Milan expo magazine2 by pmorrison

World on View

Phoebe Morrison History of Exhibition Culture RISD 2017

Pessimism doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t make Expos: the model is Star Trek, not Blade Runner.

-Paul Greenhalgh

PUTTING AN END TO THE VANITY FAIR Interview with Jacquez Herzog originally published in Uncubed Magazine for the issue titled Expotecture. Written by Florian Heilmeyer.

How did you get involved in designing the masterplan for the Expo 2015 in Milano?

We were invited by Stefano Boeri, who is based in Milan and was commissioned to develop the masterplan. His ambitions were to fundamentally rethink the entire Expo format. The concept of a “World’s Fair” appears to be very outdated. It is a model from the last century, and Stefano really wanted to turn it into an exhibition for the 21st century. So he invited us to work together with William McDonough and Ricky Burdett on this masterplan, because he knew we would share his ambition to radically reinvent the idea of a World’s Fair. He also knew he would need a strong team in order to turn this revolutionary ambition into reality. What made you think the Expo in Milan would be interested in such a radical and critical approach?

I have seen a few World’s Fairs. Particularly the last one in Shanghai in 2010 made it clear to me that these Expos

have become huge shows designed merely to attract millions of tourists. A giant area filled with enormous pavilions, one always more spectacular than the other, and these unbelievable vast halls for gastronomy, shops and pissoirs. What a bore and a waste of money and resources! We decided only to accept the invitation to design the Milan masterplan if our client would accept a radically new vision for a world exhibition; abandoning these monuments of individual national pride that have turned all Expos since the mid-nineteenth century into obsolete vanity fairs. Instead we wanted to oblige every participant to channel all their pride into their contribution to the Expo’s theme of “Feeding the Planet”: addressing the important topics of food production, agriculture, water, ecology etc. The content of the exhibitions should make the countries look different, not the size of their pavilions. Also we felt that this expo would be exactly the right place to start focusing on content, because it simply seems embarrassing to address

this very important topic and at the same time built enormous, dramatically curved pavilions with facades in wavy plastic or with spectacular waterfalls or whatever. We would much rather know how countries like Kenya, Mexico, China, Laos or Germany are dealing with the question of how to feed their people. How did your masterplan try to disrupt the dominance of the national pavilion architecture?

We suggested a strong basic and generic pattern with two big main axes based on the cardo/decumanus orthogonal grid of the antique Roman city. This would create a grid of extremely long and rather thin plots, with every country having a plot of the same size. We proposed encouraging all participants to present their exhibitions as agricultural gardens with only very simple, basic shacks forming sheltered spaces for their exhibitions. All of this would have been covered by a structure of tent roofs stretching over the entire site, provided by the organisers. This 7

would have resulted in all participants having plots of equal size under the same light roof structure, with no big individual pavilions.

participating countries to forgo their individual designs and break with the Expo traditions they have all been following for so long now. It was clear to many people that the themes of this Expo deserved to be treated differently, but they were not prepared to follow our guidelines.

This would indeed have turned the Expo as we know it upside down. Did you really think you could get away with these radical ideas?

So what happened to your masterplan?

Our intentions were clear from the very beginning and the organisers understood and supported us. However they were not powerful or courageous enough to convince their own organisation and the responsible politicians to support them. As a consequence they were reluctant to convey that fundamental message to the

It became the official basis for the Expo in Milan - yet only as an urbanistic and formal pattern, not as an intellectual concept. The tent roofs we proposed are now covering the main boulevard in front of the national pavilions, which seems an absurd reversing of our ideas. As I said, we are not involved in the realisation of the Expo

anymore. From what I have heard about the coming pavilions and concepts, it seems that this Expo will be the same kind of vanity fair that weâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;ve seen in the past. What was lacking to have made your concept reality?

I cannot put the blame on anyone or anything in particular. All the people we discussed our concept with were quite intelligent and understanding - but bound to their employers and/or voters. I still think that everyone involved at Expo agrees with our critical vision of what a Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fair should be and that the basic idea behind it should be kept for the next possible occasion. But when if not there,

in Milan, with people like Stefano Boeri and Ricky Burdett on our side, could we convince an Expo client to take that risk? An event this big (and expensive) has many forces acting upon it and I am not even sure if there ever was a conscious decision against our concept. Maybe it is rather like a swarm of fish swimming in one direction; we tried to navigate it in the other, but somehow they kept swimming. Maybe we should have initiated a diplomatic mission, sending the very talented “diplomat” Ricky Burdett to every single participant, explaining our concept, and to win them over. But this was impossible, and we then realised that the organisers would not – or could not – undertake the

necessary steps to make these ideas happen. Since 2011 none of the offices are involved anymore – Boeri, McDonough and Burdett got out, and we decided to end our collaboration with the Expo team that was an almost daily exchange until that moment. The Expo team has dealt with the realisation themselves since then. Yet the structure will still be based on your ideas. At least that’s what the Expo office tells us. Do you believe that this Expo will be different from the others, even just a little bit?

