Get Off of My Cloud by Coop Himmelb(l)au

Get Off of My Cloud Wolf D. Prix COOPHIM MELB( L)AU

Texts 1968â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2005 Edited by Martina Kandeler-Fritsch and Thomas Kramer

Editors: Martina Kandeler-Fritsch and Thomas Kramer Coordination/ Editing: Petra Königsegger-Dabrowski Publication Staff: Gudrun Hausegger, Petra Trefalt, Markus Pillhofer, Caroline Ecker, Timo Rieke, Doris Fritz, Edith Fritz Translation: Dream Coordination Office (Lisa Rosenblatt & Charlotte Eckler) Design and Typesetting: Paulus M. Dreibholz, London/ Vienna Typefaces: ITC Charter, Akzidenz Grotesk Paper: Munken Lynx 130 g/m 2 Binding: Druckverarbeitung IDUPA Schübelin GmbH, Owen/Teck Printed by: Offizin Chr. Scheufele, Stuttgart © 2005 Hatje Cantz Verlag, Ostfildern-Ruit, and authors Published by Hatje Cantz Verlag Senefelderstrasse 12 73760 Ostfildern-Ruit Germany Tel. + 49 711 4405 -0 Fax. + 49 711 4405 -220 www.hatjecantz.com Hatje Cantz books are available internationally at selected bookstores and from the following distribution partners: USA/North America—D.A.P., Distributed Art Publishers, New York, www.artbook.com UK—Art Books International, London, sales@art-bks.com Australia—Tower Books, Frenchs Forest (Sydney), towerbks@zipworld.com.au France—Interart, Paris, commercial@interart.fr Belgium—Exhibitions International, Leuven, www.exhibitionsinternational.be Switzerland—Scheidegger, Affoltern am Albis, scheidegger@ava.ch For Asia, Japan, South America, and Africa, as well as for general questions, please contact Hatje Cantz directly at sales@hatjecantz.de, or visit our homepage www.hatjecantz.com for further information. ISBN 3 -7757-1671- 8 (English) ISBN 3 -7757-1648 -3 (German) Printed in Germany

Table of Contents 14 Foreword Jeffrey Kipnis

84 Reiss Bar, 1977

20 Foreword Christian Reder

86 Hot Flat, 1978 88 Roter Engel (Red Angel), 1980

Programmatic Texts

90 The Temperature Wing, 1980

24 Coop Himmelblau Is Not a Color, 1968

92 Merz School, 1981

25 Our Architecture Has no Physical

94 Architecture Is Now, 1982

Ground Plan, 1968 26 In the Beginning Was the City, 1968 27 It Is Not That We Should Change, 1970 28 The Rift in the Mind of the City Dweller, 1977

96 Open House, 1983 98 Apartment Complex Vienna 2, 1983 100 Youth Center Berlin, 1983 102 Skyline, 1985 104 Form-mutation, 1986

35 Beautiful Living Makes Frozen Lives, 1978

106 The Heart of a City, Melun-Sénart, 1986

36 The Future of the Splendid Desolation,

108 Like Sugar. White on White, 1994

1978 38 City of Nature, 1978

Lectures

39 The Poetry of Desolation, 1979

112 Architecture Must Blaze, 1984

40 The Tougher Architecture, 1980

150 The City as a Field of Clouds, 1996

45 And This Is How It Works, 1980

166 More and Less, 1998

46 Architecture Must Blaze, 1980

184 Architecture at the End of the Twentieth

47 Sections through Open Architecture, 1980 48 The Drawing Is Important to Us, 1982 49 The Open System, 1982 50 Architecture Is Not Accommodating, 1983

Century, 1998 202 “Let’s Be Realists. Let’s Do the Impossible”, 1999 220 Space for a Change, 2000

55 Open Architecture, 1983 56 The Dissipation of Our Bodies in the City, 1988

Interviews 228 The Desire for Oblique Walls, 1986

58 On the Edge, 1989

232 We Were Young and Very Bored, 1988

59 For Us, a City Is . . . , 1990

250 Body—Space—Time, 1996

60 Our Architecture Has Four Cities

262 Understanding Deconstructivism

and Seven Lives, 1990 64 Desert Storm, 1993 69 The End of Space Is the Beginning

as a Strategy, 1996 266 Resisting Accommodation, 1996 276 Paradise Cage, 1996

of Architecture, 1993

280 The Psyche of Architecture, 2000

71 Planning Concepts, 1993

290 Against the Visual Devastation of

72 The Architecture of Clouds, 1995

Our Environment, 2001 300 The Box as a Burial Site for Art:

