Everybody notices that it is above all pictures and crossing
visual streams that make up the contents of perception; this
results in speechlessness, but also in the extension and confusion
of language, of possibillties of thinking. The archaic aspect
of this hints at universal moments connecting different times
and spaces - in the beginning was the picture, then came the
word. Due to the intensity of the media to be experienced
at present, this situation becomes more and more critical.
Feelings of order, of limitation, of responsibility, of an
overall view vanish. Things happen, and there is nothing to
be done about it; the perspectives are quite vague. And the
universality circulating imperative is that people should
better get used to this, and that without exception. Stabilizing
recollections and leads seem to fade faster and faster. The
really possible depends entirely on certain constellations.
It is a matter of luck if impulses of change trigger something.
The only chance left is one of isolated interventions. These
can only be communicated by means of pictures.
Centering on limitless architectural dimensions, the present
publication vehemently counters the impression that there
can be no models for this any more, especially no bold, far-reaching,
experimental models; this articulates an opposition to the
attitude prevalling in many spheres: that such approaches
are in vain by now because all moving - planning, sociopolitical,
technological, urban - designs have led to entirely different
results than those intended. Visions must not be great anymore
at least, neither the concepts they are based on nor the stories
about them. The problems have not changed essentially after
all. Many things become even more and more awkward. The projects
from more than twenty years and the photographs of these projects
assembled in this volume reveal some of this in reverse, as
it were, as a statement on the times, as a manifestation of
what is possible.
Experimenting with Models
To relate the models and buildings by COOP HIMMELB[L]AU to
some retrospective longing for radicalism would be completely
beside the point. They are something different. They are insistently
visualized questions concerning the further development of
the models as a figure of thought. This is put to the test
in the design processes. And building starts immediately;
this is what the model is used for. As a multitude of considerations,
pictures, layers, associations, the model is always a working
model at the same time. Nobody cares about what is allowed.
It seems necessary to immediately explore the concept in a
three-dimensional way. Sketches increase the speed. The small
scale relied on for the time being creates laboratory situations
and allows experiments. Makeshift materials help anticipate
requirements for the materials finally chosen. What matter-of-fact
and functional might mean is always explored anew, as a counterpoint
to a number of pathetic positions. Mass is related to fragility.
Yet, there is a definite sturdiness nevertheless. The wish
to fly is still present. The sky, the light is allpervasive.
Emotionalism as passion, as an expressed feeling is converted
into subtle structures without leveling patterns for antipathy
and sympathy akin to emotionalism. There is no infatuation
with chaos but rather a nervous grappling with changes.
Each COOP HIMMELB[L]AU model leaves room tor an infinite
number of models, presents layers, a potentlal, constitutes
a built openness. The planned architectural situations as
such grant insights, apertures, views. Energy, in its boundless
and rather personal dimensions, is a crucial theme. Spaces
are distorted as if gravity were suspended, the gravity of
thinking included.
This has only Iittle to do with conventional models. Regarding
them, scientifically speaking, as schematic, simplifying,
idealizing representations outlining the relations and functions
of the elements in question would prevent conquering fields
beyond the possibillties of pragmatic planning. This is why
Wolf D. Prix challenges all those who are serlous about architecture
''to understand themselves more vehemently than ever as those
responsible for three-dimensional culture, to counter the
leaden dogma of economic viability with the vital function
of the aesthetic. [...] lf architecture continues developing
the way it is going, then in a few decades the architect will
have disappeared alltogether. Instead of making decisions
for themselves, they will carry out decisions for others.
Instead of realizing what they envisage in direct contact
with the client, the architect is threatened with the prospect
of being delegated to a third row seat behind the facility
manager and the building contractor. Similarly, the architect
will only be required when all the significant data for the
framework have been fixed. The architect's job will no longer
be to design the form taken by buildings and the spatial sequence,
but to kit out a piece of architecture with atmosphere that
is already dead before it is taken out of its drawer. In a
few words: the future belongs to the architect as a designer
of atmosphere."
So the responsibillty for a "three-dimensional culture"
is emphatically claimed despite all knowledge about the realities
of building. The (inner) struggle to arrive at models that,
articulating up-to-date solutions and focusing on explosive
issues, turn into new models, excluding any linear development,
hinges on structures which, as an interplay of changing spatial
notions and patterns of behavior, remaln flexible. Overloading
archltecture with contents may turn into a paralyzing venture.
Competence thrives on the division of Iabor, which has to
be insisted on where things do not work out. Speeding up social
and technological innovations calls for architectural offensives,
especially when considering the fact that the demand for urban
situatIons increases explosively all over the world. There
seems to be more to it than just positioning clues radiating
something in the flux of events. Yet, according to the strategy
so tangibly necessary, even this can only be achleved in the
form of a visible and audible voice within the fields of force
created by the media. Which calls for models and pictures.
Visualizing Thought Processes
The pictures of these models - and of many realized buildings
- have been made by Gerald Zugmann for years. He says that
he only reduces the three dimnsions of designed buildings
to two-dimensional surfaces limited by margins; is there a
more succint way of putting it? The problem is to portray
the volumes and structures. What matters to the photographer
is grasping the forms, the light situations, the intersections.
This is what he considers his craft: transforming the photographed
object into something else. He is not interested in realism.
A photographer cannot and should not pretend to be able to
show an object or a reality the way lt really is, he says.
His work is nothing additional, supplementary but part of
the triggered thought processes. His views continuously provide
even the architects with further approaches. As he is granted
complete freedom, this division of responsibilities turns
out a fruitful solution for both parties involved. Though
it is usually commission work, the clear frame of the various
projects clearly indicates the conditions for precision. Important
are the object and the realm of ideas manifested in lt.