I believe that some countries understood our concept and therefore will put more weight on content than on form. Also, as

far as I know there will be 13 ngos like Oxfam and wwf adding some important topics. But they will have small, modest venues compared to the big global companies like Monsanto, Syngenta, New Holland or Agriculture, which will be present with huge shows – and we can expect similar marketing shows from many of the participating countries. So I am afraid that the visitors will again be blinded and distracted rather than informed and made aware of chances and risks, of opportunities and difficulties, of politics and business, etc. There is an amazing variety of global themes that should be tackled and brought to the fore – the conventional format with national pavillons 9

“Difference should be real, i.e. based on content, not on architectural design – basta!” -Jacques Herzog

competing for design awards cannot deliver that! Much to your own surprise, you became involved with the Expo once again in 2014 when Carlo Petrini asked you to design the pavilion for the International Slow Food Movement. Why did you decide to work again within the framework of your own failed masterplan?

That was only because of Carlo, who had been working with us on our ideas for the Expo from the very beginning. He was reluctant himself about joining a big show event like this, but had finally agreed to present Slow Food on a very prominent location within our grid: a triangular plot at the eastern end of the central boulevard, which we always imagined to become one of the main public forums. We felt that it would be great to have Carlo and his ideas and convictions being represented, so we couldn’t resist. I believe that our Slow Food Pavilion will demonstrate how we had imagined all the pavilions of this Expo to be. It is composed of three very simple shacks made of almost archaic wooden structures, like market stalls, which define a triangular courtyard, an open and communal space. After the Expo they will be easily dismantled and reassembled as garden sheds in school gardens around Italy, to be used by Carlo’s Slow Food Movement for their ongoing educative school programme. Do you think that the upcoming Expo editions in Antalya, Astana and Dubai will pick up on the principles of your collective masterplan?

I still believe that most of all we have to 10

overcome this ridiculous system of national pride represented by individual pavilion design. Difference should be real, i.e. based on content, not on architectural design – basta! A World’s Fair must expose common topics and problems, presenting different ways of dealing with these problems in different regions of our world. That would be an amazing and exciting exhibition that I would be eager to visit on the very first day it opens. Yet of course this is much more difficult than to simply stick to the existing model, and that’s why unfortunately it is very unlikely that it’s going to happen anytime soon. I would rather expect the upcoming Expos to be more like the one in Shanghai again, trying to attract an ever-larger crowd of visitors. If you say that so many people were convinced by the ideas inherent in your masterplan, what would it take to make things change in the future?

As long as the Expos are more or less an economic success – at least to promoters of tourism – there will not be any fundamental change, simply because there is no real need to change anything. The Olympic Games are meanwhile viewed very sceptically in many democratic countries, which is at least partially due to the fact that they are a very profitable business for only a very few, and a financial disaster for the hosting city or country. As a consequence such events will increasingly take place in countries where democratic systems are not so well developed and such shows serve as propaganda for the political regime.

Lost in Translation

When Herzog & De Meuron were first approached to design the Milan Expo to be held in 2015 they said yes under the condition that the expo break the mold of what a world fair was like. The topic was set to be â&#x20AC;&#x153;Feeding the Planet Energy For Life.â&#x20AC;? The serious theme of the expo seemed like a great opportunity to simplify the concept of the expo down its purest form. The proposal that was accepted for the design of the expo included a main road that spanned the site, connecting all of the pavillions. Instead of large modern pavillions, Herzog & De Meuron encouraged each country to devote the majority of their lots to live gardens. The pavillions were secondary to the gardens and would just serve as understated shacks for exhibitions. This plan would allow for the expo to be installed with minimal investment from the participating countries and would be easy to take down at the end of the expo. The Milan Expo committee agreed with this plan