Selected Project Texts 76 Villa Rosa, 1968 78 Villa Rosa I I, 1968

We Think That’s Boring, 2001 308 Freeing Architecture from Material Constraints, 2001

80 The Cloud, 1968

314 The City in the Age of Globalization, 2002

82 Feedback Vibration City, 1971

326 Baroque Himmelb(l)au, 2002

330 We Build Spaces That Are as Fast as Cars, 2002

425 Rapid Eye Movement Schindler— R. M. Schindler, 2001

338 The Rigor of Art and the Foolish Pleasure Principle, 2002 366 An Architect Who Doesn’t Want to Improve the World Will Always Be a House Builder, 2002 376 On the Added Value of Form, 2003

426 The American Friend—Steven Holl, 2002 428 Wolf 4 Zaha—Zaha Hadid, 2003 430 Frog King and Butterfly Prince—Greg Lynn, 2003 433 Visionary in Exile—Raimund Abraham, 2005 438 Call Him Thom Mayne, 2005

380 Vienna Is Happy When We Build Abroad, . . . And Other Texts

2005

442 A Feeling in Glass, 1972 On Friends and Foes

443 A Museum Is Art, 1990

386 Art’s Great Wall of China—Christo, 1976

445 On Urbanized Landscapes, 1993

391 The Monastery—Günther Domenig, 1988

453 Ideas Always Have Something Dictatorial

392 Wd. Z., Structural Designer—Wolfdietrich Ziesel, 1989 393 The Prince—Wilhelm Holzbauer, 1990

About Them,1995 455 Against Rowing in the Architecture Galley, 1995

394 E M = C —Eric Owen Moss, 1991

463 Cultural Buildings Are Mirror Images, 1996

395 About the Reiss—Michael Satke, 1991

464 Gasometer in Vienna-Simmering, 1996

396 Otto Wagner, a Viennese Architect, 1991

468 Power to Fantasy, 1997

398 On Frank O. Gehry, 1995

470 Vienna Is Not Bilbao, 1997

399 Rolling the Sky—The Rolling Stones, 1995

477 The Opposite of Fortresses, 1999

405 Promote and Suppress: Architect,

478 The Future of Architecture I, 1999

Kingmaker, and Vampire—Philip Johnson,

479 The Future of Architecture I I, 2000

1996

482 Dynamite on Stage, 2000

409 Congratulations to Margarete SchütteLihotzky on Her One Hundredth Birthday, 1997 410 For Gerald Zugmann, 1997 411 Congratulations to Alvar Aalto on His One Hundredth Birthday, 1998 412 S 1-2, B KK-2, and the Poor Boys’ Brain-Surfer, 1998 414 The Proud King of Samarkand—Zvi Hecker, 1999 416 Poise Is Costly; Honor Requires Patience—Roland Rainer, 2000 418 A Flexible Modernity—Enrique Norten, 2000

486 Art Is Research, 2000 488 Acceptance Speech for the Großer Österreichischer Staatspreis, Coop Himmelb(l)au, 2000 495 MAK o Muerte, 2001 496 Architecture Is a Dog, 2001 497 The University Space Is a Free Space, 2002 499 Opening Speech of the steirischer herbst, 2002 509 Norms Are Regulative Borders, 2003 510 Architecture as a Comprehensive Thought Process, 2003 512 96° 13 W /16° 33 N, 2005

