DECONSTRUCTION

ARCHITECTURE

SUBMITTED BY : AR. NITIN

AR. PRACHI WALIA
 DECONSTRUCTIVISM ????????
 Deconstruction is a development of POST MODERNISM
that began in the late 1980’s.
 DECONSTRUCTIVIST PHILOSOPHY : it was influenced
by the formal experimentation and geometric imbalance of
Russian constructivism.
 There are additional references in deconstructivist to 20th
century movements:modernism/postmodernism,
expressionism,cubism,minimalism and contemporary art.
 DECONSTRUCTIVISM ????????
 Explodes architectural form into loose collections
of related fragments.
 Destroys the dominance of the right angle and the cube by
using the diagonal line.
 Uses ideas and images from Russian Revolutionary

architecture and design.

 Rejects the idea of the “ perfect form “ for a particular

activity and rejects the familiar relationship between

certain forms and certain activities.
DECONSTRUCTIVISM IN ARCHITECTURE
 Jacques derrida (july 15,1930-oct 2004) was a french
philosopher. He developed the critical theory known as
deconstruction .
 In the 1980’s a new tendency was born : the deconstruction
, which was also called “ new modern architecture “ in its
beginning . It was meant to replace post modern
architecture.
 Important events in the history of the deconstructivist
movement include the 1982 Parc de la Villette
architectural design competition (especially the entry from
Jacques Derrida and Peter Eiseman and bernard
Tschumi’s winning entry.
 The Museum of Modern Art’s 1988
Deconstructivist Architecture exhibition in New
York ,organised by Philip Johnson and Mark
Wigley, and the 1989 opening of the Wexner
Center for the Arts in columbus , designed by
Peter Eisenman.
 It is characterized by ideas of fragmentation , an
Interset in manipulating ideas of a structure’s
surface or skin , non rectilinear shapes which
serve to distort and dislocate some of the
elements of architecture , such as structure and
envelope.
SOME ARCHITECTS WITH
DECONTRUCTIVISM

