Lehigh University Lehigh Preserve Volume 16 - 2008 Lehigh Review 2008 Rem Koolhaas: An Architecture of Innovation Daniel Fox Follow this and additional works at: http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-16 Recommended Citation Fox, Daniel, "Rem Koolhaas: An Architecture of Innovation" (2008). Volume 16 - 2008. Paper 8. http://preserve.lehigh.edu/cas-lehighreview-vol-16/8 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Lehigh Review at Lehigh Preserve. It has been accepted for inclusion in Volume 16 - 2008 by an authorized administrator of Lehigh Preserve. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Rem Koolhaas: An Architecture of Innovation by Daniel Fox 22 he three Master Builders (as author Peter Blake refers to them) – Le Corbusier, Mies van der Rohe, and Frank Lloyd Wright – each Drown Hall (1908) had a considerable impact on the architec- In 1918, a severe outbreak ture of the twentieth century. These men of Spanish Influenza caused T Drown Hall to be taken over demonstrated innovation, adherence distinct effect on the human condi- by the army (they had been to principle, and a great respect for tion. It is Koolhaas’ focus on layering using Lehigh’s labs for architecture in their own distinc- programmatic elements that leads research during WWI) and tive ways. Although many other an environment of interaction (with turned into a hospital for Le- architects did indeed make a splash other individuals, the architecture, high students after St. Luke’s during the past one hundred years, and the exterior environment) which became overcrowded. Four the Master Builders not only had a transcends the eclectic creations students died while battling great impact on the architecture of of a man who seems to have been the century but also on the archi- influenced by each of the Master the flu in Drown. tects of the century and beyond Builders in some way. In its history Drown Hall has as well. Their personal styles and Koolhaas’ early career was slow- also housed bowling allies building preferences, therefore, do going; he first studied scriptwriting in its basement. indeed transcend their body of work at the Dutch Film Academy before and can be seen in architectural moving to study architecture at the styles of today. One such architect Architectural Association School is the Dutch-born Rem Koolhaas, of Architecture in London. He also who is world-renowned not just studied at Cornell University in New for his architecture, but also for his York before founding the Office for 1887 Riots complex yet provoking theories on Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) in the urban environment. Koolhaas’ the Netherlands in 1975. Koolhaas process in approaching an archi- and OMA did not have a significant Lehigh’s students were tectural problem can be described impact on the actual built environ- dismayed with the lack of as enigmatic at best; the depth and ment until the 1990s. Much of the support the administration breadth of his work, while it can firm’s early work consists of a series had towards the football pro- be examined and dissected based of competition entries (mostly un- gram. As a way to celebrate on his theories, does not exude a built), unrealized structures (some the team’s first win of the singular architectural style. Is he a actually unrealizable), and the shap- season, the freshmen burnt Modernist? Is he a Postmodernist? ing of architectural theory under the down the rickety stands that Is he Deconstructivist? Since fitting direction of Koolhaas. His first book, they saw a disgrace. The him neatly into any one of these Delirious New York (published 1978), stylistic niches is almost impossible, set the tone for Koolhaas’ future tradition of excess at Lehigh it is imperative to jettison all no- theories and buildings by using the football events has followed tions of style when tracing Koolhaas’ concept of a “retroactive manifesto” since. professional development. It seems to establish his theoretical stand- as if a study of his work is best point on the development of the begun by establishing the fact that urban condition in America. he is deeply concerned with how Delirious uses New York City as a simple “space” can be transformed “study model” of sorts, and traces into an “environment” which has a the architectural history of Manhat- 23 tan through the construction of some of its most well- in effect, he is concluding that the city in itself is a contra- known landmarks (such as Central Park, Coney Island, diction and will forever be a contradiction, in that the “the and the Empire State Building). Before delving into a Program” must be present in some form but at the same historical survey, however, Koolhaas puts forth his theory time have a minimal effect on the built environment. This of Manhattanism, which basically purports that Manhat- allows the chance-like nature of human life to penetrate tan has been formed around a “culture of congestion” the physical fabric of the city, which is a concept that un- with the city block being the only source of organization derlies much of his later built work (which in most cases amidst the chaos of rapid construction and change . Ac- is smaller in scale but nonetheless echoes the sentiment cording to Koolhaas, “Manhattan’s architecture is a para- of the urban theory proposed here). digm for the exploitation of congestion,” with the desire Delirious New York no doubt lays the foundation for of man to live in a world surrounded by artificiality (“to Koolhaas’ future theoretical texts, which are larger in exist in a world totally fabricated by man”) as the prima- physical weight and size but not as deep in content as this ry drive behind such congestion . In fact, throughout the first seminal work. S, M, L, XL (published 1995) is a tome course of the book, Koolhaas establishes that it is precise- which categorizes all of the built and unbuilt architectural ly human desires, fantasies, and obsessions that have not works of Koolhaas and OMA in order of increasing size just shaped congestion itself but also the nature of that and importance (with a radical design by graphic artist congestion. The penchant for ignoring the historic nature Bruce Mau). Interjected within this so-called catalog are of a building’s exterior while planning for the interior theories relating to the various works of Koolhaas and According to Koolhaas, “Manhattan’s architecture is a paradigm for the exploitation of congestion,” with the desire of man to live in a world surrounded by artificiality (“to exist in a world totally fabricated by man”) as the primary drive behind such congestion. creates a “schism” or “lobotomy” in the architecture of OMA, with probably the most important being Koolhaas’ Manhattan, but it is precisely that schism which allows the theory about “Bigness” in architecture. “Bigness,” as rapid changes of the city to not affect its overall architec- he describes it, is “ultimate architecture,” architecture tural character (defined by the block and the high-rise). that has gone beyond a certain scale to the point which In the end, however, the “human obsession” to reach a “the size of the building alone embodies an ideological finite destination in terms of architectural development program” . Koolhaas wrote that the basic principles of has led to the need for a “rebirth” in Manhattan’s future to architecture (composition, scale, proportion) are “moot” be defined by the concept of mobility and the recogni- when a building “acquires” Bigness, and that the “’art’ of tion that “there is no destination” in the development of architecture is useless in Bigness” . Throughout his ex- a city . His proposal for such future development, which planation of the idea that Bigness does not simply refer to he termed La Villette (and also bears a resemblance to a large or massive building, but rather more to collections Le Corbusier’s Radiant City concept), involves a series of of buildings or structures (the city); in this way, he is once “programmatic bands” being laid end upon end to form again commenting on the human experience created by the structure of the city; the insertion of random elements architecture, much like in Delirious New York. Bigness was into such order would in turn increase the possibility for indeed a part of Delirious New York (although it was not “unplanned encounters” and an increase in “social en- explicitly mentioned), as the idea of looking at the overall ergy” . This futuristic, almost utopian, city-scheme repre- picture of the city rather than focusing too much on the sents the culmination of the gamut of complex and almost minute details of a “Program” was heavily stressed as the incomprehensible ideas presented in Delirious New York; key to success for the theory of Manhattanism. 24 The span of Koolhaas’ work in theory does not end where the ideas for his architectural projects spring forth. there, however; there are a few more ideas of his which The project most exemplary of his theories is prob- are not as terribly pivotal as the ones shown in Delirious ably his urban planning scheme for the city of Euralille, New York and S, M, L, XL but that nonetheless constitute France, which was physically realized in 1994. The city’s important links to understanding the thinking behind his “relevance,” so to speak, had just been transformed architectural work. The Harvard Design School Guide to by the extension of France’s TGV network to include Shopping (published 2002) is a book which espouses the London, England (thanks to a tunnel connecting Britain idea that shopping is the “last remaining form of public to the mainland).