Theory matters if... / Architectural Reflections

August 5th, 2019. I write this reflection 400 KMs away from Vienna, in an 8 people van surrounded by greenery and icy mountains. My mind has been occupied with the little knowledge I know about architecture theory, about the straight and slick streets that have been built to enhance mobility, how almost evasive they look against a random background of pine trees and bushes. What is considered organic nowadays, and is modernity of space causing us discomfort? How is urban planning being modified to meet the economic needs of tourism/globalization etc.? I attempt to investigate such questions (I have a lot of them) and the places we have visited through an interdisciplinary approach, as I explain the meaning of being a “Cross-Disciplinary Strategies” student and its relevance to the discipline of architecture itself, drawing on ideas from the likes of Patrik Schumacher.

Postsparkasse / Otto Wagner 

Where is the gap between the idea and the architecture? 

The exterior of the building resembled nothing of the works I knew from Wagner, my predisposed ideas were of colored majolica and detailed ornaments, something that would be noticeable at first sight. Yet at a closer onlook, Wagner’s angels, and “buttons” that surrounded the outer surface stood out as trademarks similar to the ones from “Kirche am Steinhof.” The interior, however, reminded me of the inside of a 20th-century railway station, the lantern-like light fixtures and stalls seemed quite nostalgic, creating a contrast with light steel and glass, elements of modern minimalism. Are we living in a post-modern society? I can still hear one of my professors echo that question when asked about the notion of “modernism” nowadays. While Wagner believed in the importance of practicality, I like to believe that he dedicated space for details as well.

Candle Store / Hans Hollein 

 “Hollein had a dictatorial attitude towards humanity.” I wrote so in my notes, and now that I look back, I realize how arbitrary my opinions remain towards what he creates. Hans Hollein is one of the more controversial architects from the modernist era.  Unlike Wagner, most would summarize his works as being “purely formalistic”, taking in no account their usability. Yet I remain intrigued about the nature of his beliefs, what he defines as architecture as opposed to engineering, and whether his motives were to merely provoke, pushing people to see beyond the boundaries of utilizing space. The question of visibility remains a huge exploration for me as a student that has worked in public settings before, how aesthetic decisions can be made to completely hide or grab the attention of onlookers. 

How do we make something more/less visible? 

Hollein’s candle store annoyed me the most. “What’s this shape supposed to look like?” “Why a keyhole for a shop that sells candles?” (now selling jewelry) Although I have passed through Fleischmarkt hundreds of times, the shop never seemed to stand out to me; totally opposing its purpose. Its ridiculously small window displays hinder the passers-by from having a glimpse of its interior, perhaps serving the whole point, igniting their curiosity. 

Looshaus / Adolf Loos 

Looshaus really raised a lot of thoughts about the rise of minimal and clean architecture in contrast to the cluttered details found in churches, for example. The need for fast and straightforward is constantly increasing, and our lifestyles require continuous decluttering in order to avoid complexity. Could this be one answer as if to why? A thought that has remained with me is the way we as humans react to environmental changes, and how such constructions can become systematic when done continuously. Perhaps that’s where the role of design comes in. 

Vienna BioCenter 

 At first glance, VBC seemed like a perfect example of high-modernity and advanced technology. The glass building radiated enormous amounts of light, and the connection bridge provided an odd array of chairs to meet and chat up during break hours. The building’s most famous landmark was a huge wall dedicated to a capitalized quote “WHAT IF GOD WAS WRONG?” hanging above a couple of palm trees on both sides. A quite cheesy attempt to add aesthetic to a room, I must admit, but I guess you get used to it. The low-rise bright yellow stairs apparently served a purpose; less distraction and increased opportunity for communication amongst peers going up and down together. Another common factor with the open workspace and desks that were stuck to each other.

This really made me realize how much of a try-hard this building really is. When dealing with individual work, especially that of scientists’, I can only imagine how tedious it must get for people to find an isolated space where they can work by themselves. This desire for an individual setting was nowhere to be found, and soon enough it all felt like a boast of wealth. The fancy bar, the entrance, and the booklets that were distributed all seemed a bit over the top.  Furthermore, the decoration added in between the elevator walls and the animal pictures hanging around really raised a lot of worries. All in all, the VBC seemed to contrast itself in many ways, its bright red and yellow flooring in combination with this vision of high modernity reminded me of a school setting. The mapping of the place itself is a bit hard to navigate, especially between the labs and two connected buildings. VBC does have some intriguing qualities, almost as if it was so bad to the point where it becomes interesting. Is the word for that called…kitsch?  

Theory matters if... it matters at all. 

For what it takes, I believe the need for in-depth research about construction materials in order to increase a building’s sustainability, for example, can enhance the discipline in better understanding the challenges we face nowadays, both societal and architectural. From topics ranging to SDGs to behavioral science, are notions such as “contemporary”, “renaissance” etc. really relevant? The space between engineering and architecture is yet to be filled.