Specks of Light and the Darkness of Manhattan - Bigness as Landscape, Landscape as Bigness by Patricia

Specks of light and the darkness of Manhattan:

Patricia Schleeh MSc Architectural & Urban Design 2015/2016

Bigness as Landscape and Landscape as Bigness

Few people have the imagination for reality. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

index

introduction

timeline

Andrea Branzi - Rem Koolhaas

comparison

conclusion

image references

references

bibliography

introduction The general urban condition is getting more and more complex, and both Andrea Branzi and Rem Koolhaas are highly interested in this condition and the role of designers within that constantly transforming urban condition. The landscape or the physiography has got a renewed importance towards architecture and design. Not only is it the origin and the ground; it is what unites and inspires. The infinite the non-relation to human scale, if seen as a whole it would lose the myth. However, the landscape is like humans constantly transforming, nowhere exactly the same, influenced by wind and light and diverse in its details and natures. There is a current relevance due to the fact that landscape has been disregarded and is slowly disappearing under a carpet of architecture and infrastructure. The constantly moving almost fluid landscape, and the stagnant architecture within the complex urban condition. The landscape if urban or not is an almost ubiquitous carpet of architecture and territories; linked through the territoriality of things. A flower blown far away from its original place by the wind enlarges its territoriality; different from the one before, influenced by its new environment, exposed to its new host. It is a sharing, giving, and taking of space; the territoriality of nature, the built environment, and humans through movement. Landscape seen through different scales is the key to an overall understanding of the territorialities and the accompanying enzymatic urbanism - the scale of the flower seen through human, architectural or urban scale. It is crucial for landscape architecture to analyse the environment, its enzymatic components and their circle of movement, which means looking at the territoriality of a specific part of landscape or territory through different scales in the programme required. It is not a question of landscape in architecture or architecture in landscape it is a question of how to collectively occupy ground. The role of a designer is to create a quality of the environment by using different scales, an analysis of the territory and the programme, and furthermore by giving up control through a comprehension of the enzymatic processes in this urban environment. ‘The universe of objects does not have any relationship with the prebuilt environment anymore. It develops and expands itself.’1 the idea of giving up control, letting the designed object or architecture just develop in their surroundings by the events of the city - Development through the change of program, expansion through the flow of people. This statement could be from Rem Koolhaas but it is in fact from Andrea Branzi. These two very different personalities offer a significant understanding of architecture in terms of scale, scope, and the reach of various impulses through architecture and landscape. In this dissertation, we will look at both architects and their work in terms of landscape and bigness. It is structured in three parts, starting with the analysis of a timeline settling both architects in relation to their background and history. Furthermore, a close look at Branzi’s Object-Landscape and Koolhaas’ Bigness; and beyond that a composition of similarities and differences, relations and places, scales, and dimensions. The dissertation’s general composition is set up as a two columns comparison with alternating bridging paragraphs, headlines, and quotes. Can we see landscape through Bigness and Bigness through landscape? What change can we expect if Bigness is used in landscape and its territories? Nevertheless, the conclusion reflects the main parts; it closes and explains some of the inquiries and still it opens up further questions towards the two individuals. A contrasting juxtaposition of Andrea Branzi and Rem Koolhaas held together by landscape, bigness, and their shared concern about urbanism.

Branzi Andrea (2012) l’architettura nelle città di oggi ‘soffre’, youtube video, transl. by Vivoda Alice

(1) (2)

Andrea Branzi, 2014 Rem Koolhaas, 2014 7

Le Corbusier *1887 +1965

1938

Andrea Branzi was born in Florence, Italy

1961: Archigram (London, UK) based at AA: P.Cook, W.Chalk, R.Herron, D.Greene, M.Webb, D.Crompton rethinking the relationship of technology, society, architecture

1966: Archizoom Associati (Florence) A.Branzi, G.Coretti, P.Deganello, M. Morozzi; design, architecture, urban visions, Italian Radical Architecture movement, superarchitettura

Rem Koolhaas was 1944 born in Rotterdam, Netherlands

1966: Superstudio (Florence) A.Natalini, C.Toraldo di Francia Italian Radical Architecture movement, superarchitettura

1966 graduates in Florence, project Luna-Park

O.M.Ungers *1926 +2007 studies TH Karlsruhe teacher/chairman at Cornell University

starts at Archi- 1968 tectural Association, London 1969: Superstudio Continuous Monument

1973 Branzi moves to Milan 1974 dissolution Archizoom

1972: Italy- the new domestic landscape at MOMA New York

1975: OMA (Rotterdam) R.Koolhaas, M. Vriesendorp, Z. Zenghelis & E.Zenghelis(Koolhaas teacher at AA); Exodus, or the Voluntary Prisoners of architecture

further studies 1972 at Cornell University, New York

Peter Eisenman *1932 New York guest lecturer at AA

1978: Superstudio abandoned working as a collective Alessandro Guerriero *1943, Milan, founder Alchimia, co-founder Domus Academy

1979 Studio Alchimia, design & manufacturing studio

Delirious New 1978 York , written while at NYC (Peter Eisenman)

timeline Andrea Branzi was born in Florence in 1938, he studied architecture in his hometown and moved to Milan in 1973, where he still lives and works as designer and theorist. Among many guest lectures at international Universities he was also a teacher at the Politecnico in Milan until 2009. Branzi was not only part of the Italian Radical Architecture Movement but he was also co-founder of the Archizoom Associati in Florence. The group around Archizoom was interested in contemporary architectural theory, among many successful design projects Archizoom also collaborated with the other Florence-based group Superstudio to create superarchitettura.