but as other countries began to submit their drawings for pavillions is became clear that getting everyone on the same page would be close to impossible. Participating in an expo is a large financial investment for a nation. In the case of the United States, all funding for the pavillion had to come from corporations because the government cannot fund pavillions for events like the Expo. There are high expectations set for what participation in an expo will bring a nation. It is a chance for a nation to make a big statement about where they fit on the world stage. Trying to send out a message of national unity and strength from behind an understated shack was too much for most countries to accept. Ultimately Herzog & De Meuron stepped down from the project. On their website they have written quite brashly, â&#x20AC;&#x153;As much as we were convinced that our masterplan would be a good platform for the radical re-invention of what a world exhibition could be in the 21st century, we 15

understood that the organizers would not undertake the necessary steps to convince the participating nations to give up on their conventional indulging in self-contemplation instead of focusing on their specific contribution to agriculture and food production.” This burtally honest account of what it was like working on the Expo shows how challenging it is so honor the supposed “theme” of an expo, when the underlying themes are unavoidable and stronger. While parts of the expos original plan remained like the main road with a large tented structure, minamilism certainly wouldn’t make the list in descriptions of 16

the event. The tradition of world fair culture has deeply engrained the idea that a pavillion is more than an exhibit. It is a symbol for everything the country stands for and the idealic vision it wants to show the world. The culture of nationalistic display dates back has always occured in the world’s fair setting. In the Crystal Pallace, the resources and culure of colonized nations were showcased to strengthen the support of the British Empire. Although things have changed since the Crystal Pallace the platform of the fair is still used in a simillar way. Turkmenistan’s pavillion included extensive information on their

infrastructural development and natural resources. The emphasis was hardly on food. Investing in a pavillion is like buying adspace at the super bowl. Nations have to make their own decisions about what will benefit them the most. At the end of the day no theme is more important or powerful than nationalism. When I visited the Expo I noticed that many of the international visitors were waiting dedicatedly waiting in line to visit the pavillions of their home country. Despite an optimisitic plan for the Expo it is clear that the organizers and many visitors are not ready to end the era of the vanity fair.

Bringing in The Masses

Reading through reports of both the Milan Expo and the 1939 World’s Fair there is an enourmous fascination with scale. The amount spent on each fair was speculated time and time again in magazines and newspapers along with the expected number of visitors. Even metrics like the number of trees planted at the 1939 World’s Fair become an exciting element of the spectacle. National Geographic wrote, “The whole area covered by the Fair embraces 1,216 acres. There are 17 miles of roads, 45 miles of footpaths, and 300 buildings. About 2,000,000 growing plants are shown; there are 250 acres of lawn and 10,000 trees transplanted and set as in landscape gardens… The total cost of construction was about 155,000,000. About 60,000,000 people, including repeaters, are expected to pay admission…” This quote regarding the 1939 World’s Fair is from one of many articles I found that is written in this way. The focus of much of the promotional material for

the events is on large numbers rather than large ideas. Visitors are drawn in by the grand spectacle of the crowds and visual display. Although expos have always been a means of bringing tourist dollars into a city, the public’s perception of that has shifted. Life magazine published an article on the development of the World’s Fair while it was still being constructed. They wrote, “The fair, however, has always declared primarily that it is more concerned with instruction than amusement. An out-andout advertising venture, sponsored by New York businessmen who expect visitors to spend $1,000,000,000 in their city, the Fair has a high-sounding purpose: to demonstrate the interdependence of men and the blessings of democracy.”This quote is one of the only instances I have found where the intentions of the fair have been questioned. Much of what I have read presents the fair positvely as a bringer of hope and better 19

days. The fair was coming at the end of The Great Depression and promised a hopeful future along with an influx of tourism. It was proposed as something that would be beneficial to all. It would educate and support business. The fairâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emphasis on using the tools of today to build the world tomorrow allowed for visitors to take a break from their reality. Much like in art museums, visitors are asked to put aside their frustrations and find comfort in the possibility of a better future. In a time of uncertainty, the Worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Fair provided proof of what was to come.

similar but the public did not respond to it nearly as well. When it was announced there was a lot of opposition. Protests were held in the streets of Milan as a part of the No Expo Movement. Protesters argued the the Expo was only going to benefit big businesses. The lure of a mass tourism event has passed. The pattern of expos has shown huge investments and not much positive impact for the nations people. Italy had been experiencing an economic downturn and the highstakes investment was not a popular decision. The government set aside 1.3 billion for infrastrucutre and construction surrounding the expo.