420 If That Isn’t Effectiveness!— Günther Feuerstein, 2000 423 Hitoshi Abe, Wanderer in His Spaces, 2000

520 Editor’s Note / Text Index 524 Picture Index

Against Two Gravities Jeffrey Kipnis “Get Off of My Cloud!” the first collection of lectures, interviews, and project discussions by Coop Himmelblau marks a decisive moment in the evolution of their architecture, a strategic swerve that should not go unnoticed. “Get Off of My Cloud!” does not systematically position the practice’s work in the historical/intellectual manner of such writing-architects as Rossi, Venturi, Eisenman, or Koolhaas. Though rife with scalpel-edged apercus on architecture and architects, these texts are for the most part polemic declarations—brash, brazen, even poetic, if I push the meaning of that word to ragged limits. Yet, as one reads, the turn taken by the book soon becomes abundantly obvious, in a sense the very subject of the book itself, though it is never mentioned. Time after time, Coop Himmelb(l)au expresses its absolute faith in the built—in building and city—as architecture’s supreme action instrument. After so many years of reticent struggle, the practice begins to have an opportunity to realize its architectural ambitions in important building commissions. Why, then, does it now decide to write? •• “The mayor of Vienna has said he can no longer pursue contemporary architecture projects . . . he would run the risk of losing votes. . . . In fact, nothing terrifies Vienna’s inhabitants more than the sight of modern buildings.” “A democracy of opinion polls and complacency thrives behind Biedermeier façades.” In these pages, readers will find not one single word that is not about architecture’s responsibility to confront the perils of political complacency. But perhaps because Coop Himmelb(l)au has not actively published its discourse, it is still often treated as an “art practice”: born of raw talent, driven by iconoclasm, sustained by bravado, and rescued by daring leaps of building technique, its incongruous architecture requiring no other intellectual justification beyond its intrinsic interest. Ridiculous, of course, even in the art world itself, at least since Duchamp, the links that join practice, politics, and writing have long since hardened fast. The outrages

14 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

of Vienna’s most seditious art practice, the Actionists, were in a mere thirty years all but forgotten until the publication of their writings in 1999 disseminated and opened to discussion their thoughts on the regenerative potential of an art that assaults taboos and indulges destruction. By 2001, their photographs were hanging in New York’s august Metropolitan Museum of Art. Architecture and art may each have special powers, but so does writing. But even if the Actionists and Coop Himmelb(l)au share the naiveté that real exploits in and on the world are, or should be, sufficient, the mind-set of the two are as far apart as art and architecture. And in any case, it was Gandhi who long before said, “You must be the change you want to see in the world.” Or more exactly, Gandhi, who long before wrote. Wolf Prix, most often the voice of Coop Himmelb(l)au, insists that two issues place architecture at the nucleus of that problem of complacency. First, Prix asserts Coop Himmelb(l)au’s critical position. Architecture is dangerous; it possesses a profound power to indoctrinate, because indoctrination occurs through incessant repetition and nothing else keeps pounding conservative rhythms to the brain as insidiously as the familiar comforts of saccharin buildings. The core premise might be summarized thusly: It is the defining responsibility of an architect to keep the power of architecture out of the hands of those who would use it to lull us into complacency. Anything else is just the building business. To frustrate power and business, then, an architect must pursue power and do business, a complicated, slippery tight-rope that cannot be avoided. “Our topic is urban life. That has nothing to do with urban development.” “In order to survive, a chick has to remember two images. The first is a goose . . . the second is a hawk. . . . Seeing one sign, it stays; seeing the other, it runs. That means, polemically, that if you simplify things too much you might have the point of view of a chick.” •• • “. . . because incongruous aesthetics are political aesthetics.” “. . . authoritarian systems can’t stand contradiction.” Second, Prix announces the fundamental conjecture that fuels Coop Himmelb(l)au’s mission. It is simple: architecture can stage other politics, other democracies, better futures. At that moment, Coop Himmelb(l)au aligns

15 FO R EWO R D

Programmatic Texts

u a l b l e m m i H r p o l o o C ot a Co Is N

ut lor b ith o c a n o t e c t u re w s s i u a it e l b l a n g a rc h a r i a b l e m m i v i t nd pH re a Coo ea, of c oyant a u an id sy, as b a t fa n s . d clou

19 68

24 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

cal hysi . no p has hic one c u re itect ut a psy a rc h b Our lan, nd p ons. g ro u xist. g ballo er e n long pulsati space; s s no re Wall es a b ecome spac t O u r e a r t b e a fa รง a d e . h e Our ce is th fa our

r u O e r u t c e t i o h n c s Ar a H cal i s y h P Plan 1968 d n u o r G

PROG RAM MATIC TEXTS

Selected Project Texts

G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

The space in the suitcase—the mobile space. From a helmet-shaped suitcase, one can inflate an air-conditioned shell, complete with bed.

The pneumatic, transformable space: eight inflatable balloons vary the size of the unit’s space from minimum to maximum volumes.

The pulsating space with the revolving bed, projections, and sound programs. Appropriate fragrances to accompany the changing audiovisual program are blown in through the ventilation system.

The pneumatic prototype is composed of three spaces.

Pneumatic Living Unit: Prototype 1968

Villa Rosa

Design ideas for an architecture that is as variable as a cloud. Pneumatic construction permits changes in volume due to a new “building element”: air. And the new forms— supported through projections of color, sound, and fragrance—influence the quality of experience within the spaces.

