics; the rationality and irrationality in the structure is very legible. I also have the same doubt about the unconventional diagonal column; it seems to turn into a red symbol in the overall layout of the environment but lacks an explanation in life or architectural programming, such as the ceremonial stage, a playground, or a special corner; consequently, I don't really understand what it's trying to underscore.
KUNG : I very much agree with Nishimaki and Chiu. To create or connect, so to speak, the outdoor ceremonial stage, the structure is altered and the column is pulled outside and turned diagonal to create a new relationship between inside and outside at this point and a slightly different relationship with another long wall and long window. This is quite positive in its meaning, but two things fell short: after pulling this column out more should have be done with the structure and tectonics, and the space too. The other thing is pulling the column out but erecting another white wall behind makes it impossible to feel the outside from inside; although it has strong symbolism outside, the impact on the internal space is weakened.
NISHIMAKI : In terms of external appearance, the page elaborating the strip windows is very delightful. But if one were to highlight the mechanics of the red diagonal column, it should not be made to appear so complete, because the addition of that red diagonal when the overall structure already appears complete actually gives the feeling it has been added as an afterthought.
CHI : Allow me to chime in. Actually, if you extend that red column from the building outward, it lands at a point that links to a red sports field, meaning the external field is connected back to the building. This is similar to the outer wall on the other streetfacing side, where the architect has recessed the outer wall of the campus and merged it with the building to create a sidewalk. In other words, the building connects with the sports field on one side and the city on the other.
KUNG : Perhaps we should show this photo to Nishimaki; the red PU field soon to be finished will link the red diagonal.
NISHIMAKI : I can appreciate why this red after seeing this image. But the red diagonal is the element that stands out the most overall, shaping an entirely different interpretation of the relationship between city and architecture.
KUNG : Perhaps Huang can share his suggestion on cabletension from yesterday.
HUANG : I like this project for two reasons; one of them may be unknown to Nishimaki-san. There has been a wave of neo-campus movement in Taiwan in the past decade or so, and this project offers a chance to jolt us into an awakening from that. In the movement, many architects are gradually leaning more and more toward this sweet and soft attitude, or to be blunt, political correctness. But when it comes to education, especially when the audience is children who can still see stars and animals, I feel we should touch on things like mechanics and cosmology, and a core connection with architecture. I am very supportive of the way this project deals with the city. It's a pity, though, that what was started structurally was not finished. For instance, in the onsite presentation it was said the purpose of the horizontal members was simply for light installation; it is obvious the outward compressive force of the triangle needs to be resolved, and they offer an opportunity to provide the tensile force to rein in compression on the two ends and thus liberate the street-facing wall. Diagonal column, tension cable, tensile force, and compressive force--these elements can spur great discussions in mechanics. This project has the potential of waking up architects for small public buildings like this one, especially campus buildings.
NISHIMAKI : I would very much like to support campus planning and designs works done by young architects because such opportunities are no longer available in Japan.
CHIU : Nishimaki-san, would you like to talk about "Ayumi House" ?
NISHIMAKI : A project like "Ayumi House" is so familiar in Japan that I would probably not support it as one of the main winners even though I was still moved by the beauty of the sky and night view when I watched the video.
KUNG : I think what was said here is the following: there are already many projects like "Ayumi House" in Japan; the design has its merits but the differentiation is not strong enough; I think it's best this message comes from Nishimaki. I'm still not sure how to convey it, but young people should be informed because this condition has lasted for almost a decade.
NISHIMAKI : Next is "White House and Black Rooms" . I see the park as its microenvironment, so I'm puzzled by the scarcity of fenestration with merely the use of a white volume. It is too strong for me.
KUNG : Could you elaborate on "too strong"?
NISHIMAKI : The white volume is so white and the fenestration so scarce that it doesn't interact a whole lot with the external environment; this maneuver feels unconvincing in such a pleasant environment.
CHI : According to the architect, the reason for not opening windows toward the park is because the project is mainly used by the park's maintenance staff, who sometimes walk around shirtless or need to perform chores like drying clothes, so the client wanted to keep it enclosed. Therefore, the architect's tactic was to break apart the massing to reinforce the relationship with the surroundings.
NISHIMAKI : I can appreciate that, but architecture should enhance the scenery of a park; it would be a pity it doesn’t not improve the environment.
CHIU : Would Nishimaki-san also say a few words about "Generals’ Village" ?
NISHIMAKI : "Generals’ Village" is probably the only one in the eight that relates to history, or the only one that takes an analytical approach. The relationship between process and materials is visible through the crevices, window frames, or doorframes. I'm very keen on thinking about architecture through the means of a "testament". "Wow, there is an architect so young doing something like this in Taiwan, too," I thought to myself.
CHIU : But what is the reason you didn't ultimately pick it?
NISHIMAKI : Both being reconstruction, "XX" creates a fresh look to an existing building after the renovation while also making a statement, but "Generals’ Village" feels like it remains merely a way to generate a new face for an existing building via renovation. That's why I'm keen on it but did not give my support.
CHIU : I fully agree with Nishimaki; historical buildings are subject to some limitations after all. Let's return to creating many crevices with enclosures between the small houses. Some of the walls have been demolished and some vegetation planted to create a subtle link between households. This will happen more in Phase Two because there are twelve more households on the other side--where there are currently many trees in the existing photos.