Rem Koolhaas was born in Rotterdam in 1944. Architecture was not his first passion, he was more interested in making films and in journalism, interviewing different artists and architects for the magazine Haagse seemed to have persuaded him: Koolhaas started his studies at the Architectural Association at 1968. A time when a new critical thinking was in the air; inspired by groups like Archizoom, Superstudio or Archigram; Rem Koolhaas worked together with Elia Zenghelis, Zoe Zenghelis and Madelon Vriesendrop on projects like Exodus – or the voluntary prisoners of architecture and later on Delirious New York.

Two years after Andrea Branzi’s graduation in Florence, Rem Koolhaas started his studies at the Architectural Association in London. It did not take a long time for them to meet; Italy was the European hot spot for a new thinking, escaping the clasp of tradition, taking on new impacts like the pop-culture and rejecting a ‘finalized architecture’.2 Their ideas received first European then global recognition ‘Students and staff at the Architectural Association were keenly interested in their ideas, and many, including … Rem Koolhaas, Jenny Lowe, Bernhard Tschumi … were inspired by the designs produced by these Florence-based architects, who also visited the AA as guest lecturers.’3

2 3

Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.5 Stauffer Marie Theres (2002) Utopian Reflections, Reflected Utopias: Urban Design by Archizoom and Superstudio, AA Files, No 47, London: AA School of Architecture

1983 Branzi is co-founder of Domus Academy and editor of MODO

1982: OMA, competition for- Parc de la Vilette 1987: OMA, Ville Nouvelle Melun-SĂŠnart Masterplan 1992: OMA, Kunsthal, Rotterdam

Alvin Boyarsky *1928 +1990 Teaching & chairman at AA

2001 Andrea Branzi, Ernesto Bartolini, Lapo Lani, Master Plan for Eindhoven

Rem Koolhaas & Bruce Mau, Jennifer Sigler, Hans Werlemann: S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York

1995

1998: AMO, think tank within OMA, research and design studio

Rem Koolhaas 2005 co-founded Volume Magazine

2001 Luna Park II

2006 Weak and Diffuse Modernity

- The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century

Yona Friedman *1923 mobile architecture, spatial city

2008 Open Enclosures, Fondation Cartier

2010 Branziâ&#x20AC;&#x2DC;s Weak Modernity, Q+A at the Architectural Association featured in AA Exhibition

2016

Andrea Branzi lives and designs in Milan

Rem Koolhaas at the AA, 2007 lecture: recent works Bernard Tschumi *1944 former teacher at AA competition for Parc de la Vilette 1983

2013: OMA, Koolhaas, De Rotterdam

Rem Koolhaas, AMO, 2014 Harvard Graduate School of Design, elements

timeline Italy was politically unstable and troubled at the time, where in 1966 not only one group formed but two. Branzi explains how ‘the Italian case’4 (make use of negative factors and transform them into something entirely new) might have been part of this formation ‘It is from this inner conflict that its great richness of expression and experiment was born. The contradiction is unresolved and perhaps, luckily, unresolvable.’5 Superstudio founded by Adolfo Natalini and Christiano Toraldo di Francia were part of the Italian Radical Architecture Movement and mainly criticised mainstream architecture, which according to them ignored environmental and social problems. Their most famous work is the Continous Monument in 1969. Archizoom was founded by Andrea Branzi, Gilberto Corretti, Paolo Deganello and Massimo Morozzi. They all graduated together and were also part of the Italian Radical Movement, which brought them to their vision of radical anti-design. Design, architecture, large-scale urban visions and an ironic response to Archigram’s consumeristic logic; their desire to detach architecture from politics. Branzi explains ‘…politics has always been the national sport of Italians.’6 These radical groups influenced architecture forever, a shift from approaching architecture as a static building to identifying architecture as a form of cultural critic, social and political practice.

4 5 6 7

Branzi Andrea (1994) in The Italian heim Mudeum Publications, p.596 Branzi Andrea (1994) in The Italian heim Mudeum Publications, p.596 Branzi Andrea (1994) in The Italian heim Mudeum Publications, p.602 Verschaffel, Bart (2013) Reading Rem p.1-3

Archigram, a group formed in 1961, based at the Architectural Association, was, first of all, working on a magazine in which they published little essays and paper projects. The group was rethinking the relationship between technology, society, and architecture; in addition, the members of the group (all graduates at the AA) were not happy with the way architecture was taught and tried to stimulate the general opinion through critical thinking. Influenced and inspired by European architects, colleagues, teachers, and lecturers at the AA; Rem Koolhaas went to New York to work on Delirious New York. First with his teacher Oswald Mathias Ungers at the Cornell University and then with Peter Eisenman at the NYC University for the final editorial act. Together with Elia Zenghelis, Zoe Zenghelis, and Madelon Vriesendrop, Rem Koolhaas founded the architectural firm OMA in 1975, first working only on critical paper projects but quickly gaining international recognition through their work on architecture, urbanism, and cultural analysis. AMO is the think tank within OMA, a research and design studio, which goes beyond architecture. It could be called the ‘mirror image of OMA’7 expanding architecture towards broader issues around culture, identity, politics, media, technology, fashion, and organisation.

metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggen metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggen metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggen Koolhaas, Architectural Histories 1(1):12,

timeline

Andrea Branzi and Rem Koolhaas are guest lecturers at the AA, their projects are either educational material for current and future architecture students or used as examples for a critical and well-composed architecture. Their influence on today‘s work is immense. Andrea Branzi and Rem Koolhaas working and performing in two parallel lines, with relations and ideas crossing and connecting their professional career. It is apparent that Le Corbusier has been an inspiration. Especially his later work and the projects in Italy had an impact on Andrea Branzi. The Venice Hospital was one of Le Corbusier’s last designs before his death in August 1965. Although never build it shows a very unusual approach to the city of Venice ‘The horizontal project doesn’t aim to become a landmark, but to work as an extension of the tissue of the city.’8 (image3) The competition for the Italian Pavillion at the Universal Exhibition in Osaka (image4) is doing exactly the same, also never realised, it still extends the urban tissue through architecture. Critically looking at the urban condition; a distributed metropolitan landscape; an urban void. Rem Koolhaas is rendering a pattern of the in-between and creates a vital design part to the draft of the urban landscape. Urban sprawl and complexity through urban voids in the Ville Nouvelle Melun-Sénart (image5). The control and the development of the urban landscape. Rem Koolhaas may give him the title of the first ‘starchitect’10. This way or another Le Corbusier is a small fragment in Branzi’s and in Koolhaas’s way of thinking architecture and design.