SE LECTE D PROJ ECT TEXTS

Lectures

Architecture Must Blaze Lecture by Wolf D. Prix at the Städelschule, Frankfurt 1984

“Ha! A coward wind that strikes stark naked men, but will not stand to receive a single blow. … Would now the wind but had a body; but all the things that most exasperate and outrage mortal man, all these things are bodiless, but only bodiless as objects, not as agents.” This passage from Herman Melville’s Moby Dick is perhaps the most poetic formulation of one aspect of Open Architecture, namely, the psychological aspect. Who or how or what is Open Architecture? Or how can we think, plan, and build in a world that grows more shattered by the day? Should we be afraid of this tattered state? Repress it and escape into a wholesome, ideal world of architecture? Apart from the fact that repression takes up a great deal of energy—energy and intelligence that we would much rather put to better use—this wholesome world of architecture no longer exists, and will never exist again. We don’t believe in the architectural dogmas of the foolish Krier brothers, who try to convince us that the true and beautiful can only be reached by following the old school of architecture. There is nothing true or beautiful in architecture. Or shall we believe the city re-constructors, who escape into the nineteenth century and then speak only of enclosure (which is, incidentally, no coincidence)? Enclosing the block, closing up the street space, enclosing the square? We don’t want a closed-in square, closed house, closed mind, and we certainly don’t want a closed world view. We also don’t believe in the functional functionaries—and their architects—who tell us that everything, above all architecture, is no longer affordable. Nor do we believe the appeasing politicians—and their architects—who tell us that all problems will be resolved through opinion-poll democracy. We don’t believe the housing speculators—and their architects—who, when they speak of savings, never seem to forget about their own pockets, and because they never forget about their own pockets, want to convince us that apartments must be smaller and smaller. Nor do we believe those who preserve the monuments and the conformity ideologues—and their architects—who use laws and regulations to block freedom of fantasy and imagination.

112 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

No. We don’t believe any of these architects. We believe nothing and no one. Because everyone is right but nothing, really nothing is right. All is right and nothing is right: that, too, is an aspect of Open Architecture. Openness—in architecture does that mean that the building has no roof or doors or windows? Does it mean that the building is not finished? No, it doesn’t mean any of that. Openness means: open mind, open eyes, open heart. Awareness. “Open Architecture is not accommodating. Because accommodation and classification are—in architecture as well as in social life—expressions of a rigid, reactionary, and entrenched attitude. An attitude that turns life to ice. Just as propriety and remaining in the past petrify everything that lives. However, architecture lives for seconds at the moment of design. It can never be past, because at this moment it becomes future. The moment of design differentiates and decides. If this moment is free from pressure, cliché, ideology, and formalism, then architecture is free. Then the material constraints crumble. Causality is overturned. Architecture is now.” In recent years, two themes have been foremost in our works: one is the design process, or rather, the design moment. The other is the confrontation with Open Architecture. The Ent-wurf (or, in English, de-sign) The German language is marvelous—it says it all. If you separate the word Entwurf, you get the prefix “ent” and the word “wurf.” Ent is in words such as ent-äußern (renounce), or ent-flammen (stir up), and ent-täuschen (dissapoint), which is not the same as täuschen (deceive). The prefix thus indicates an unconscious, personal process. The word wurf comes from werfen (to throw). Together, they result in a very complex, personal process.

113 LECTU R ES

Interviews

The Desire for Oblique Walls Coop Himmelblau in conversation with Peter Noever about urban living 1986 PETER NOEVER: You, too, have now reacted to the latest residential building activities in Vienna … WOLF D. PRIX: No. Not really. We’ve been dealing with this problem since the late seventies, already at the height of postmodernism. Even back then we were disgusted by the fact that residences were being built to look like palaces but the poor living conditions had not changed at all. PN: Your idea in that regard is similar to that of hobby builders who attempt to make use of all possibilities and everything they have in mind. You’re thinking of a kind of factory building that everyone can design according to his or her preferences and desires. WDP: No, that’s not quite how it is. A house builder dreams the dream of building a home somewhere out in the countryside. Usually it remains a dream. We are concerned with urban housing forms. We like the factory buildings in New York or Berlin that have been remodeled into living spaces. But this took place mainly in desolate, neglected areas. New housing forms of this type are never offered; we think that’s pretty outrageous. It is also hard to understand why, despite the favorable living conditions offered in the so-called desolate urban areas, these areas are eliminated in favor of new planning. PN: Isn’t self-determined living space more likely to be accepted by people who think beyond clichés? WDP: Of course. It was artists who discovered the lofts in New York. They then revitalized a non-residential area in this way. That’s over now—the artists live somewhere else and doctors and lawyers have moved into the lofts. That’s not a panacea, but at least it provides a starting point for a different way of thinking about and living in a city.