CHI : Shall we talk about "A Whale Story" ?
KUNG : The architect created a nice podium facing the ocean and street as well as porous space, but the side facing the sports field--whether it is the stage or flanking public space--is rather passive. The handling of the activity space in the field behind and the duality of the classrooms seems insufficient.
NISHIMAKI : I can fully comprehend and identify with "A Whale Story" conceptually. People would want to gather in a seaside public building like this, and he achieved publicness indeed. However, the surroundings offer excellent conditions from the perspective of the architectural approach--something that may have to be established with more than the ramp, podium, slide and staircase; the details require more thoughts.
NISHIMAKI : I want to hear your opinion on the direction with which you would like to guide Taiwanese architecture through the awards because that may affect the evaluation criteria.
KUNG : What Nishimaki-san is asking will be key to our ensuing discussion, including choosing the First Prize and Special Award, and how we are orienting our values this year. Shall we take a break and resume in 10 minutes to talk about the positioning of the awards and your thoughts?
(Part II)
KUNG : There are two awards at every edition: First Prize and Special Award. The Special Award is not necessary the runner-up, but rather representative of an issue the ADA Awards for Emerging Architects would like to call attention to. Nishimaki-san mentioned the positioning and values of the awards. Shall we have each juror share your thoughts regarding the values this time and where you draw that critical line, starting with Chiu?
CHIU : The work I've been searching for may be related to compassion for the society or pursuit of artistry executed through the willpower of an individual in wanting to surpass that critical line, so it has little to do with the type or size of the project, but rather a condition that begins from the inside, an artist-like condition. If it were a decade ago, I may have aspired to a work or action that is grander and have a lot of compassion for the society. But in Taiwan today with all the noise around, I am looking for something that amplifies personal honesty, naivety and romanticism to its maximum through architecture, with less politics and less melodrama.
KUNG : Okay. How about Huang?
HUANG : Pretty much the same for me, actually. After two days of onsite visit I have found myself even more strict with that critical line for the ADA Awards for Emerging Architects. The entire architectural circle--or perhaps myself--is calling out to the awards for help. That is to say, someone who does not ask for an excuse-not ask for forgiveness in many things just because he or she is only starting out. Quite the contrary indeed. It doesn't need to be a fierce wake-up call, just expressing a very honest attitude. Even if it's unfamiliar and even uncomfortable at first, but emerging with a profound beauty, and with many future possibilities, or in other words, freedom. I would give more emphasis to this value, and such is the aspiration that created the Special Award in the first place.
KUNG : Okay, now Chi. You know best the process from start to end, so what are your thoughts about the entire spectrum?
CHI : To me, the ADA Awards for Emerging Architects is extremely important. They are there to identify if there is potential to move forward based on the creative trajectory of this young architect thus far. That is, is there a chance for him or her to build on the direction of his or her current endeavors? Secondly, I think "unknownness" is imperative. How will he or she lead us to march forward from a known world into a realm with which we are familiar, or even one that is unknown? Even if it is just a little bit, it is enough for us to rethink how architecture may move forward. That is because these minute differences may move the criteria of the critical line while representing how they shape different attitudes and values around what is recognized as "good architecture" today. The third thing is whether or not the endeavor by a young architect is sufficient to create a threshold? In other words, is there a chance to create uniqueness upon further accumulation of the work?
NISHIMAKI : Fully agreed.
KUNG : The key to the preliminary selection this time is establishing the critical line for 2020 to demonstrate a spectrum in scale and color. There are perhaps two objectives for the final selection: one is toward the creator himself or herself, the other is toward the current state of architecture in Taiwan. For the former, I want to look for the "threshold for oneself" as Chi just described. This threshold doesn't have to be full transcendence, but must be directional. Since it's the Awards for Emerging Architects, this threshold or direction may resist against Taiwan's current state to a certain degree. That is to say, between the kitch and innateness of this direction, I am more concerned with the internal development of the self. The second line is that the awards should present a chance to turn Taiwan's current state of architecture toward a different direction. The Awards for Emerging Architects represent a prophecy, so I see it as a given when its imperfection stems from imperfection in the execution of the concept or the work. But this so-called imperfection would be lethal if it results from being too kitsch or from existing limitation or interference. Hence, the ability to shed a light on a "future direction" is an important theme as well a critical mission for the awards.
KUNG : Approaching architecture in Taiwan from another place, what does Nishimaki-san think about the positioning this time?
NISHIMAKI : I fully agree with everything that has been said by the other four jurors; I resonate with it and feel moved. As a guest juror from overseas, I feel the awards will not only exert an influence in Taiwan but also elsewhere. The message sent to the outside world by the awards is worth pondering too.
KUNG : All five of us have expressed our thoughts on the positioning this time. Shall we start the official discussion on each award, starting with the First Prize? I suggest starting with Nishimaki-san sharing the winner you have in mind and its meaning to you.
NISHIMAKI : I think the First Prize should go to “XX” . In a highly site-specific environment, the work simultaneously embodies the architect's perspective and belief towards architecture; that is highly challenging, and the ideas have also been fully executed in the physical space.