 Frank O Gehry
 Peter Eisenman

 Bernard Tschumi

 Rem Koolhaas

 Zaha Hadid

 Daniel Libeskind

 Coop Himmelb
FRANK O. GEHRY
TIMELINE
 1929 Gehry was born on February 28, in Toronto, Canada.
 1947 He moved with his family to Los Angeles.
 1952 He married Anita Snyder.
 1953-1961 Gehry apprenticed with Victor Gruen in Los Angeles
and with Andre Remondet in Paris, France.
 1954 He recieved a bachelor of architecture degree from the
University of Southern California.
 1956-1957 He studied city planning at Harvard University
Graduate School of Design.
 1962 He founded his architectural firm Frank O. Gehry &
Associates in Los Angeles.
 1968 He was divorced from Anita Snyder Gehry.
 1972-1973 Gehry was assisant professor at the University of
Southern California.
 1974 He was elected to the College of Fellows at the American
Institute of Architects.
 1975 He married Berta Aguilera.
 1976 He was visiting critic at Rice University.
 1977 Gehry recieved the Arnold W. Brunner Memorial Prize in
Architecture from the American Academy and Institute of
Arts and Letters.
 1977-1979 He was a visiting critic at the University of
California.
 1979 He held the William Bishop Chair at Yale University.
 1982 He held the Charlotte Davenport Professorship in
Architecture at Yale University. He held this position again in
1985 and 1987-1989.
 1983 Gehry was visiting critic at Harvard University.
 1984 He was the Eliot Noyes Chair at Harvard University.
 1986 A retrospective exhibition of Gehry's work was held at
the Walker Art Center, Minneapolis, and traveled to Atlanta,
Huston, Toronto, Los Angeles, and New York.
 1987 He was a Fellow of the American Academy and Institute
of Arts and Letters.
 1989 He was an assisant professor at the University of
Southern California. He recieved the Pritzker Architecture
Prize.
 1991 Gehry was a trustee of the American Academy in Rome.
 1992 He was a fellow of the American Academy of Arts and
Sciences.
 1994 Gehry received the Wolf Prize in Art (Architecture) and
the Praemium Imperiale Award in Architecture by the Japan
Art Association.
He received the Dorothy and Lillian Gish Award for Lifetime
Contribution to the Arts.
 1996 He received the title of Academician by the National
Academy of Design.
 1996-1997 He was a visiting scholar at the Federal Institute of
Technology in Zurich, Switzerland.
 1997 He received the Friedrich Kiesler Prize. He was an
honorary consul of the city of Bilbao.
 1998 He was an Honorary Academician at the Royal Academy of
Arts and a visiting professor at the University of California. He
received the gold medal at the Royal Architectural Institute of
Canada.
 1999 He received the American Institute of Architects gold
medal for lifetime Achievement.
 2000 Gehry received the british architects gold medal from the
royal intitute.
 2004 he received the Royal Fine Art Comission's British Building
of the Year award for Maggie's Centre in Dundee, Scotland.
Gehry was chosen to design the Performing Arts Center at
Ground Zero in New York City.
 AWARDS
 1977: Arnold W. Brunner Memorial Prize in Architecture,
American Academy of Arts and Letters
 1989: Pritzker Architecture Prize
 1992: Wolf Prize in Art, the Wolf Foundation
 1992: Praemium Imperiale Award, Japan Art Association
 1994: Dorothy and Lillian Gish Award for lifetime contribution
to the arts
 1998: National Medal of Arts
 1998: Friedrich Kiesler Prize
 1999: Lotos Medal of Merit, Lotos Club
 1999: Gold Medal, American Institute of Architects
 2000: Lifetime Achievement Award, Americans for the Arts
 More than 100 awards from the American Institute of
Architects
 Numerous honorary doctorates and honorary titles
 Furniture: Gehry had success in the 1970s with his line
of Easy Edges chairs made from bent laminated cardboard.
By 1991, Gehry was using bent laminated maple to produce
the Power Play Armchair. These designs are part of
the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) collection in NYC.
 Memorials: The Eisenhower Memorial Commission choose
Frank Gehry's design for the Washington, D.C. memorial
honoring Dwight D. Eisenhower's command of the Allied
Forces in Europe in World War II and as the 34th
President of the United States.
 Gehry Designs: Because architecture takes so long to become
realized, Gehry often turns to the "quick fix" of designing smaller
products, including jewelry, trophies, and even liquor bottles. From
2003 to 2006 Gehry's partnership with Tiffany & Co. released the
exclusive jewelry collection that included the sterling silver Torque
Ring. In 2004 the Canada-born Gehry designed a trophy for the
international World Cup of Ice Hockey tournament. Also in 2004,
the Polish side of Gehry designed a twisty vodka bottle for
Wyborowa Exquisite.

TORQUE RING

Ice hockey tournament trophy

vodka bottle
 FAMOUS BUILDINGS
1. 1967: Merriweather Post Pavilion, Columbia, Maryland (first Gehry structure reviewed
by The New York Times)
2. 1978 and 1987: Gehry House (Gehry's private home), Santa Monica CA
3. 1993: Weisman Art Museum, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis
4. 1997: Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao, Spain
5. 1999: Maggies Centre, Dundee, Scotland
6. 2000: The Experience Music Project (EMP), Seattle, Washington
7. 2001: Fisher Center for the Performing Arts, Bard College, Annandale-on-Hudson, NY
8. 2004: MIT Stata Complex, Cambridge MA
9. 1989-2004: Walt Disney Concert Hall, Los Angeles CA
10. 2004: Jay Pritzker Music Pavillion, Chicago, Illinois
11. 2005: 'MARTa' Museum, Herford, Germany
12. 2007: IAC Building, New York City
13. 2008: Serpentine Gallery Pavilion, Kensington Gardens, London, UK
14. 2010: Dr Chau Chak Wing Building Design, the "Treehouse,", University of Technology,
Sydney, Australia
15. 2011: New York By Gehry, New York City
16. 2014: Biomuseo, Museum of Biodiversity, Panama City, Panama
GEHRY HOUSE (GEHRY'S PRIVATE HOME)
 Frank and Berta Gehry bought a pink bungalow that was originally
built in 1920. The original structure is the conventional two-storey
bungalow with framing. Some interior finishes have been stripped
to reveal the support of the structure inside the residence. The
bearing wall is raised inner and outer structural frames wooden
support beams, girders and joists.
ARCHITECTURAL STYLE