228 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

PN: Then, you’re dealing with a confrontation with the actual theme of dwelling and its related social component. Does Vienna’s social housing from the thirties present for you, as it does for many, a glowing example and a challenge? WDP: We’re not interested in that at all. All that’s stale. PN: Then your ideas flow into luxury housing instead … WDP: … that’s a gross misunderstanding. We want to elevate residential building to architecture. It’s not about propagating loft apartments. PN: As always, there is a contradiction to clear up here. On the one hand, you retreat from a design that includes all of the details, yet on the other, you make such a strong mark with the form of the building that most people would shy away from a confrontation with your intentions. WDP: We find that the fascination with details, as wonderful as they are, obscures the real problems. The central problems are that living spaces are too small and too expensive. PN: You don’t necessarily need architects to solve that. WDP: We’re not just putting up a factory building. That would be boring. But if you tilt the factory a little and break it apart a bit, you get a new, three-dimensional setting, interesting living situations. That is what we understand by Open Architecture. Nonetheless, the shell, the space, is not neutral, on the contrary it is incredibly differentiated, without predetermining anything. PN: You determine nothing, and yet you determine a certain situation. WDP: Don’t you find it dreary that a huge housing complex only has three different apartment types? Look at our model. These are, seen like this, two normal building parts, just turned and tilted, broken up a bit and stacked incongruously. In this way, every single apartment has its own unmistakable significance and presents its own area and its own landscape, so to speak. Why are lofts remodeled? Not just to gain living space,

229 I NTE RVI EWS

On Friends and Foes

Art’s Great Wall of China On Christo 1976

“Art works of the future will acquire the dimensions of the Great Wall of China.” Eight years ago in 1968, fortyone year old Christo Javacheff, known as the artist Christo, made this prophecy. Now in 1976, he is again one step closer to his prophecy. In 1968 he wrapped air in a forty-meter-high plastic column. He then wrapped a stretch of beach in Australia that extended for one kilometer (Wrapped Coast). In 1972, he hung a curtain between two mountains in Colorado (Valley Curtain). His biggest project until now is six meters high and forty kilometers long: a shimmering construction made of nylon mesh, stretched between steel supports: Running Fence. For two weeks, Christo’s Running Fence could be viewed approximately seventy kilometers north of San Francisco, California.

386 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

The “poetry of a landscape,” as Christo calls his object, began on a hill near the Californian city of Petaluma and stretched diagonally for forty kilometers, finally sinking into Bodega Bay. An artificial wall gleaming in the sun, billowing out into the wind like a sail, meandered over earth-brown hills, stretched through valleys, crossed more than ten streets and four cities, and passed through forty-eight farmers’ fields. The realization of this object required a huge amount of material, countless assistants, three-anda-half years, and two million dollars. “This artwork consists of forty-two months of team effort, the cooperation of farmers, seventeen court proceedings, and one environmental appraisal.” Attributes that are cited for other artists as “pencil on cardboard, 70 100 cm,” for Christo are “2000 pieces of nylon sheets, each six meters high and twenty meters long. More than 2000 steel poles with bases, and approximately one hundred kilometers of steel cable.” The steel poles were anchored into the ground using machines that were created especially for the task and bound by steel cables with the textile sheets hung between like curtains. The visible object was realized in a relatively short period of time. From April to September, the poles were driven into the ground. Four hundred assistants installed the white sheets, on site, in four days. On September 10, 1976, it was complete: Running Fence was realized. Yet the visible part was only the tip of the iceberg of this project. Although the tangible reality of his ideas is an essential part of his art work, Christo owes his reputation to his perseverance to actually complete the project. Thus, the process of creation is equally as important for the artist as the work itself. The financing, technical equipment, the legal aspects—in short, all things that grow with a project of this kind as soon as it leaves the paper—are all a part of his work.

387 ON FR I E N DS AN D FOES

. . . And Other Texts

A very pretty girl was leaning on the bar. The music was quite loud and it slowly built walls around us, straight through the bar. Walls that you could see everything through, but you couldn’t hear or touch it. Everything at the Hardrock became very white, then slowly clear and transparent. Even the girl at the bar.