When allegations of corruption started to fill the news, the opposition to the expo intensified. Despite interuptions to the construcstion of the site the expo opened on time with only a few of the pavilions in complete. In six months the expo was estimated to have brought in twenty million visitors which met the projections for the event that had been set. This shows how much appeal events like the Milan Expo still have. Even though oposition has grown there is still a market for glitzy shows.

The goals for the Milan Expo were very 21

The Pavillion

Herzog’s creative battle over the tone of the pavillions at the Milan Expo shows how important the pavillion is as a symbol of a nation. The construction of a Pavillion is a time for a country to wrap up all their efforts into one modern and forward thinking package. As I walked around the expo the outlandish architecture is the thing that screamed the loudest. The only thing that you didn’t have to wait in line to see was the Pavillions themselves. The exhibitions on the inside were primarily secondary to the buildings that housed them. As Oliver Wainwright wrote for The Guardian, “Because, ultimately, surely the only point of visiting an Expo is to marvel, drop-jawed with morbid fascination, at the bizarre architectural freak-show, and be entranced by the same sense of contemptuous captivation that comes from watching the Eurovision Song Contest. It is a spectacular mess, but it’s also fascinating to see national ambitions embodied, side by side, in a line-up of skin-deep architectural flourishes.”

The pavillions become a strange assemblage of styles all fighting to prove their modernity and power. Before visiting the Milan Expo I went to the Venice Biennale. The event happens every two years on the site and the pavillions do not change from year to year. The only countries with pavillions rivaling the ones form the Milan Expo are new entries to biennale. This allows the focus to stay on the art and not on the architecture. The pavillions, for the most part, are understated and worn around the edges. The American pavillion is done in neoclassical style and really doesn’t say much about what America means today. This forces countries to be more resourceful and use what they have to say something about who they are today. I was struck by the Israeli Pavillion which was covered in a sheet of old tires that had been zip-tied together. It was a simple and inexpensive move that helped align the strucutre with the work inside the pavillion.

This humbleness would not be possible at the Milan Expo. If a country is going to spend money on constructing a pavillion they are going to build the thing that will showcase them the best.

be repurposed as a botanical Garden in Bahrain. It is one of the very few pavilions where anything edible is actually being cultivated, or with any attention paid to its own structural sustainability.”

There were some pavillions that were designed to fit within the theme. Many more were likely very considered but put aesthetics above content. Elivia Wilj wrote about her experieces at the Expo in an article for Uncubed“Practically spartan in comparison with its neighboring architecture, Bahrain’s oasis, designed by Dutch architect Anne Holtrop and Swiss landscape architect Anouk Vogel, is assembled of cool concrete panels that will eventually 29

â&#x20AC;&#x153;...it simply seems embarrassing to address this very important topic and at the same time build enormous, dramatically curved pavilions with facades in wavy plastic or with spectacular waterfalls or whatever.â&#x20AC;? -Jacques Herzog

“It was a wonderful fair, with fantastic modern architecture, waterfalls coming down off buildings, lights shining upward at night upon the bright green young trees; with fountains, and fireworks, and a General Motors Futurama…”

Expo and Enterprise

Arum adit ad quiasintur sime si offic te volores num volut acepellabor rehent. Is quam es ipid que dolupicipit moditi veresendi corionsequae sint aut ut eturercimpor alictem la is alicide lendunt et idelignit eos sequam fuga. Nem re pro occae aut laut aut atis ut aligent. Molest pliquos sed magnat et que nis volest quiam, ipicatem vendeliquam fuga. Nemquas delibus ut accate cusam rem is a ium renient iatest, quis idessintore, sunt, alitatur arum aut eiusdae ceatur? Quiatur, ilignim quunt hit quatet ut reperiate volum vendus eiciendae volupta quiberchil in con nobisciminto est quosam, volor sum et es voloriatur sum nobit, ut as ma pore eum erum estis sequid qui ut fugiati onsequaspiet excea quam quam, officturit exerum re, nustius sitint as essima volenim usantiunt qui con perum dolorest, sed ut opti omnist que re natia vitiusdae. Nequodist, id molupta tectur? Quias ne sitaestrum, ulparitatur modi is nis maio doluptatur? Quis cusandem nihicimodis dolorro doluptur ab ipsam rem non placepudam voluptatibus