 Much of Gehry's work falls within the style of

Deconstructivism, which is often referred to as
Post-structuralist in nature for its ability to go
beyond current modalities of structural
definition. This can be seen in Gehry's house in
Santa Monica
 Gehry’s style at times seems unfinished or even
crude, but his work is consistent . Gehry has been
called "the apostle of chain-link fencing and
corrugated metal siding"
 Concept: Frank Gehry said "... I loved the idea of leaving the
house intact ... I came up with the idea of building a new home
about. We were told there were ghosts in the house ... I decided
they were ghosts of cubism. Windows ... I wanted to make them
look like they're dragging. At night, since the glass is tilted
reflect light ... So when you are sitting at this table all these cars
are passing by, you see the moon in the wrong place ... the moon is
there but it reflects here ... and you think it's there and do not
know where the hell are you ... “

The architect explains: "... Armed

with very little money I decided to
build a new house around the old
and try to maintain a tension
between the two, making one define
the other, and making them feel
that the old house was intact within
the new, from the outside and from
the inside. These were the basic
objectives ... "
 Materials: It makes use of unconventional materials such as
fences with trellis, glass inner wire and corrugated metal
sheets, wood framing, corrugated steel, plywood and light wood
frames.
 The Gehry Residence is architect Frank Gehry's own
house. It was originally an extension, designed by
Gehry and built around an existing Dutch colonial style
house. It makes use of unconventional materials, such
as Chainlink fences and corrugated steel. It is
sometimes considered one of the earliest
 Gehry actually did keep the existing house almost
completely in tact, but not in a conventional manner.
The Dutch colonnial home was left in tact and the new
house was built around it. Holes were made, walls were
stripped, torn down and put up, and the old quiet house
became a loud shriek of contemporary style among the
neighboring mansions–literally.
GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, BILBAO, SPAIN
 The work of American architect Frank O. Gehry, the Guggenheim
Museum has played a key role in the urban revitalization and
transformation of the area, in addition to becoming the symbol of
the city of Bilbao, Spain.
 It is situated on a plot of 32,500 square meters, of which 24,000
square meters are occupied by building. 9,066 square meters are
devoted to exhibition spaces.
 It is one of the major landmarks on campus, situated on a bluff
overlooking the Mississippi River at the east end of
theWashington Avenue Bridge. The building presents two faces,
depending on which side it is viewed from. From the campus side,
it presents a brick facade that blends with the existing brick and
sandstone buildings. On the opposite side, the museum is a
playground of curving and angular brushed steel sheets. This side
is an abstraction of a waterfall and a fish.
 Concept: The design of the building follows the style of Frank
Gehry. Inspired by the shapes and textures of a fish, it can be
considered a sculpture, a work of art in itself. The museum is
essentially a shell that evokes the past industrial life and port of
Bilbao. It consists of a series of interconnected volumes, some
formed of orthogonal coated stone and others from a titanium
skeleton covered by an organic skin. The connection between
volumes is created by the glass skin. The museum is integrated into
the city both by it height and the materials used. Seen from the
river, the form resembles a boat, but seen from above it
resembles a flower.
 Structure: The building is built with load-
bearing walls and ceilings, which have an
internal structure of metal rods that form
grids with triangles. The shapes of the
museum could not have succeeded if it did
not use load-bearing walls and ceilings.
Catia(three dimensional design software)
determined the number of bars required in
each location, as well as the bars positions
and orientations. In addition to this
structure, the walls and ceilings have
several insulating layers and an outer
coating of titanium. Each piece is unique and
exclusive to the place, determined by Catia.

