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