KUNG : Thank you, Nishimaki-san. How about you, Huang?
HUANG : The same for me! I feel the creator comes through as one ready for combat. She is obviously challenging empiricism--any experience-based inertia in terms of use, creation, and construction-and this permeates in everything. I find her willpower something I aspire to myself.
KUNG : And the winner for Chiu?
CHIU : Same for me. Although I see many shortcomings, I still see a subtle expressiveness no matter which way I look. For instance, the idea to use triangular and curvilinear glass elements in reorganizing the facades to make things jump out is quite original and smart. There is also a personal passion and willpower in the author that meets my expectation in a way I cannot describe, something that clearly challenges the status quo in the society. I find in general the willpower and architectural approach, the handling of
subtle interfaces between the small building and the city, and even the interior aesthetics deserving of encouragement. The aesthetics is relatively simple and has an amicability and everyday feel to it.
KUNG : And your choice, Chi?
CHI : "XX". Geometric rotation of the interior is something that was done as early as fifty years ago, but what differentiates this project is elevating it to the level of the urban relationship. That is, starting from the geometry of the interior and moving to modify the relationship between architecture and the city and, at the same time, the relationship between the family members. A key reason for my support is the fact that it is "remarkably intimate and yet public". Of course, I also believe she has a strong potential for future growth.
KUNG : My choice is also "XX". My excitement begins right with the concept: it leverages a very conceptualized architectural geometry to defy the existing architecture, and defies the selfestablished 45-degree axis by preserving the existing external appearance and volume and the internal staircase. There are a multitude of issues to be tackled here--the relationship between the four major sides and the city, the conflict between the "X" axes and staircase, the crosspoint of the X, or the 45-degree corners in every space. I choose this work because the author strives to tackle these important architectural issues with her unrelenting willpower. Another interesting thing is, in a departure from the 3x3 grid from 50 years ago, the ultimate outcome is loose. I found a strong sense of scale and "everyday feel" at the site visit yesterday; to me that is invaluable. Personal willpower on aesthetics exercised over a uniquely Taiwanese and rather rural housing form. Despite some deficiencies, I still see her as an exciting and emerging architect, so I would pick her as the First Prize winner.
NISHIMAKI : Fully agreed, all shortcomings considered. This is also the age where you see the greatest creativity and best work in Tokyo.
KUNG : It's great that we have unanimously agreed on awarding the First Prize to "XX" with all 5 votes. As for the Special Award, shall we also start with Nishimaki-san?
NISHIMAKI : I find it very difficult, but after our discussion it is "Sport Centre with a Column" for me, because it is indeed invaluable to have a work that has sparked such debate.
KUNG : And Chi, which is the Special Award for you?
CHI : I would nominate "Sport Centre with a Column"; the path they're exploring right now has a chance of moving forward. Another candidate for me is "Morrison Academy" ; it is one of the only two that is better onsite than in photos; usually the photos are better than onsite. (Kung: One of two, which is the other then?) The other is "XX"; both of these feel much better onsite than in photos. "Morrison Academy" resembles work from a big firm at first sight, but once you walk in you find spatial connections in terms of sections, floor plans and materials in the handling of the relationship between architecture and the city, inside and outside. It is introspective at the core.
CHIU : I've been wavering between "Sport Centre with a Column" and "Morrison Academy". If I could only pick one, I would go with "Morrison Academy" but also I recommend "Sport Centre with a Column". I don't hold its massive volume against "Morrison Academy"; even if you examine its design by applying the spirit of the ADA Awards there is no incongruity. For example, I'm very impressed by the triangle at the entry. "Where is the entry gate," I asked him. He replied that there is no gate; all the vehicular and pedestrian circulation concentrate in that small triangular space and finally ascend from that spiral stairs. Located on a site with 2.5m elevational difference; no excavation of basement; the massing is inconspicuously concealed within half of the topography; then there is an atrium with not a single window and completely enclosed in glass, with rising hot air discharged from the parapets...etc. There is competence, talent and ideas in completing this rather naturalistic work. Coming back to the "Sport Centre", I actually agree very much
with Nishimaki on the back side being more charming than the front. The connecting of the wall...the horizontal ribbon windows...just looking at this photo makes me want to give it an award. I also read the description very carefully; the writing is in fact very intellectual; but as with the struggle with the red diagonal... I guess I have a loveand-hate thing with this project.
HUANG : I find it quite a feat to achieve such "quiet" handling in "Morrison Academy". The firm is small but shows staunch willpower; this is something I want to encourage, albeit they didn't offer discussions on the "architectural hardcore". As for "Sport Centre with a Column", it clearly lays out their "architectural hardcore" on the table. I am happy finally someone is setting aside political correctness to confront this thing, allowing architecture to face the society head-on and make contributions. There is a chance for "Sport Centre with a Column" to put forth a stronger vision but it falls short so far, though at the same time I really want the process of these persistent endeavors to be seen in Taiwan. I find that these youngsters are almost ready to take the helm--of the freedom for everyone to speak on equal footing when it come to public matters. In addition, both teams gained this opportunity thanks to the credit they had earned from previous work; that is something to be encouraged, too. If I had to pick I would go with "Sport Centre" first.