With Sam and Bertram at the Hardrock, London 1972

A Feeling in Glass

We had to wait for a table, the music was really loud. Swi, as always, was smoking his cigars he had bought in the airplane. Bertram was telling stories about architecture.

The words dripped like milk over glass panes. “Our plane leaves in twenty minutes.” The feeling was gone, as though the glass had cracked.

442 G ET OFF OF MY CLOU D

Thus, I have arrived at the assumption that museums are something for more mature people. I think our eyesight is worse than it was before, too; therefore, it is particularly necessary to deal with the lighting in museums. We go to a museum because of its content and architecture. To be honest, we go to a museum more for the architecture and as far as that goes, we prefer, let me put it this way, disobedient museums or disobedient architecture, as opposed to the anticipatory obedience that is frequently found in architecture. Artists love obedient museums and hate disobedient ones. Why? We believe architecture is and ought to be the visual expression of this existing social world and is perhaps and must be an expression of future worlds, too. For this reason, architecture in the future will have to deal intensively with

1990

A Museum Is Art

I would like to mention three working theories that should prove that a good, timely museum makes art in its conventional form obsolete and that the money for the art collection should instead go to the building costs and the architectâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s fee. An emotional stock taking could run as follows: we, that is Coop Himmelb(l)au, never liked museums. We used to prefer going to rock concerts, but ever since rock concerts started getting louder and louder (or our hearing worse and worse), we now occasionally escape to a silent, quiet, obliging museum because it is simply more comfortable.

443 . . . AN D OTH E R T EXTS

Flap, inside: Stadtpla(h)nung / © Markus Pillhofer 129 Funder Factory 3, St. Veit/Glan, Austria, 1988–1989 / © Gerald Zugmann 7 Sketch / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 145 Stadtpla(h)nung / © Markus Pillhofer 31 Urban Fictions, 1967 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 41 Heart Space—Astroballon, 1969 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au

105 Form-mutation, 1986 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 392 Wolfdietrich Ziesel / © Hubmann 107 The Heart of a City, Melun-Sénart, France, 1986 / © Gerald Zugmann 108 Like Sugar. White on White, Havana, Cuba, 1994 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au

393 Wilhelm Holzbauer / © Peter Korrak 394 Eric Owen Moss / © Eric Owen Moss Architects 395 Michael Satke / © vyhnalek.com

524

398 Frank O. Gehry / © Thomas Mayer Archive 399 Keith Richards / © www.picturedesk.com 405 Philip Johnson / © Richard Payne FAIA 409 Margarete Schütte-Lihotzky / © Collection of the University of Applied Arts Vienna 410 Gerald Zugmann / © Gerald Zugmann 411 Alvar Aalto / © E. Mäkinen/Alvar Aalto-arkisto/ Alvar Aalto Archives 412 The Poor Boys / © The Poor Boys Enterprise 414 Zvi Hecker / © Büro Zvi Hecker 416 Roland Rainer / © IMAGNO/Harry Weber 418 Enrique Norten / © TEN Arquitectos 420 Günther Feuerstein / © Atelier Feuerstein 423 Hitoshi Abe / © Daici Ano 425 R. M. Schindler / © Used with permission from the Architecture and Design Collection, University Art Museum, University of California, Santa Barbara, USA 426 Steven Holl / © Mark Heitoff 428 Zaha Hadid / © Steve Double 430 Greg Lynn / © Greg Lynn FORM 433 Raimund Abraham / © Aleksandra Pawloff 438 Thom Mayne / © Mark Hanauer 449 Akron Art Museum, Akron, Ohio, USA, 2001–2006 / © Gerald Zugmann 459 The Great Egyptian Museum, Cairo, Egypt, 2002–2003 / © Markus Pillhofer 473 Cafesjian Museum of Contemporary Art, Erewan, Armenia, 2003 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 491 House of Music, Aalborg, Denmark, 2002–2007 / © Markus Pillhofer 496 Diagram / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 505 Central Los Angeles Area High School # 9 for the Visual and Performing Arts, Los Angeles, California, USA, 2002–2007 / © Coop Himmelb(l)au 515 ECB—European Central Bank, Frankfurt am Main, Germany, 2003–2010 / © Gerald Zugmann

Most of the model photos by Gerald Zugmann are taken from the book Blue Universe. Modelle zu Bildern machen / Transforming Models into Pictures. Architectural Projects by Coop Himmelb(l)au, Peter Noever (ed.), Hatje Cantz, Ostfildern-Ruit 2002 (ISBN 3-7757-1240-2).

525