The dynamics of the design process makes him emphasize statics,
stiIlness. He creates still Iives. People are to realize that
the moments have been carefully prepared. This turns the photographer
into a participating observer of research processes whose
wordless statements carry weight. Models and photographs make
up two complementary levels within these processes which continue
as long as they demand a specification of one's sensibility
and powers of judgment. The models' explosive and violent
character and their only ostensible calm are regarded with
deliberate cool. Which does not mean that the look becomes
indifferent at all. Needless to call attention to the integrity
of its controlling functions; the precision of the results
speaks a sclentific language, as it were, though there is
no doubt that objectiveness cannot be the issue.
The surroundings are mostly faded out or darkened. Concerning
his fondness for certain effects, the photographer links the
gloomy impression of his pictures with his intention to focus
on details, to create tensions, to make things emerge from
the dark. Alienation vs. entertaining gIimpses. Gerald Zugmann
wants to invite analysis. In spite of all statics, every moment
might imply some surprise, maybe even a tempest. He succeeds
in capturing an uncertainty that is in the air. lt is not
really clear for how long time comes to a halt. But time is
as present as space. He converts the object in question into
a site of crystallization of such relations; even its fourth
dimension makes itself felt as a force.
The points of view are carefully chosen. As a rule, there
is only one picture from one perspective. lt is up to the
photographer which elements he brings out and which parts
he banishes into the background in order to make the essential
things take shape. Light and shadow relations are often reworked
in the darkroom. He usually prefers black-and-white; this
penchant is oriented towards graphical clarity. In his color
pictures, shining bodies emerge from the dark, miracle-like.
Such exaggerations appeal to an instinct telling you not to
allow any of the usual standards to limit the things that
might be. An expression of persistent and slow methods of
work, his line of reasoning in this respect is based on a
technique that may strike us as almost antiquated. Gerald
Zugmann does not want to present architectural reports. The
effort put in remains a significant aspect. His photographs
reflect that bullding only achieves microscopic parts of architecture.
These parts deserve to be treated with care. Volumes, lines,
and surfaces are redefined by settling for certain demarcations,
so to speak. Including urban environments would only allege
imaginary connections. That the architecture photographed
does without people - a fact that people often complain about
- has mainly technical reasons: inside, the exposure times
are too long; the photographer would have to employ extras;
and the created impression would again be a staged one without
much effect. To present an everyday scene would artificially
trivialize the model character. How single parts fit in with
the whole is illustrated by details and alienations far better
than by any supposed truthfulness. Not including such things
emphasizes the model character, is a form of liberation. Settling
in buildings of this kind should keep the user from such a
generosity to a certain degree. This can only be anticipated
up to a point if the process is not to turn into some oppressive
form of planning. Gerald Zugmann regards form, light, and
structure as the ingredients relevant for a photograph. He
does not see himself as a documentarist. He is interested
in outstanding architecture to which he dedicates himseIf
with great intensity. That he regards his objects as objects
explains the object character of his subjects. This is why
he often works from positions others would not dream of taking.
He wants to disclose the central idea behind the designs and
the buildings, additional layers, and fields of reference.
Hence the significance of being famillar with the thought
processes. He has been working with COOP HIMMELB[L]AU for
more than twenty years and taken photographs of architectural
works or objects by Günther Domenig, DonaId Judd, Kiki
Smith, Vito Acconci, Chris Burden, Philip Johnson, Bruno Gironcoll,
James Turrell, Jannis Kounellis, Franz West, Hans HoIlein,
Richard Artschwager, a.o. And he has made special photo series
on Frank Lloyd Wright, R. M. Schindler, Louis I. Khan, or
CarIo Scarpa. He thinks that extending such competence-Iinked
networks in a way based on the principle of the division of
Iabor might intensify a lot of things.
By reveaIing the development of COOP HIMMELB[L]AU from the
beginning through the model photographs assembled for this
volume, Gerald Zugmann also makes us understand the architects'
approach of regarding working with models as a consistent
development resulting in more and more precise thought patterns
- which provides us with an idea of the matter in question
that is more compact than that conveyed by the higher complexity
of realized bulldings. ModeIs express the objective pursued.
Reducing their spatial concepts to surfaces, which includes
the translation of actually invisible, irritating mental properties,
is an independent achievement within the design and assessment
process. Zugmann's photographs are evidence that he succeeds
in following the architects' train of thought. The extent
of abstraction becoming manifest in the string of models discloses
structures of thought, focuses of commitment, conceptual shifts.
A shining transparency turns specific sources of light into
a mystery. There is no hint as to which civilization would
dare realize buildings of this kind. The structures could
be objects in a fictitious "blue universe" encompassing
nothing but no-places [Greek: ou tópos, Utopia]. This
pluraIity and the resonant ironic overtones deprive them of
their aloofness. This is exactly why the models often strike
us as more real than built designs. This antagonism is intended.
It elucidates the categorical, yet always open character of
these modes of thinking which burst boundaries when steering
for bold possible uses.
Models and realized buildings - and their pictures - are
manifestations of coherent thoughts. Visualizations reveal
to what extent the two belong to different worlds or have
already become aspects of one and the same context. We understand
how necessary it remains to continue developing possibilities
for new, manifold quallties, examples countering all anticipatory
adaption in spite of thousandfold blockades. The heart of
the matter is some form of exploratory development work which
breaks away from the scientific obligation to primarily prove
the repeatable. If we look at sequences of extraordinary constituents,
on things still unclassified, models and pictures, as visualized
language, have a decidedly ascertaining and investigative
function. Even without much talk about art, some things become
art because the commitment focuses on the conceptual, the
technical, the craft, the formal.
Translation: Wolfgang Astelbauer
|
UFA CINEMA CENTER - architectural model / architects:
Coop Himmelb(l)au, ektachrome transparency, 1996 |