KUNG : Okay, my choice is the same as Chiu--"Morrison Academy" first, "Sport Centre" second. And the two of you (Huang & Chi) and Nishimaki-san have "Sport Centre" first. "Sport Centre" seems to have one extra vote now. My reasoning is as follows: when I read closely into "Morrison Academy", I find the willpower of the creator comes through in every part; the only thing missing is to condense it into an architectural stance regarding the spatial essence. I also like the discussion on the architectural essence in "Sport Centre"; I just think it's still one step short.
NISHIMAKI : Based on my personal preference, "Sport Centre with a Column" and "Morrison Academy" is also about half and half.
I went with "Sport Centre" because as a planning project set against the background of the neo-campus movement, the message it attempts to convey carries certain significance, and the ADA Awards provide a platform of dissemination. There was a period of time when Japan's architectural community leaned toward social movements and programs and there were fewer and fewer works with a good sense of space. So, what are the judging criteria and the core values here? What is the thing Taiwan's architectural community want to convey the most, the most urgent conversation to be had with young people? I think we need to return to this in our consideration.
CHIU : I find discussions in Taiwan on open space in the last few decades to be too... (Huang: Cliché?). The interior atrium of Morrison Academy uses curved glass and cannot be opened whatsoever; it is completely enclosed; is there any other place in Taiwan like that? What I want to say is: sometimes enclosedness has its charm, too. To have such a large space so enclosed gives us a chance to engage in more profound discussions on "openess".
KUNG : Let's hear everyone's final opinion; sounds like "Sport Centre with a Column" wins the Special Award?
NISHIMAKI : I agree. This ADA award jury has shown me the high caliber of Taiwan's architectural community and the drive in young people here, and they get opportunities to do a master plan. In Tokyo and Japan in general, young architects actually have fewer and fewer opportunities now; I hope young architects in Japan and Taiwan will have a chance in the future to engage in live conversations like this in the future. This kind of opportunity would propel Taiwanese and Japanese architectural communities forward together, and we as architectural media also need to work harder on promotion.
KUNG : So Special Award goes to "Sport Centre with a Column" then; I hope this statement is communicated at the award ceremony this afternoon, as well. Finally, thank you, Nishimaki-san, for taking part in this discussion online for four straight hours.
NISHIMAKI : Thank you.
(Photos & goodbyes)
Atsuko Nishimaki
Chief Editor, Jutakutokushu , Shinkenchiku-Sha Co.,Ltd., Japan
Editor, “Next Generation Manifestations of Architects Under 35,” The Japan Architect , no.86 (Summer 2012)
Jay Chiu
Sheng-Yuan
Huang
Jr-Gang Chi
Principal, Jay Chiu Architects & Associates + AXB Architecture Studio
Recipient, The 2011 Outstanding Architects in the ROC
Principal, Fieldoffice Architects, Yilan, Taiwan
Recipient, Yosizaka Takamasa Award, Japan
Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Shih Chien University
Principal, Jr.Gang Architectural Lab
Shu-Chang Kung
Professor, Graduate Institute of Architecture,
National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan
Recipient, The 2007 Outstanding Architects in the ROC
Time
Venue
Attendees
2020.9.13 15:00p.m. (GMT+8)
3F, Museum of National Taipei University of Education (MoNTUE)
Chun-Hsiung Wang (WANG)
Jay Chiu (CHIU)
Sheng-Yuan Huang (HUANG)
Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
Shu-Chang Kung (KUNG)
KUNG: Over the past three days (September 11-13), four Taiwanese Juries discussed for more than 12 hours in total. On the first day, we discussed until midnight. On the second day, we discussed until our way back in high speed rail. This morning, we discussed until the last minute before getting on stage. In fact, we really hope to hear from the first-stage juries. They probably have different expectations to these eight selected works, but we get to decide. We would like to hear from Chun-Hsiung Wang about these projects.
WANG : I would like to invite Jr-Gang Chi to speak first. He was the first one to read through these projects. He didn’t select in the preliminary round, but judged in the final round. He has also played this role for the second time, so he should have some opinions. What was your first impression about these projects?
CHI : I was quite surprised to receive these submissions, as they all seemed prepared. There were no easy thresholds to evaluate them. We had to go into details before making decisions. Even though entries are fewer this year due to the pandemic, they are all critically important. In other words, people recognize ADA Award and take it seriously, and they place high standards on their outputs. This is crucial.
After I learn more about these teams, I think all participants deliver a consistent message over the years: I believe I can achieve, even under the most challenging conditions. All teams persist in their projects. These persistence and struggles are valuable experiences. We have also invited winners from the past four editions to attend today. They have gradually become creative drivers in architecture in Taiwan.
WANG: Our first impression is the quality is consistently good. These practices do not happen overnight. Just as what PeiJung has said, it takes motivations and commitments to achieve these results. When I read through them, I can feel they really want to create something. During the evaluation process, we had some interesting discussions. Right before we finished the discussions, some strange sentiments emerged. Over the five editions of ADA, it seems to recognize certain qualities, and only architects with these qualities would be awarded. Jyun-Shao Hsu was the last winner we chose. After deciding on the other seven winners, we felt discontent. These architects worked hard, and delivered experienced works, but we felt discontent when the evaluation was coming to an end. Initially we felt excited about these brilliant projects. During discussions, though, some fundamental issues emerged. Many of them seemed to prioritize technique over originality. It is about the essential contradiction between them. Technique itself is not from originality, but imported. Even if architects develop techniques specifically for their projects, they focus on issues at hand, without considerations about the future. While they resolve issues, no new ideas are born out of them. While these works are good, but they are also dangerous. The struggle between ”Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus” and “Sport Centre with a Column” in the final evaluation is probably because of this aspect.