8 10

Fabrizi Maria Bruna (May 18, 2014) The Building is the City: Le Corbusier’s Un built Hospital in Venice, WordPress, socks-studio.com Koolhaas Rem (May 18, 2007) Recent Work, AA Lecture Video Archive, Architectural Association Inc. 2016

(3) Le Corbusier, 1964, Hospital for Venice (4) Archizoom Associati, 1969, Italian Pavillion, Universal Exhibition Osaka (5) OMA, 1987, Void, Ville Nouvelle Melun-Sénart, Paris 13

Andrea Branzi

Rem Koolhaas

Branzi is one of the old gentlemen of the Italian design. However, his work with Archizoom and the critique on modern Urbanism is still up to date; He says ‘I am not an architect. I am interested in human history, actuality, processes and the project which is located among those things.’11 It seems Branzi does not go with the time he rather waits for the time to come back to him. His installations and projects show a poetic and detailed understanding of space and cosmos. The scales can be misinterpreted, then again no scale can mean every scale, and it opens up the enclosure to entirely new possibilities; through scale and time ‘Sometimes when you do a work you don’t understand why but then 40 years later projects are revaluated from actuality, long times always pay back.’12

It is the year 1994 the so-called architectural big bang is long ago. The advanced building technologies changed architecture fundamentally, not only in design, detail or material but architecture itself became a global captivation, more approachable, experimental, collective and more incomprehensible at the same time. Why is Rem Koolhaas so interested in Bigness now and how does he understand the aspect of Bigness in architectural and urban aspects? Koolhaas seems to speak about Bigness with an almost ironic point of view. As if the extremely immoderate size alone makes it impossible to take it seriously. It might not be the degree of seriousness that makes him appear that way but the variety and quantity of definitions and speculations needed to explain Bigness - the irony of Big.

Andrea Branzi’s work on design is timeless. In his eyes designers are researchers and explorers with a ‘wide range of activities that move from design to architecture, and then on towards the city.’13 An architect can design furniture and a furniture designer can design architecture; the design is the issue. Pier Carlo Bontempi, the founder of Alchimia, says ‘if a man sits on the ground the whole world beneath becomes his chair.’14 Thus the issue is not only design but also the perspective. With this in mind, Branzi’s The New Charter of Athens - a manifesto on the post-modern city in 2010, becomes more coherent. Branzi calls the second suggestion ‘great transformation through microstructures’15 with microstructures he means the domestic apparently useless objects, the things

Koolhaas formed five theorems to analyse Bigness. Number one, he points out that a single or even a combination of architectural gestures can’t control a big building. The size generates the autonomy of parts within, however, these parts remain committed to the Whole. Number two; the need for mechanical inventions and the dependency on elevators makes architecture in terms of composition, scale or proportion unsettled or more precise: useless. Number three; what you see vs. what you get. The core of the building and the façade move further and further away from each other to a point where the façade stands for itself. Number four; Big buildings are not good or bad – they are big. Number five; all these breaks result in the final and most important break:

11 12 13 14 15

(6) (7)

Andrea Branzi (2012) l’architettura secondo me, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2012) vi spiego perchè l’oggetto inutile è indispensabile, Wise society, transl. by Vivoda Alice Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Tha mes and Hudson, p.144 Bontempi Pier Carlo & Gregori Giorgio (1985) Alchimia, Milan: Idea Books, p.9 Branzi Andrea (2010) For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens Charter in Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.110

Andrea Branzi, 2008, Gazebo, Fondation Cartier Rem Koolhaas, 1998, Maison a Bordeaux 15

Andrea Branzi

Rem Koolhaas

and tools which are used in everyday life. In an interview, Branzi says ‘Every big civilization always invested in things that look pointless like literature, art, music, and painting. You would say, what are they for – nothing they are useless but they are absolutely indispensable.’16 In his eyes, the role of a designer is to create an environment ‘quality through things which are small in dimension but very important for the anthropological point of view.’17 In other words, the microstructures within the environment are what makes the difference in design and quality of space ‘the reality in which every civilization invests in’18. The way architecture used to be seen as a formation of boxes and volumes is now outdated and replaced by the details and fragments of the smallest most useless things, technology, infrastructure, and communication.

Bigness is independent from the urban landscape. The Big building finds itself in a parallel existence. ‘Its subtext fuck context’21 Bigness as a double polemic with two points of defence - integration and concentration vs. the Whole and the Real as useable categories for architectural friction. Dismantlement: the smallest, most different fragments and their uniqueness seem to get lost. However, the concentration of these fragments turns from disarray to a system. Disappearance: the opposite of Bigness, asking the question of disappearing architecture and virtuality in the world of virtual reality. ‘Bigness is a theoretical domain at this fin de siecle in a landscape of disarray, disassembly, dissociation, disclamation, the attraction of Bigness is its potential to reconstruct the Whole, resurrect the Real, reinvent the collective, reclaim maximum possibility.’22

Speaking about territory means speaking about architecture, about the ground, and about movement. ‘design has become the fundamental planning instrument used to bring about a real modification in the quality of life and of the territory.’19 The constant movement is global but most visible in the metropolis. The NoStop city a vision for the future by Archizoom explains best how Branzi sees territories in an urban context – architecture with no boundaries ‘crossable perimeters’20, fading contrasts between interior and exterior and public and private. He points out the importance of movement and shiftings - nothing should be stagnant; especially not architecture, which plays the