 Materials: Built of limestone, glass and

titanium, the museum used 33,000 pieces of
titanium half a millimeter thick, each with a
unique form suited to its location. As these
pieces are so thin, a perfect fit to the
curves is necessary. The glass has a special
treatment to let in the sun's light, but not
its heat.
WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL IN LOS
ANGELES, U.S.A.
WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL, LOS
ANGELES CA
 The Walt Disney Concert Hall, designed by the architect Frank
Gehry, opened in 2003 after many years of gestation.
 The history of the building began in 1987 when Lillian Walt
Disney, widow of businessman donates $ 50 million to start
building a philharmonic hall. The idea was to create a reference
point for music, art and architecture, which position the city of
Los Angeles in the cultural level.
WALT DISNEY CONCERT HALL, LOS
ANGELES CA

 Location 111 South Grand Avenue

Los Angeles, California U.S.A.
 Owner Los Angeles Music Center
 Type Concert hall
 Seating type Reserved
 Capacity 2,265
 Built 1999–2003
 Opened October 24, 2003
 Construction cost $130 million (plus $110 million
for parking garage)
 Concept:The design represents the style of their creator,
architect Frank Gehry, could be considered a work of art in
itself. The extravagance of its forms seems to defy any rules of
harmony and symmetry. The forms are external inspired by a
boat .
 The building is essentially a shell which consists of a series of
interconnected volumes, some form of orthogonal coated stone
and other forms of organic and surfaces covered with a
corrugated metal skin of steel. As a bridge between the
different volumes are used glazed surfaces.
 The centerpiece of the interior of the building was designed to
represent the hull of a boat. The idea of the architect was to
design a room with an evocative sculptural forms of music,
achieving an intimate connection between the orchestra and
audience.
The building also fulfills an important role in urban areas.
PLAN
 Structure:To calculate the complex shapes of the
curves Walt Disney Concert Hall was used to Catia
software. This allowed us to determine the structure
and shape of each piece of steel that covers them.
 Materials:To coat the outer surfaces were used
corrugated 12,500 pieces of steel together on the
outside. No two equal parts, as each piece takes a
unique form of agreement to their location.
 In areas outside of regular forms, the stone was used.
Glass surfaces function as a liaison between the various
volumes.
 The interior of the auditorium and rooms, is lined with
fir wood. used in floors, walls and ceilings.
PETER EISENMAN
INTRODUCTION
 Peter Eisenman was born in 1932 in Newark, New Jersey. He
studied architecture from 1951 to 1955 at Cornell University in
Ithaca, New York, and later at Columbia University in New York
City, and concluded his academic training in 1963 with a doctoral
thesis on design theory.

 He worked together with Charles Gwathmay, John Hejduk,

Michael Graves and Richard Meier in the architects’ group »The
New York Five. At this time, Eisenman developed his principles
for design theory in a number of key publications.

 At the beginning of the 1980s, Eisenman established his own

architectural practice in New York, and since that time has
created a number of important and diverse structures.
JACQUES DERRIDA
 Founder of Deconstruction.
 Peter Eiseman followed Derrida’s principles in
architecture.
 Questions about the borders , the frontiers,the limits that
have been drawn.
Impossibility of setting up a perfect ideal structure. That
which cannot be presented for conception or perception.

The “ real architecture “ only exists in the drawings.

The “real building” exists Outside the drawings.
The difference here is that “ architecture “ and
the “ building” are not the same.

Peter Eisenman
MEMORIAL FOR MURDERED JEWS,
BERLIN.
 The Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe, also known as
the Holocaust Memorial, is a memorial in Berlin to
the Jewish victims of the Holocaust.

 The Berlin Holocaust memorial was the outcome of a process

which extended over a period of 17 years.

 Peter Eisenman won the competition and construction of project

started in April 2003. It was inaugurated on May 10’ 2005, sixty
years after the end of World War II.
SITE PLAN
CONCEPT : HOLOCAUST MEMORIAL
 Generally, while experiencing a building a person walks through
the building perceiving columns on the left and moving around
and again there are columns on the right, so there can be a sort of
conclusion about the building being symmetric, axial etc. So
understanding of a buildings comes from being presence in the
experience.