Occuscit aquuntin nihicia sit endant. Ebit digent omnis que nem a qui sectendempor sed quam, omnist et ut re voloren ditatem lab ipsumqui dolorum volupta nam consequo vollaut ectibus aut aut omniscim adiae. Que endeles tecepro dem int.Mossequat ommo con earcia ni beriorero quatque pernatem derati as esciis atur apiet ra exceperibus mint verchil lacieniminis quam excerem cuptatu ribusdae et unt rem ipsus aut descium nus seque occuptatem rectotae sus dolumenis recae quia coreperia vent eictorrum voloria tiatquosant ea volor aut quia niae nusae odi voluptur? Exceptatia voloreruntus aut la pe cullentur renderferios aciis et optatur rehenim quasperia quasped ut officid ignate venihit et volorersperi ut earchit imodit laboremporit andam as et eiur, cus doluptatis rectio estiossus et aut pro ex elitatiissum hilictem. Ceaturestiam quatiscimo ipidunt offici nam, omnia si dolum quam, que dollaut vitibus cipsunt velector sapiendeles ea cum venis quat provit quodiossima solore volore, quunt lab inveristis eicid exces ulluptae. Sapis ut 35

Occuscit aquuntin nihicia sit endant.

Ebit digent omnis que nem a qui sectendempor sed quam, omnist et ut re voloren ditatem lab ipsumqui dolorum volupta nam consequo vollaut ectibus aut aut omniscim adiae. Que endeles tecepro dem int.

Mossequat ommo con earcia ni beriorero quatque pernatem derati as esciis atur apiet ra exceperibus mint verchil lacieniminis quam excerem cuptatu ribusdae et unt rem ipsus aut descium nus seque occuptatem rectotae sus dolumenis recae quia coreperia vent eictorrum voloria tiatquosant ea volor aut quia niae nusae odi voluptur? Exceptatia voloreruntus aut la pe cullentur renderferios aciis et

Exhibitions of Power

Nationalism, brand identity, propaganda, politics and economics, all wrapped up in spectacle and shiny architectural gestures: Expos, says author and historian Paul Greenhalgh, are a quintessentially modern invention â&#x20AC;&#x201C; the most effective peaceable way to wage war. -Paul Greenhalgh

“The whole area covered by the Fair embraces 1,216 acres. There are 17 miles of roads, 45 miles of footpaths, and 300 buildings. About 2,000,000 growing plants are shown; there are 250 acres of lawn and 10,000 trees transplanted

and set as in landscape gardens… The total cost of construction was about 155,000,000. About 60,000,000 people, including repeaters, are expected to pay admission…” -National Geographic

This quote regarding the 1939 World’s Fair is from one of many articles I found that is written in this way. The focus of much of the promotional material for the events is on large numbers rather than large ideas. Visitors are drawn in my the grand spectacle of the crowds and the large concentration of visual display. Although expos have always been a means of bringing tourist dollars into a city, the public’s perception 43

“Such events will increasinlgy take place in countries where democratic systems are not so well developed an such shows serve as propaganda for the political regime.” -Jacques Herzog “New York World’s Fair 1939 is no longer a vision, no longer a figment of man’s dream expressed soley in terms of artists’ sketches, models, word pictures.” Life Magazine

“Sixty nations took part; the only conspicuous absentee was Germany. (At that moment Hitler had more pressing business to attend to: it was in the spring of 1939 that he overran Czechoslovakia, in defiance of the Munich agreement.)”

“Th de co am ver Ne vis in hig str an Lif

“It’s har endeavo misplac

-Oliver W

c I left wondering why so many countries “The World’s Fair celend - many very poor with starving citizens brates the 150th anniver- would make the large investment tosary of the inauguration be present at what seems like a giant, of George Washington glitzy tourist information show. as President. This is its theme: “A happier way of American living through a recognition of the interdependence of men, and the building of a better world of tomorrow with the tools of today.”

he fair, however, has always eclared primly that it is more oncerned with instruction than musement. An out-and-out adrtising venture, sponsored by ew York businessmen who expect “‘The world of tomorrow’ sitors to spend $1,000,000,000 their city, the Fair has a will be fantasitcaly big and bright” gh-sounding purpose: to demonrate the interdependence of-Life menMagazine nd the blessings of democracy.” fe

“The interior of the Heinz Dome is spectacular, spacious and impressive with notable examples of sculpture, interesting murals done in a modern manner, a great center fountain and dramatic lightning effects. Here are 20,000 square feet of rd not to see the whole exhibit space, providing many different our as a monumentally ced allocation of resources.” types of entertainment for the visitor.” Heinz Exhibit Wainwright