Thirdly, when if not by writing about Bigness is it possible to connect a new beginning with the return to alchemy? Bigness is through its size and relentlessness ‘the one architecture that engineers the unpredictable’23 and furthermore, the one architecture that represents, depends on and authorises freedom. In the same way, the Big building works as a city within a city. A container of most diverse events, it can contain, sustain, develop and organize ‘their independence and interdependence withing a larger entity’24 Everything within this container of Bigness is open for relations, alterations, and expansion. Out of various programmatic elements unpredictable events form ‘a model of program

16,17,18 Andrea Branzi (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice 19 Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.66 20 Branzi Andrea (2010) For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens Charter in Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.111 21 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 502 22 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 510 23,24 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 511

(8) (9)

Archizoom Associati, 1970, No-Stop City Madelon Vriesendorp, 1984, 10 years after love 17

Andrea Branzi

Rem Koolhaas

role of the territory of experience. The in between territories where the flow of people, information, communication and the importance of the useless things find their temporary landing. The main infrastructure of the current time is the network, independent from the grid of the city, independent from the territories that form the metropolitan environment. Branzi points out that architecture is far away from where he would like it to be, he says ‘Architecture needs to start working on these elements in order to attain a level of flexibility, transparency, and elasticity, as well as a form of poetic expression.’26

specks

light

and

‘There is no place left that is not in some way tied to the city and its patterns of consumption.’27 Andrea Branzi is concerned about disappearing voids in the cities and a too high density not only through architecture but through information, commerce, and media (image11). What is more, Branzi assumes everything is urban; his designed projects include a sense of infinity - a rich landscape. The lines between urban and suburban do not exist; Branzi does not use walls or borders but indicates the unpredictable shift through communication or networks. The landscape is the visual event that occurs when looking at the diverse and multiple territories of the urban layers. Branzi’s arrangement of elements in the landscape is a repetition and a proposal for the freedom of movement. Branzi says ‘Man stands defenseless before this overwhelming freedom;’28 a condition created through the extreme pos

matic alchemy’25 However, Bigness is not creating relations it ‘regulates the intensities of programmatic coexistence.’29 The vast number of events is only possible if there is space for it to occur. Fourthly, Rem Koolhaas writes about Bigness being only an instrument. The size of the building is the architectural way of looking at it. Any other form of Bigness means giving up control, surrender, the collaboration of strength and impersonal neutrality. Bigness depends on a huge number of factors and still constantly rises towards independence by just being big.

the

darkness

Manhattan

Bigness as the mirror of the city - there are no relations with the classical city. The classical city is now the remnant of Bigness while Bigness itself is urban. Architecture is the villain that exhausts the city, steals its potential, and frustrates a flourishing identity. Despite its size, Bigness is the reserved hero of the metropolis. Bigness stands for itself as urban being; almost as if it is a natural occurrence within the metropolitan landscape. Bigness=urbanism vs. architecture30 The architectural landscape of the future will be an accumulation of containers and forms containing the fragments and events of the city ‘The containers of Bigness will be landmarks in a post-architectural landscape’31; creating an endless sequence of unique systems held apart by their envelops - intensifying and weakening the relations within. In the same way, Bigness treats architecture - it treats the city. The Big building is a diagram of the

25 26 27 28 29 30,31

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512 Branzi Andrea (2008) Open Enclosures, Paris, New York: Thames & Hudston Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Tha mes and Hudson, p.66 Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.168 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 515

(10) (11)

Koolhaas, Vriesendorp, Zenghelis, 1977, Exodus or the Voluntary Prisoners Andrea Branzi, 2014, 50 years of design, Musée des Arts Decoratifs, Bordeaux 19

Andrea Branzi

Rem Koolhaas

sibilities of the metropolis, not palpable but in the need of a design that brings clarity. Additional, the various elements speak for different scales. The elements in the landscape as part of the landscape. Branzi’s operation always includes multiple scales; showing the extended disciplinary limits of design.

city, organized and located by the city’s infrastructure. What if the city is covered in Big buildings and each building represents the city? Is the actual city still the city or is it the country that contains the cities? The metropolis ground as the immense mount for the urban landscape.

Branzi represents landscape as a uniform condition all over the globe. An urban carpet of grids with no hills, mountains or valleys. A paradigm of urban landscape; Waldheim calls it ‘contemporary urbanism as a field of potentials, shaped by weak forces and spontaneous programmatic eruptions.’32 The term landscape is usually defined by what can be seen from a viewpoint; innumerable impressions to a singular moment in time. ‘Freed from the armor of its own character, architecture must become an open structure, accessible to intellectual mass production as the only force symbolizing the collective landscape.’33 Regarding size the infinite resonates in

In a moment when Manhattan’s Skyline is illuminated, with the sun going down in the back of the skyscrapers, the buildings draw shapes of mountains and valleys in the sky. No details are visible, no materiality, not even colour. The silhouettes are broken by the light – the metropolitan landscape clearer than ever. The skyscrapers with their ‘exhausted and outdated typology’34 already manage to create a landscape of concrete, steel and glass, it seems insubstantial to think a Big building will not. It does not even need the light or the right angle to look like a landscape. Their sheer size are rendering it to a metropolitan landscape between concrete ground and the freedom of the sky.

Andrea Branzi’s work. On the one hand, a representational understanding of infinity created through reflection. On the other hand mass production as the critical cultural turning point in Italy’s design history. However, landscape in this context has a deeper understanding. The landscape is only the visual environment – a transparent container for the useless, nevertheless, the invisible navel that holds everything together. The view of landscape varies if the viewpoint changes, and it completely disappears at night only little specks of light from a lamp or a candle will be visible.