KUNG: “Sport Centre with a Column” and ”Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus” are very different from each other in scale and openness. We discussed between them for the Special Prize, and overturned the decision several times. Chun-Hsiung Wang raises an authentic issue. When we deliberated, we identified issues in each of the finalists. We tried to put ourselves into their shoes, and hopefully through this process, these architects could clarify on what they really aspired to do.
CHIU: Chi told me that he could easily find another eight entries this year to organize another exhibition that seemed to deliver the same quality at first glimpse. In other words, the
preliminary round should be very competitive. The nomination itself is a recognition. As to these projects, I hope young people can deliver works that resonate with people. You don’t need repeat our nostalgia anymore. I am delighted to see so many fascinating proposals without constraints or legacies. You should carry on and dip deeper. That is something you should certainly improve further. I also want to highlight the importance of personal will. When you are young, you should insist on what you want to do, without being limited by other views or ideologies. You should embrace unknown factors to create something transformative.
In her acceptance speech for the First Prize, PeiJung burst into tears. I can feel their struggles and loneliness. However, you have to be lonely enough to the level of stupidity to create something powerful. She doesn’t need to turn a square into a X shape in the layout, but it is beautiful. She breaks through some frameworks for this effect. When you have these three rooms and one staircase, everyone needs to meet in that small space. Do you realize how important the crossing point is?
HUANG : It would be much better if the two storerooms were removed!
CHIU : Yes, when you remove those storerooms, three doors on the second floor will all facing the stair to form the center of the X. That could also eliminate the small connecting passages. I think you need to pay attention to those details in your practices in the future. We enjoy so many aspects in this project, such as windows. You create curves, squares and folds. More boldly, people indoors may not see outside. Finally, there are clients who do not want ugly urban views, but just light. This is courageous. Lastly, I would like to talk about ”Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus”. ADA in our minds is about youth, creativity, spirit, transformation, and the unknown. However, this difficult and mature project challenges our values. This team of five has delivered almost as good as a corporate firm. Their spirits may not be the same as “XX”, but I hope they can cherish these capabilities, as they can do much more in the society.
HUANG: We define the evaluation theme as “critical lines”. While we were somewhat polite on the first day, we later went all in to take advantage of this opportunity to communicate with young architects. In Taiwan, we should cherish authentic freedom and diversity. We are used to hearing different voices and cherishing these opportunities to learn from others. I do not define these architects by their ages. They are playing roles that we all should do. As creators, we always need inspirations and stimulations. That’s why we offer harsh comments, as we do not want anyone to use budgets or clients as excuses. Creators should always take responsibilities for drawbacks. I also acknowledge the construction quality as a major factor. When constructions of my own projects are really below my standards, ultimately I will share certain cost to make it right.
On the third day of our discussions, we needed to select a Special Prize winner. It should encourage and support some values to carry on. Clients in ”Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus” offer a lot of resources to build everything they have in mind. It is difficult for architects to find any cracks or gaps for new solutions. While it is challenging to design for resourceful private clients, it is equally hard when the public project, “Sport Centre with a Column,” even has issues with client to select the right curtains.
Pei-Jung highlights “rules of thumb” in the project. Experiences are easily anticipated and described. It is powerful when she delivers a simple solution beyond our experiences. About “Ayumi House”, the Japanese judge said she anticipated almost everything as soon as she started to read this project. According to her, there were many similar projects in Japan already. We noticed some of your interventions, including receding from the city street to form a pocket plaza. The cut in “Ayumi House” was very courageous, and it was interesting to see the ground floor raised higher than the street. In this tiny house, one could hear all the sounds internally. The issues emerged during the interview. I was offering an opportunity to explain your interventions, when I asked about to extend the cut on the balcony to allow the space and light penetration. However, you answered, “Leakages will happen if we don’t seal the patio”. I didn’t know how to turn the conversation back. It was more important to
earn the clients’ support to reduce the space a little bit for better quality of life.
I also have something to say about “Sport Centre with a Column”. Over the past decade, our “new campus movement” has become something strange but politically correct. Now we see some people are trying to bring cosmic forces and dynamic relationships back to campus. There are opportunities to offer better conditions to children. Even though their interventions are all half done, it’s rare to have such a hardcore design on campus. I think they offer everyone an opportunity to rethink and rediscuss.
KUNG : I want to talk about a few other projects. Jyun-Shao Hsu is very young. I actually know a bit about this project. I think, rather than spatial issues, it is about “artistic expressions”. He has to raise several questions. How do these tracks connect with personal life? How to renovate a small living room in a traditional apartment? What relationships are created between reflection screens and the park? The creator is required to answer clearly without ambiguity. I remember Sheng-Yuan Huang asked him, “After you renovate this room and living space, should your roommates open or close their doors? What reactions do you expect?” As radical as these interventions are, we hope he can say decisively that “I just want this line!”. Even though we can understand, we hope to hear the core concept from him.