 But in the holocaust memorial, experiencing the building does not

give you understanding of the monument. In this project, when
we move, we do not learn anything, there is no specific path to
follow, any point within the memorial is no different than any
other point.

 The underlying idea behind the memorial was to reduce the

meaning of experience because this relates to what happened in
camps. The memorial intends to show the absence of meaning in
the executions carried out in camps.
 Often referred to as a “field of
stelae,” the memorial consists of
2711 concrete stelae (95 cm x 2.37
m), with heights varying from
less than a meter to 4 meters.

 The stelae are separated by a

space equal to the width of an
individual stele, or enough room
for a single individual to pass
through.

 The memorial is traditional in the

sense of using material such as
concrete, which is a common
means for the construction of
memorials, but it is innovative in
its form and design.

 There is a quality of
indeterminacy to the entire field,
despite what appears to be a
regularly spaced grid. Regularity
is only perceived when standing
on top of one of the lower pillars
at the perimeter or in an aerial
photograph.
 Upon approaching the site, one might assume that the stelae are
evenly spaced but the undulating ground surface defeats the sense
of a grid, as does the actual experience of walking through the
relatively confined spaces and the existence of varying views framed
and obstructed by the stelae.
 Eisenman relates this monument to a living memory rather than a
sentimental memory as the holocaust cannot be remembered in the
first, nostalgic mode, as its horror forever ruptured the link between
nostalgia and memory. Remembering the Holocaust can, therefore,
only be a living condition in which the past remains active in the
present.
 The space of the memorial is not overwhelming in scale, the
instability of the ground and unpredictability of the heights of the
stelae interact to frustrate understanding of the space.

 One is further confused or disoriented by the narrow alleys which

are not truly perceived as straight lines, due to the varying
heights of the concrete slabs and the uneven ground plane.
INFORMATION CENTRE
 Underneath the stelae is Information Centre.
 The focus of the exhibition lies on the personalisation of the
victims and on the geographical dimension of the Holocaust.
 A major section of the information centre that supplements the
memorial is dedicated to informing the visitor about authentic
sites.
 The information centre stresses the importance of authentic sites
and encourages the visitation
 The room of names displays & reads out loud the names of all the
3.8 million known jewish Holocaust victims.
 The room of families tells the fates of 15 jewish families.
ROOM OF DIMENSIONS ROOM OF
FAMILIES

ROOM OF NAMES ROOM OF SITES

remembrance

FLOOR PLAN OF INFORMATION CENTRE

AUTHENTICITY AND PURPOSE OF THE
MEMORIAL
 During the painful debates about erecting such a memorial, a
major aspect of criticism was the danger of authentic sites of the
holocaust losing their importance. Thus, it is vital to distinguish
the different roles of authentic sites from the artificially created
monument.

“With the memorial we intend to honour the murdered

victims, keep alive the memory of these inconceivable events
in German history ,admonish all future generations never
again to violate human rights, to defend the democratic
constitutional state at all times, to secure equality before
the law for all people and to resist all forms of dictatorship
and regimes based on violence.”
 The design is to turn the visit of the memorial into an individual
experience that causes the visitor to reflect about the genocide.

 Each individual entering the field of stelae will find him- or

herself wandering alone, because the paths in between the
concrete slabs are not wide enough for two people to walk next to
each other. Thus, the visitation turns into an individual
experience.

 Lea Rosh, the initiator of the memorial stated that this meant to
raise the murdered above their murderers and to raise the victims
above the perpetrators.
 Looking at the historical significance of the claimed area, the
memorial gains a layer of authenticity, but what is almost of more
importance is the setting of the memorial in the government
quarter and in the heart of the capital.

 Time will show if the memorial will live up to the definition of

authenticity in the sense of heritage conservation where it is
understood “as the ability of a property to convey its cultural
significance over time”.