Rem Koolhaas writes about many diverse things. He questions himself and is using surrealism as a form of understanding and expression in his own predictions and theories. However, one thing seems to pop up in almost every theoretical and practical work: size. Mainly in terms of Bigness, but also in the maximum importance, maximum difference, maximum quality, and maximum research. Ingrid Böck calls it ‘an unprecedented richness, multiplicity, and programmatic diversity.’35

32 33 34 35

(12) (13) (14)

Mohsen Mostafavi & Gareth Doherty (2010) Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.119 Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.51 Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.312 Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.299

OMA, 2001, competition UN City, New York City Andrea Branzi, 2004, Blister Collection OMA, 2001, competition UN City, New York City 21

comparing

landscape

Andrea Branzi and Rem Koolhaas represent the ground, or landscape in an extremely opposite way. While Branzi uses the form of a grid in different scales; creating a tartan like urban fabric (image15), Koolhaas works with islands seeing the connecting infrastructure as voids in the urban tissue (image16). Branzi’s vision of a new landscape is the mobile landscape of people ‘A rapturous number of people who move freely through the constructed world and determine an absolutely new landscape phenomenon.’36 The expressive human presence invading spaces and places inducing new events and qualities. Branzi’s landscape seen as Bigness means looking at it from a different point of view; it is a Big landscape based on the idea of microstructures and scales, everything is part of the urban landscape. The big and enormous amounts of things, architecture, people, communication, and structures build a landscape of bigness. ‘Architecture no longer defines a permanent segmentation of space, but becomes a theater of vast elastic modification.’37 Architecture is part of this landscape, it is defined by the landscape as much as the landscape is defined by the architecture. Big buildings may create unpredictable events, go through programmatic changes and take on information from its environment. Landscape reacts in the same way – natural disaster (unpredictable and big), agriculture and seasonal changes, and natural shifting of flora and fauna. Nevertheless, it is not only in the scale of nature we can see Bigness but also in the dimensions of the city. Ingrid Böck points out ‘with the growth of the city and the increasing distance between core and fringe, the sphere of influence becomes both expanded and diluted’38 The Big building’s envelope can be seen as the city’s fringe while the fragments contained inside stand for the core. In that case, the building takes on the entire landscape of the city through its diagrammatic composition. ‘architecture makes decisions, determines certain orders, and inevitably leads to the reduction of freedom and opinions.’39

36 37 38 39

(15) (16)

Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.28 Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.24 Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.292 Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.22

Andrea Branzi, Ernesto Bartolini, Lupo Lani, 2000, Master Plan for Eindhoven Rem Koolhaas, 1994, Delirious New York 23

comparing

alchemy

Branzi says ‘Complexity may also lead to the mystery and the alchemy of encounters, to the uncontrolled and uncontrollable truth of the chance god.’40 Koolhaas says ‘programmatic elements react with each other to create new events – Bigness returns to a model of programmatic alchemy.’41 Branzi speaks about the primitives, the people that create the constantly moving identity of the city, the alchemy of encounters is a uncontrollable clash of people or identities. Encounter describes a peaceful meeting of two or more identities or objects. Branzi does not describe what the alchemic process might create, however, we know it is something unforeseen, a new occurrence, a mystery. Is the final event positiv or negative? Does it matter? The production of space where new coincidental creations (=alchemy) are possible, architecture is on its right path – interconnecting, chance of event. Koolhaas sees alchemy in a slightly bigger scale. The programmatic elements are not people but different functions and uses of space. Alchemy is not intended but it is possible. Furthermore, the possible event through programmatic alchemy might occur due to the movement of identities or the smallest object within; it stays open of how these programs interact, however, the infrastructure, communication, and dimensions are surely part of it. Obviously, Branzi and Koolhaas had the same idea to call encounters and reacting elements alchemy, however they understand its meaning in a different scale and a different context. Branzi’s idea of microstructures speaks of the importance of the smallest apparently unnecessary items. All elements of this world are dependent on each other and have their place in micro- and macrocosm. These things might be useless but they are absolutely indispensable.42 Branzi puts it in Oscar Wild’s hands when he says ‘take away everything from me but not the unnecessary.’43 On the other hand, Koolhaas’ idea of small parts (core) and the Big part (envelope) creating the ultimate architecture. The smallest functional particles in Bigness suggest a rich composition of chaos, despite the fact that every part is put in its place. Koolhaas says ‘the attraction of Bigness is its potential to reconstruct the Whole, resurrect the Real, reinvent the collective and reclaim maximum possibility.’44 However the Whole and the Real work only through the autonomy of parts within. The small elements react with each other to create new events; there is a demand for interaction but also the fact of the dimension and size to keep them apart. Koolhaas speaks about Big buildings and says ‘Its interiors accommodate compositions of program and activity that change constantly and independently of each other’.45 These parts are autonomous – in their multiplicity, they create an accumulation of possible events, in solitude, they are an efficient fragment of the Whole (building, Bigness). With this in mind, Branzi does exactly the same in terms of agriculture and their territories; he calls it ‘the autonomous territory with respect to the urban context’.46 Shifting territories, autonomous but not stagnant and not without relation to the Whole (urban, infinity).

40 41 42 43 44,45 46

Branzi Andrea (1986) We are the Primitives, Design Issue Vol.3 No1, The MIT Press, p.25 Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512 Andrea Branzi (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2012) vi spiego perchè l’oggetto inutile è indispensabile, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512 Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.40

(17) (18)

Andrea Branzi, Ernesto Bartolini, Lupo Lani, 2000, Master Plan for Eindhoven OMA, 1987, Ville Nouvelle Melun-Sénart, France 25

comparing

size

Branzi’s goal is the infinite, which contains necessarily also the imperfect and the fragmented. His installations are often small rectangular, highly detailed urban environments framed by mirrors on three or more sides (image19). He uses physics and the principle of reflection to create infinity and is still just producing one fragment of the Whole. An attempt to include everything, his compositions show the small details of human behaviour and the small object they need to exist, and the vastness of the urban carpet, which extends until out of view. However, he does not focus on architecture, he says ‘When we define things, things already change’47 almost as if he wants to only hold on to what is not going to change. Branzi’s design work is a paradigm so extreme, but it is more a formula than a paradigm. We have been interpreting a lot about Bigness, the meaning, the different ways of interpretation and its advantages, however, there has not been any kind of criticism. ‘Bigness or the problem of Large’48 the title alone is a contradiction in terms. Bigness as the last hero of the metropolis next to the problem of Large, that is all the negative aspects Bigness brings with it. The loss of the art in architecture, the sacrifice of control, the extremeness, and size. However, the architecture renders into a frame for the landscape. De Rotterdam (image20) completed in 2013, outstands as a structure of Bigness - the fragment of the metropolitan landscape.