“A Whale Story” is gifted with great natural surroundings, with ocean in front and mountains in the back. It takes a lot of time to convince the client to accept a one-story building. It would be ruined by two stories. I think it’s clever to bring people to the rooftop. Unfortunately, architects used too many metaphors about whales in their presentation. I think it is sufficient to use an image to explain to general users. However, when you said whales only refer to an external image and form, I thought there were too many expressions involved. Elements such as platform, handrails, and horizontal planes are scattered without fully integration. It’s a pity that even the landscape is shaped as a whale tail. To me, if architects really think these tangible forms are required to explain
their design strategies, it would be dangerous. I still enjoy its spatial strategy, and how the project respects the village (Fangshan) and its natural environment.
We have discussed about “Generals’ Village” a lot today as well. Japanese jury Atsuko Nishimaki likes it. However, besides sophisticated scale, proportion, and connecting new and old materials, she doesn’t see any new experiments or perspectives. Even though she likes the project, she doesn’t know how to evaluate it based on ADA values. Jay Chiu is impressed about this project when he runs through alleys to the back for toilets. He thinks the architect Pu-Ming Tseng should introduce this project with such a perception/ experience, rather than those grand discourses. Simple life experiences are sufficient to explain how fascinating the historical project is.
We have talked about drawbacks in “XX”. That center on the second floor is not done properly. When I visit the site, I like how stubborn it is. In the architectural geometry, the scale is processed really well. When I walk into toilet with the door half open, I don’t feel pressured. The angle to look out from windows is just right. When they sculpt the space, they address personal and physical experiences well. It is also appropriate to keep the old staircase. It’s the only element at home with a 90-degree angle, and creates an extraordinary tension with all other 45-degree angles. It’s marvelous to see how an architect puts her design will into practice, and takes care of personal perceptions and experiences.
There is a huge gap between photos and the on-site experience in “White House and Black Rooms”. Construction quality is a major issue, partly because of budgetary constraints. These are the comments I would like to add, thank you.
Time
Venue
First stage jury
Online Voting
Curator
2020.7.11 13:00p.m. (GMT+8)
Dacin meeting room
Chun-Hsiung Wang (WANG)
Kwang-Tyng Wu (WU)
C. David Tseng (TSENG)
Divooe Zein (ZEIN)
Hui-Hsin Liao (LIAO)
Jenny Wu (JENNY)_LA
Jing Liu (JING)_NY
Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
(Part I – Jury Discussion after the Portfolio Review)
WANG: We need to select 20 out of 28 submissions at the second stage. Let’s go through them again.
WHITE HOUSE AND BLACK ROOMS
TSENG: These public buildings come with practical needs for spaces. The architectural language is well-organized with good dynamics in the space.
LIAO: I like how he addresses relationships between volumes and the site, and between volumes.
WANG: Even though I am not really satisfied with these tiles down here, I can imagine experiences based on photos and graphs. There is a tree… walk up along the ramp… go though… and turn to see a staircase. I can see how paths and volumes intertwine and extend.
TSENG: If you look closer on this graph , you will see how he divides the support into two legs, suspends the upper volume, and places the window on the edge. It is wonderful.
WU: How do you think about toilets?
TSENG: I think they are great in black and white.
WANG: I like toilets as well, especially the relationship between water curves and abstract volumes.
LIAO: And that pipe as well.
TSENG: I still have a few questions, though, such as the angle between two volumes.
A WHALE STORY
WANG: Huang often remodels aging village houses in southern Taiwan. His past projects include “Yamato Café” and “Space of Engraving Lights”. His team often has to complete projects with limited budgets and minimal technical supports. Through many details, I can tell he is quite sensitive to spatial aesthetics, such as railings at the corner, or the proportion in red bricks, grey walls, and white walls. He is very committed for years. While he does not rise to fame immediately, he prepares and persists.
TSENG: This flagpole must be required by the client, but he places it well in the façade. I also like the relationships between sinks outside classrooms.
LIFE×LIFE
LIAO: I enjoy this work. It addresses a common issue to many young renters in cities, in a light and modern way. I find it poetic.
TSENG: I second this opinion. I told Divooe Zein that it might have the fewest design interventions among candidates this year. Since the landlord obviously wanted to limit the renovation scope, he had to deliver in a minimal method.
LIAO: To me, he interprets the space not from an interior design perspective.
TSENG: It is more like a spatial installation. People tend to close their doors in a house like this. He attempts to create a public space like a studio, and tries to convince the landlord.
GENERALS’ VILLAGE
LIAO: This community is large in scale, but the approach seems to be a mixture of too many things. It’s unclear what the main strategy is, even though I like the overall plan.
WU: At first glance, it uses many design languages without a highlight.
LIAO: Does this kind of plan happen to some older communities in Taiwan?
WANG: I am interested in how Divooe Zein thinks about this.
ZEIN: I am not sure if this prioritizes renewal or reuse. It does not look consistent maybe because of the landscape design.
