Just a scribble of thoughts while case-studying for the redevelopment competition project(guideline) of the Seoul Station Overpass, (let’s say “post-high line” project, although we are somewhat trying to find a breakthrough with an idea that the project derive from Highline Project. And yet, I don’t think there is ‘next push’ to disregard the truth… anyways…) Guggenheim have opened their participants works (abstracts) for their 10th Guggenheim Museum in Helsinki, last week.
Its quite a vague feeling (mixture of exciting and bit knotty) to see how Guggenheim have handled (is handling) their next Guggenheim Museum in Helsinki (10th including some short lived) and for sure, its quite exciting to wait for the next updates of winners of the competition. Will the winner earn much feed back from the public like Gehry, Rem, Zaha? who knows.
Anyways this collaboration between (ART/MUSEUM + ARCHITECTURE, or BIG NAME Guggenheim) seems it have stimulated many architects throughout the world.
Not to miss out the fact that this competition was the first open competition(and anonymous) by Guggenheim. (no wonder far more than 1000 entries were made)
Above is screenshot from official homepage where they have posted participants’ works who submitted the entry.
I am not sure if any other previous competitions (with reputation of Guggenheim) have reveal all their participants’ work like this to the public. (I might be behind…I don’t know)
Framework of this page was quite appealing to me (visually) and at the same time, stating duality of today’s world, as the Guggenheim are the main host of (which became) today’s “world event” competition for architects. (I might have over-interpreted their intention)
1. Artworks, Gallery, People
I believe one of the museum’s role is establishing the field for professionals and making opportunities for people to learn/explore/communicate ranges (extreme end to fundamentals) of cultures, races, philosophies, and other meta-physical ideologies.
Even though the framework of the site (http://designguggenheimhelsinki.org) is clearly structured to announce Guggenheim Museum’s competition but, at the same time, it seems like they are insisting visitors to personalize the “communication” like museum (by adding some features like “favorites” and short info about the “works”).
It is a simple and common web-script that already have existed before but their approach to form a webpage of this one-kind seems certainly a perfect “FITTING” gesture for Guggenheim. A frame which competitor’s entries are posted like an art-piece of gallery to communicate with people.
“Interactive” conceptual in quite a simple form.
Derived from thoughts like above, this is another mild and very personal obsession that I am courted with these day while participating in guideline (Seoul Overpass…& others..) meetings.
Organization VS Selected professionals VS Selection of work
These days, seeing these ‘productions’ of works leads me to some contradicting thoughts with my foot set on structuring guideline works.
(We might have discussed about this topic couple of time on our drinking table…)
I am neither to complain that “they all look the same” nor “I have seen this/that somewhere” (since I didn’t check all the entries), its more about “process of hosting the competition” and “how the selection will be theselection“.
To be bit cynical, it more about questioning how some branches/organization(top-down) are formulated to ‘get things done in time’ with precedent (mal-functional) trajectory (usually political succession) and the process of guiding the project regarded as a labor (not academic/research process) “produced” by ‘service corps : architect’ supplements.
For instance, when we are at the museum, we are somewhat aware of the hierarchy (or its “fame”) of the art-collections in one’s museum. (ie. Mona Lisa in Louvre or The Kiss in Österreichische Galerie Belvedere museum , Café Terrace at Night in Kröller-Müller Museum or Starry Night in MOMA , Le Rêve with Steven A. Cohen and so on.) And unless the visitor have another purpose to visit the museum, we know (by instinct) where the most visitors will be reaching in the museum. But I like to add the sequence of /except/ when you will need to add interrogative ‘when’ and “how” the visitors:user want their write their narrative to reaching the one. – and I believe this is quite critical process of guiding the purpose (use) of any space.
I don’t want to state this is a social custom for all the parities hosting the competitions but many of organizations/government’s (top-down) has a perception to hold such events as option for the former purpose. Making a customary efforts to build up a set-off tool to meet ‘righteousness’ of regarding amongst public/investors’ vote than their use.
And I was quite fascinated by how Guggenheim-Helsinki has projected this competition from their logs and archives.
Guggenheim-Helsinki: Archive (link to download)
To make this writing short..(scratching my head) which I am already lost with the main purpose…
With some skepticism of coordinating with top-down party for the guideline, (as we know) articulating the purpose does not meet the demand of all the user since not only top-down organizations but any organizations/groups are also the users of the project (not the site itself).
And with some childish endeavors (disregarding this mal-functional structures), I am not exactly like Captain Marco Pagot (especially the appearance) from Crimson Pig (紅の豚) to be against fascism but I still like to find some ways to meet my purpose to this project till we reach the deadline.
Like Pocco Roso say, “It better to be a pig than fascist.” and… “Pig that don’t fly is just a pig”
lets talk more in individual updates. Chao!