47 48

Branzi Andrea (2012) l’architettura nelle città di oggi ‘soffre’, youtube video, transl. by Vivoda Alice Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press

(19) (20)

Andrea Branzi, 2016, Le metropoli primitiva, Nivola Museum Rem Koolhaas & OMA, 2013, De Rotterdam 27

conclusion ‘we insist that at no time have we presumed to have produced a designed landscape. We have confirmed ourselves to devising a framework capable of absorbing an endless series of further meanings, extensions, or intentions, without entailing compromises, redundancies, or contradictions.’49 This quote from Rem Koolhaas in Congestion without Matter an analysis of the Park de la Villette (image21) competition, is an example of how to describe one architect through the other. Koolhaas writes how design is not creating a final product of landscape but a framework, which is open for change/ chance and coincidence. Similarly, Branzi understands design as a creation of infinite prospects; a further understanding of scale and time. In his exhibition, Open Enclosures for the Fondation Cartier (image22,23) Andrea Branzi set up installations, which represent exactly the framework Koolhaas was mentioning. A framework, which is capable of absorbing various items, spaces, and the unforeseen; visitors and light as the dynamic and fluid instance. For the most part, Branzi and Koolhaas describe the same; microstructures, and an atomised landscape of architectural fragments. On the one hand, the flow of people, the urban tissue as infinite territory and the importance of freedom through space without stagnant boxes of architecture. On the other hand, the city within the building, the importance of the metropolis and its sea of skyscrapers and bigness. The only real difference is the scale. However, Branzi’s focus lies on the fluidity and the movement, architecture is taking a back seat. Koolhaas is interested in the city, Bigness is not architecture, it is part of the city, so again the importance of architecture seems diminished. In spite of their attitude towards architecture, both of them point towards a complex urban condition, which needs a rethinking of architecture. After all, the importance of thinking landscape and architecture is crucial for a future-oriented urbanism. The ground, the architecture, the fragments of the programme, the flow of people, and their indispensable items all together as a collective landscape. A shared occupation of ground – each fragment open for alchemic processes, events and occurrences. Germano Celant said ‘It is a continuous wave that dances according to a wild and domestic, heretical and productive, oblique and linear animality, in order to create a universe of design that is not flat, that emerges and arises, full of unforeseeable exuberance and rainbow-coloured surprises.’50 What if we use Bigness in landscape? What does it matter? The landscape itself is big, suburban or metropolitan, the landscape is bigger and wider than eyes can capture. At the same time, landscape is not being thought of in terms of Bigness. Landscape needs to be Big in architecture and detail, the connection to the ground and the reflection of landscape through design. ‘Design has become the fundamental planning instrument used to bring about a real modification in the quality of life and of the territory.’51 It does not have to be a Big design, important is the enclosure of Bigness in landscape through thinking and understanding.

49 50 51

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p.934 Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.7 Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.66

(21) (22) (23)

Rem Koolhaas & OMA, 1982, Parc de la Villette, Paris Andrea Branzi, 2008, Open Enclosures, Paris Andrea Branzi, 2008, Open Enclosures, Paris 29

image references

cover images: BRANZI, Andrea (December 12, 2014) archiobjects http://archiobjects.org/andrea-branzi-thoughts-and-teories/ KOOLHAAS, Rem (2014) by Ralph Mecke, Schierke Artists http://schierke.com/artists/all/427186/

1 BRANZI, Andrea (11 June 2014) Domus, Design Library, Milano http://www.domusweb.it/it/notizie/2014/06/11/andrea_branzi.html 2

KOOLHAAS, Rem (June 20, 2014) 2016 Submarine Channel http://www.submarinechannel.com/profiles/profiles-rem-koolhaas-on-lagos/

3 LE CORBUSIER (1964) Hospital for Venice, May 18, 2014, WordPress http://socks-studio.com/2014/05/18/the-building-is-the-city-le-corbusiers-unbuilt- hospital-in-venice/ 4

BRANZI, Andrea & ARCHIZOOM Associati (1996) Italian Pavillion, Universal Exhibiti on Osaka, Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.43

5 OMA (1987) Ville Nouvelle Melun Senart www.oma.eu/projects/ville-nouvelle-melun-senart 6 BRANZI, Andrea (February 13, 2008) Gazebo, Fondation Cartier http://www.dezeen.com/2008/02/13/andrea-branzi-at-fondation-cartier/ 7 KOOLHAAS, Rem (1998) Maison a Bordeaux http://oma.eu/projects/maison-a-bordeaux 8 ARCHIZOOM Associati (1970) No-Stop City, Milano http://www.abitare.it/it/architettura/2010/01/25/non-stop-thinking/ 9 VRIESENDORP, Madelon & KOOLHAAS, Rem (1984) 10 years after love http://www.geneveactive.ch/article/la-sexualite-de-lachitecture-par-made lon-vriesendorp/ 10