WANG: It is difficult to address the line between renewal and reuse, and between old and new, but this is done well. This young architect may have done a bit too much, but he has quite restrained himself in such a complicated case. For example, this wing and cabinet are added, because larger spaces are needed for operation. In this photo, everything is repaired except for the long wooden bench by the window. This skylight is added to see the structure.
WU: Are they all required to be certified green buildings?
WANG: Yes, all of them. Each unit in veteran villages after WW II is less than 80 square meters. Without additions, it would not be possible for commercial purposes. These residences have placed inherent restrictions on design. I agree with you that the landscape is not done well, but renewal and addition to the existing houses are clear to me. I also think the construction is done well, including many details. If you visit on site, outdoor surfaces are flat and well made with very few cracks. These houses were badly damaged, so it is quite extraordinary to deliver this level.
SPORT CENTRE WITH A COLUMN
TSENG: The budget for this simple space besides the playground is quite low. He demonstrates architectural skills and sophistication to transform a mundane house into a certain level logically. Connections between the wall and the city are well thought. Imagine walking from this side, and discover the connection between wall and façade. I think this project should be encouraged.
WANG: From the structural plan, I do not understand why the tilted pillar is needed. I would definitely vote for the project without that red pillar.
TSENG: Venturi has said that architecture is to create a natural language in the context, and use the language to presents all kinds of postures.
WANG: I agree and like the architectural form, but that pillar…
TSENG: Don’t get so fixated on that pillar. See how well the rooftop is done. We should encourage the project with such a low budget.
WANG: I agree on this part.
TSENG: From a formalist perspective, I can accept the idea.
WANG: I think it is not about theory or discourse.
TSENG: We do have different opinions on this pillar.
WANG: To me, the red tilted pillar is not supposed to be that important, but it looks like a key element. The interior, on the other hand, is well done.
TSENG: You can vote for the interior, and I can vote for the pillar.
MORRISON ACADEMY, TAIPEI CAMPUS
WU: Such a mature and sophisticated work is done by an architect less than 45-year-old. We should certainly talk about how he handles the project.
TSENG: When I select 12 projects for interview, I think it is important to encourage a young architect to approach architecture so comprehensively. It demonstrates both techniques and aesthetics. As far as I know about Morrison Academy, the client would have a limited budget but a certain requirement on aesthetics.
WANG: I agree with both of you, but I think it is not well controlled overall. Each photo looks different to me.
TSENG: You hope he can control more.
WANG: Yes.
TSENG: Based on this photo, the connection with surroundings is quite well.
WANG: Yes, I think he has done much better externally than internally.
TSENG: He has done a bit too much internally. However, in the last review, I hope people can look at the signage design. Signage systems in Taiwan are overlooked and terrible.
(The second round of voting selects final projects for interview.)
TSENG: In general, “Ayumi House” is a sophisticated, young, and small project. It creates front yard and back yard, and takes care of section and openings. "A Whale Story" integrates all factors. "Life×Life" and "White House and Black Rooms" have been extensively discussed, so I will not go into detail. "Generals’ Village" follows through the construction process well. "XX" is outstanding. "Sport Centre with a Column" and "Morrison Academy" deliver quality architecture with limited budgets. I like their architectural languages. It is a comprehensive list.
CHI: We have selected 11 projects. After the interview, we will choose six to eight projects as finalists. Please take a closer look later, as interviews may overturn our impressions. Thank you all, and we will see you next time.
Time
Venue
First stage jury
Curator
2020.7.25 12:20p.m. (GMT+8)
Dacin meeting room + Zoom Meeting
(Taiwan-LA-NY)
Chun-Hsiung Wang (WANG)
Kwang-Tyng Wu (WU)
C. David Tseng (TSENG)
Divooe Zein (ZEIN)
Hui-Hsin Liao (LIAO)
Jenny Wu (JENNY)_LA
Jing Liu (JING)_NY
Jr-Gang Chi (CHI)
( Part II – Jury Discussion after the Shortlist Interview )
CHI : I think we need to consider the combination of the finalists for the next round jury board.
TSENG : We can create a spectrum. From smaller scale in "Ayumi House" to larger scale in "Morrison Academy, Taipei Campus", which demonstrates the organization and integration capabilities of the architect. The floor is lowered by two meters, so all students can walk pass the principal’s office. This aspect is unusual in Taiwan, but public spaces are designed in a very Taiwanese way. I like the contrast within this combination.
TSENG : And "Sport Centre with a Column"!
JENNY: I have some doubts about "Sport Centre with a Column". It is clear, but too clear to me. David, can you try to convince me? I would like to know what you like about it.
TSENG : Its simplicity! The project places a low wall along the street side. It’s well integrated with the building. On the court side, it uses an outstanding volume to imply a certain thing. The young architects pay attention to details, and how to use these elements. They also address gravity and structure. When we discussed about the project last time, I tried to convince everyone that it felt like Venturi. I am very satisfied about their presentation today. They even think about relationships with the interior, and the existence and non-existence of a pillar. I think they are growing, and I want to encourage them. I recognize their smart and clear approach. Even though I am not sure if this project will make it to the last round, I would like to recognize their efforts.
JING : I also vote for "Sport Centre with a Column". Every move in the project is precise in my opinion. There is no redundancy in the process.