KOOLHAAS, Vriesendorp, Zenghelis (1977) Exodus or the Voluntary Prisoners

11 BRANZI, Andrea (October 2014) 50 years of design, MusĂŠe des Arts Decoratifs, Bordeaux, Pleased to meet you http://www.domusweb.it/en/design/2014/10/24/andrea_branzi.html 12 OMA, 2001, competition UN City, New York City http://oma.eu/projects/un-city

image references

13 BRANZI, Andrea (February 28, 2004) Blister Collection http://www.designboom.com/design/andrea-branzi-blister-collection/ 14 OMA (2001) competition UN City, New York City http://oma.eu/projects/un-city 15 BRANZI, Andrea & BARTOLINI, Ernesto & LANI, Lupo (2000) Master Plan for Eindho ven, Published on May 17, 2014 http://archiobjects.org/evolution-of-urban-planning-from-le-corbusier-to- andrea-branzi/ 16 KOOLHAAS, Rem (1994) Delirious New York http://contemporarycity.org/2014/04/koolhaas-rem-2/ 17 BRANZI, Andrea & BARTOLINI, Ernesto & LANI, Lupo (2000) Masterplan Strijp Philips, Eindhoven, Netherlands www.archilovers.com 18 OMA & KOOLHAAS, Rem (1987) Ville Nouvelle Melun Senart www.oma.eu/projects/ville-nouvelle-melun-senart 19 BRANZI, Andrea (2016) Le metropoli primitiva, Nivola Museum www.bmiaa.com/andrea-branzi-la-metropoli-primitiva-at-nivolo-museum/ 20 OMA (2013) De Rotterdam, Netherlands, www.oma.eu/projects/de-rotterdam 21 OMA & KOOLHAAS, Rem, 1982, Masterplan, Parc de la Villette, City of Paris www.oma.eu/projects/parc-de-la-villette 22

BRANZI, Andrea (2008) Photografies Patrick Gries, Fondation Cartier pour lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;art contemporain, Open Enclosures, Paris, New York: Thames & Hudston

for further references please contact via email patricia@schleeh-vs.de

references 1

Branzi Andrea (2012) l’architettura nelle città di oggi ‘soffre’, youtube video, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.5

3 Stauffer Marie Theres (2002) Utopian Reflections, Reflected Utopias: Urban Design by Archizoom and Superstudio, AA Files, No 47, London: AA School of Architecture 4

Branzi Andrea (1994) in The Italian metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggenheim Mudeum Publications, p.596

Branzi Andrea (1994) in The Italian metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggenheim Mudeum Publications, p.602

Verschaffel, Bart (2013) Reading Rem Koolhaas, Architectural Histories 1(1):12, p.1-3

Fabrizi Maria Bruna (May 18, 2014) The Building is the City: Le Corbusier’s Unbuilt Hospital in Venice, WordPress, socks-studio.com

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press

Koolhaas Rem (May 18, 2007) Recent Work, AA Lecture Video Archive, Architectural Association Inc. 2016

Andrea Branzi (2012) l’architettura secondo me, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Andrea Branzi (2012) vi spiego perchè l’oggetto inutile è indispensabile, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.144

Bontempi Pier Carlo & Gregori Giorgio (1985) Alchimia, Milan: Idea Books, p.9

Branzi Andrea (2010) For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens Charter in Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.110

Branzi Andrea (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice

17 18

Branzi Andrea (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice Branzi Andrea (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.66

Branzi Andrea (2010) For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens Charter in Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.111

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 502

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 510

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 511

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512

Branzi Andrea (2008) Open Enclosures, Paris, New York: Thames & Hudston

references 27

Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.66

Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.168

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 515

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 516

Mohsen Mostafavi & Gareth Doherty (2010) Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher, p.119

Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.51

Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.312

Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.299

Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.28

Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.24

Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.292

Böck Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag, p.22

40 Branzi Andrea (1986) We are the Primitives, Design Issue Vol.3 No1, The MIT Press, p.25 41

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512

Andrea Branzi (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Andrea Branzi (2012) vi spiego perchè l’oggetto inutile è indispensabile, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p. 512

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) Bigness or the Problem of Large in S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press

Branzi Andrea (2008) Weak and Diffuse Modernity: The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milan & New York: Rizzoli, p.40

Branzi Andrea (2012) l’architettura nelle città di oggi ‘soffre’, youtube video, transl. by Vivoda Alice

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press

Koolhaas Rem, Mau Bruce, Sigler Jennifer, Werlemann Hans (1995) S, M, L, XL: Office for Metropolitan Architecture, New York: The Monacelli Press, p.934

Branzi Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) forword by Celant C. in Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson, p.7

Branzi Andrea (1984) New Design, The Hot house: Italian New Design, London: Thames and Hudson, p.66