TSENG : And there is nothing random.
JENNY: I understand. I like that they decide not to embed the pillar. It’s a clever move. I also like the clarity of the details. This is important. While other parts are simple, details become critical. I think I can accept it.
TSENG : Thank you, Jenny.
WANG : Do we have the decision?
JENNY: Do you think we have a good combination?
CHI : Could you talk about your thoughts on this spectrum?
JENNY: There is a bold interior space like "XX". "Sport Centre with a Column" completes a bold exterior with a single move. The American school is a well-organized project. "Generals' Village" is about heritage restoration and urban intervention. "Ayumi House" seems to be a popular small residence... This spectrum looks good in project type and scale.
CHI : But we do not have something experimental.
JING : I agree. Many of these projects have references.
JENNY: Many of them.
JING : Take "Ayumi House" and "White House and Black Rooms" as examples. They used references, but they did not reach a critical position yet.
TSENG : "Ayumi House" and "White House and Black Rooms"?
JING: I see Tower House from Japan in "Ayumi House", and Le Corbusier and Siza in "White House and Black Rooms". In fact, I would like to encourage more experimental projects, even if they are not as beautiful.
TSENG : I think that is why Chi invites both of you. You are both outstanding and experimental, and we certainly want to encourage the next generation. These nominees cover many aspects in these two years. Just as what Jing has said, there is nothing experimental, but we welcome this dimension in the future for sure.
CHI: Yes. I think people are exploring what architecture means to them in their own ways. Jenny and Jing have been committed to this, and it is important to Taiwan as well. My former colleagues, Leslie and Sasa, have recently built a concrete pavilion with 3D printing, and won The League Prize in 2020. ADA should keep this creative spirit alive. It is not what ADA is all about, and experiments do not have to be technological, but at least something experimental should be included in this spectrum. We do not have it this year. Thank you all.
JING: OK. It’s time for bed. (Taiwan time is 12 hours ahead of EST)
WU: Three of us propose to bring "Life×Life" back.
LIAO: I agree. I like those photos in the portfolio.
WANG: Can we have eight finalists?
CHI: I suppose we can, but I want to know if it is really experimental.
JENNY: True.
WU: What do you think, Jing?
JING: I think he does the project very intuitively without full control. I can feel that he knows what he is doing subconsciously. If we want to encourage young people to experiment, and there are no other candidates, I am fine with this project.
JENNY: This project is very personal, and it is his own home, without major challenges. I don’t think this project is on par with other nominees architecturally.
TSENG: During the interview, Wu raised a great question: Will you still like it two years or five years later? This question offers us a new perspective. In the first round, I was attracted to the project. However, I feel the same as Jenny. That’s why I followed up by asking what he really wanted to achieve or challenge. Unfortunately, he couldn’t answer in the interview. His portfolio is much better than his presentation, so I am a bit hesitant.
LIAO: I would like to support him, as he is indeed courageous.
WU: I tend to increase another one.
WANG: We have eight now.
WU: I tend to have eight.
WANG: Then we are fine now.
CHI: There are two issues can be discussed. One is about architectural experiment. The other is about how architects are overshadowed by references.
TSENG: I think we are aware of these issues raised by Jing and Jenny. Strategically, it is good to include them in our discussions, so we keep them. Projects like "Life×Life" would probably be nominated by multiple awards in the 1970s and 1980s for their practices. Can Jing and Jenny agree to this?
JING: I think it would be great that the architect prefers doing experimental architecture, rather than how many practice experiences he has. If it is possible, I would vote for "Life×Life" as a demonstrator. As to "Sport Centre with a Column", I can also see references, but it is relatively interesting. It looks for references among Kazuo Shinohara, Olgiati, Mies, and locality in Taiwan. I have no issues with references, but it should be done appropriately. I would place "Sport Centre with a Column" ahead of "Ayumi House" and "White House and Black Rooms".
TSENG: That’s great.
JENNY: I respect the collective decision. Instead of opposing "Life×Life" , I think it’s really personal, and not experimental. I also recognize the benefit of opening to younger generations. If this helps them, I am fine. As to reference, my first question is why. It would be unacceptable to me if they use references simply because of preferences. I do not have questions about their techniques. The issue is how architects discuss the references they choose.
TSENG: Thanks, Jenny, for bringing up this great reminder. JENNY, JING: Thank you. It’s great to see everyone.
Chun-Hsiung
Wang
Kwang-Tyng Wu
Jenny Wu
C David Tseng
Chair and Associate Professor, Department of Architecture, Shih Chien University
Professor, Department of Architecture, National Cheng Kung University
Co-Founder, Oyler Wu Collaborative, CA, USA
Undergraduate Studio Coordinator, SCI-Arc, USA
2012 ADA Awards for Emerging Architects
Chair Professor at Faculty of Architecture, National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University, Taiwan
Divooe Zein
Principal, siu siu – LAB OF PRIMITIVE SENSES
2014 ADA Awards for Emerging Architects, Special Award
Hui-Hsin Liao
Jing Liu
Senior Associate, MVRDV Architects, Netherlands
Co-Founder, SO–IL Office Ltd., NYC, USA
Winner, 2010 MoMA PS1 Young Architects Program