bibliography AURELI, Pier Vittorio (2009) More and More About Less and Less: Notes Toward a History of Nonfigurative Architecture, Log No 16, Anyone Corporation BOKERN, Anneke (2012) Wunderkammer mit Stadtutopie: Ausstellung von Andrea Branzi in Antwerpen, Werk, Bauen + Wohnen, Vol4, Retrodigitized Journals (Seals) BONTEMPI, Pier Carlo & Gregori, Giorgio (1985) Alchimia, Milan: Idea Books BOCK, Ingrid (2015) Six Canonical Projects by Rem Koolhaas, Berlin: jovis Verlag BRANZI, Andrea (1984) The Hot House – Italian New Wave Design, London: Thames and Hudson BRANZI, Andrea (1986) We Are the Primitives, Design Issues, Vol 3, No 1, The MIT Press BRANZI, Andrea & Celant Germano (1992) Luoghi Andrea Branzi : the complete works, London: Thames and Hudson BRANZI, Andrea (2006) Weak and Diffuse Modernity – The World of Projects at the beginning of the 21st century, Milano: Skira editore BRANZI, Andrea (2008) Open Enclosures, Paris and New York: Thames & Hudson CELANT, Germano & Guggenheim Museum, Solomon R. & Kunstmuseum Wolfsburg & Triennale di Milano (1994) The Italian Metamorphosis, 1943-1968, New York: Guggenheim Museum Publications DOMUS (March 2016) La triennale di Milano, Milano: Casa ed. Domus DOVEY, Kim & DICKSON, Scott (2002) Architecture and Freedom? Programmatic Innovation in the Work of Koolhaas/OMA, Journal of Architectural Education, Vol 56, No 1, Taylor & Francis EISENSCHMIDT, Alexander (2012) Importing the City into Architecture: An interview with Bernard Tschumi, Architectural Design, Vol 82-5, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. FABRIZI, Maria Bruna (May 18, 2014) The Building is the City: Le Corbusier’s Unbuilt Hospital in Venice, on socks-studio.com, WordPress FORTY, Adrian (2000) Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary of Modern Architecture, New York: Thames & Hudson GUITON, Jaques & GUITON, Margaret (1981) The ideas of Le Corbusier on architecture and urban planning, New York: G. Braziller JAMESON, Fredric & SPEAKS, Michael (1992) Envelopes and Enclaves: The Space of Post-Civil Society ( An Architectural Conversation), Assemblage, No 17, The MIT Press KOOLHAAS, Rem (1992) Urbanism after Innocence: Four Projects: The Reinvention of Geometry, Assemblage, No 18, The MIT Press KOOLHAAS, Rem (1994) Delirious New York – a retroactive manifesto for Manhattan, New York: Monacelli Press KOOLHAAS, Rem & Mau, Bruce & Sigler, Jennifer & Werlemann, Hans & Office for Metropolitan Architecture (1997) S, M, L, XL – Office for Metropolitan Architecture, Köln: Benedikt Taschen Verlag KOOLHAAS, Rem & Office for Metropolitan Architecture (2004) Content, Köln: Taschen KOOLHAAS, Rem (2012) The Reinvention of the City, New Perspectives Quarterly, Vol 294, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. LAVIN, Sylvia (1997) Critic @ Large: Fear of Forming, ANY: Architecture New York, No 18, Anyone Corporation LEES-MAFFEI, Grace & FALLAN, Kjetil (2014) Made in Italy – rethinking a century of italian design, London: Bloomsbury Academic MASTRIGLI, Gabriele (2006) The Last Bastion Of Architecture, Log, No 7, Anyone Corporation McLEOD, Mary (1996) Review: Le Corbusier – Precisions: On the present state of architecture and city planning, Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol 55, No 1, University of California Press

bibliography MENKING, William & KAZI, Olympia Puglisi & PRESTINENZA, Luigi (2007) Radical Italian Architecture Yesterday and Today, Vol 77 - 3, Architectural Design MODO (1987) Progetto tecnologia prodotto – Design Technology Product, Vol 10, No 99, Milano: R.D.E. Ricerche Design MOSTAFAVI, Mohsen & DOHERTY, Gareth (2010) Ecological Urbanism, Baden: Lars Müller Publisher PATTEEUW, Véronique (2003) Reading MVRDV, Rotterdam; Nai Publishers RAIZMAN, David (2014) The Italian Avant-Garde, 1968-1976, edited by Alex Coles and Catherine Rossi, Design and Culture, 6-1, Berlin: Sternberg Press SCALBERT, Irenée (2004) The city of small things, Building Material, No 12, Morality and architecture, Architectural Association Ireland SINNING, Heike (2000) More is more – OMA/Rem Koolhaas, Theorie und Architektur, Tübingen: Wasmuth SLESIN, Suzanne (1992) Currents: Milan: Mysterious Lights, Pro Quest Historical Newspaper, New York Times STAUFFER Marie Theres (2002) Utopian Reflections, Reflected Utopias: Urban Design by Archizoom and Superstudio, AA Files, No 47, London: AA School of Architecture TSCHUMI, Bernhard & ABRAM, Joseph (1999) Tschumi Le Fresnoy – architecture in/between, New York: Monacelli Press UNGERS, Oswald Mathias & Hertweck, Florian & Marot, Sébastien (1977) The city in the city : Berlin : a green archipelago ; a manifesto, UAA Ungers Archives for Architectural Research, Zürich: Lars Müller VERSCHAFFEL, Bart (2013) Reading Rem Koolhaas, Architectural Histories 1(1):12, p.1-3 WEBSITES: http://www.domusweb.it/en/from-the-archive/2012/02/11/superstudio-pro jects-and-thoughts.html http://www.domusweb.it/en/design/2014/10/24/andrea_branzi.html http://www.designboom.com/interviews/andrea-branzi/ http://www.metropolismag.com/Point-of-View/May-2009/Exhibition-Review-In-Situ-Architecture-and-Landscape/ VIDEOS: Branzi, Andrea (Jan 29, 2010) Weak Modernity 2/2, Video Lecture Archive, AA School Koolhaas, Rem (May 18, 2007) Recent Work, Video Lecture Archive, AA School Eisenman, Peter & Koolhaas, Rem with Steele, Brett (Jan 30, 2006) Architecture, Ideology, The City, Video Lecture Archive, AA School Andrea Branzi (2010) NOW interview, Architecture Biennale, Biennale Channel, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2009) Andrea Branzi, InteractionDesignLab, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi, (2012) l’architettura nelle città di oggi “soffre”, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2012) vi spiego perchè l’oggetto inutile è indispensabile, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2012) l’architettura secondo me, Wisesociety, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2011) The Weak Metropolis, youtube, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2011) Argicoltura Residenziale, youtube, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2011) Territorio Enzimatico, youtube, transl. by Vivoda Alice Andrea Branzi (2011) Modello di Urbanizzazione Umida, youtube, transl. by Vivoda Alice

School of Architecture and Landscape MSc Architectural and Urban Design 2015/2016 Dorian Wisznieswki, Chris French, Kevin Adams Patricia Schleeh patricia@schleeh-vs.de