 For one thing is sure, that the memorial’s cultural significance is

complex for being a monument to honour the Jewish victims of
the holocaust and at the same time a testimony of Germany’s
accounting with the past.
HOUSE VI
 In the earlier stage of his career he designed a series of houses,
named as house I to house X. His House II, VI and X are most
famous projects of his initial ones.

 Eisenman, one of the New York Five, designed the house for Mr.
and Mrs. Richard Frank between 1972-1975 who found great
admiration for the architect’s work despite previously being
known as a “paper architect” and theorist.

 By giving Eisenman a chance to put his theories to practice, one

of the most famous, and difficult, houses emerged in the United
States.
 Situated on a flat site in Cornwall, House VI stands its own
ground as a sculpture in its surroundings.

 The design emerged from a conceptual process that began with a

grid. Eisenman manipulated the grid in a way so that the house
was divided into four sections and when completed the building
itself could be a “record of the design process.”

 Therefore structural elements, were revealed so that the

construction process was evident, but not always understood.

 Thus, the house became a study between the actual structure and
architectural theory. The house was effeciently constructed using
a simple post and beam system.

 However some columns or beams play no structural role and are

incorporated to enhance the conceptual design. For example one
column in the kitchen hovers over the kitchen table, not even
touching the ground! In other spaces, beams meet but do not
intersect, creating a cluster of supports.
DRAWINGS

GROUND FLOOR PLAN

FIRST FLOOR
PLAN
ELEVATION
SECTION
 The structure was incorporated into Eisenman’s grid to convey
the module that created the interior spaces with a series of planes
that slipped through each other.

 Purposely ignoring the idea of form following function, Eisenman

created spaces that were quirky and well-lit, but rather
unconventional to live with.

 He made it difficult for the users so that they would have to grow
accustom to the architecture and constantly be aware of it. For
instance, in the bedroom there is a glass slot in the center of the
wall continuing through the floor that divides the room in half,
forcing there to be separate beds on either side of the room.
 Another curious aspect is an
upside down staircase, the
element which portrays the axis of
the house and is painted red to
draw attention.

 There are also many other difficult

aspects that disrupt conventional
living, such as the column hanging
over the dinner table that
separates diners and the single
bathroom that is only accessible
through a bedroom.

 Eisenman was able to constantly

remind the users of the
architecture around them and how
it affects their lives.
 He succeeded in building a
structure that functioned both as
a house and a work of art, but
changing the priority of both so
that function followed the art.

 He built a home where man was

forced to live in a work of art, a
sculpture, and according to the
clients who enjoyed inhabiting
Eisenman’s artwork and poetry,
the house was very successful.
"Only rarely does an architect emerge with a philosophy and approach
to the art form that influences the direction of the entire field. Such an
architect is
Zaha Hadid..." -- Bill Lacy, architect
Presented by:
Kartik Sood
10110026
 She was born on October 31, 1950 in Baghdad, Iraq.
 She studied mathematics at the American University
of Beirut (Lebanon) in 1968.
 In 1972 she moved to London (UK), to join the
Association of Architecture where she graduated with
honors in 1977 and served as a teacher soon after.
 After her first building was commissioned and built in
1994, the Vitra Fire Station in Germany, her career
took a leap forward.
 In 2004, she was bestowed with Pritzker.
PRITZKER PRIZE 2004

Seminal Works:
 Vitra Fire Station 1993
 LFOne/ Landesgartenschau 1999
 Bergisel Ski Jump 2002
 Lois and Richard Rosenthal Center for
Contemporary Art 2003
 BMW Plant Central Building 2004
 Hotel Puerta America [interior] 2005
 Ordrupgaard Museum Extension 2005
 Phaeno Science Center 2005
 Museum of Art, XXI (MAXXI), 2010
 Her style is Deconstructivism (breaking architecture,
displacement and distortion, leaving the vertical and
the horizontal, using rotations on small, sharp angles,
breaks up structures apparent chaos)
 Using light volumes, sharp, angular forms, the play of
light and the integration of the buildings with the
landscape.
 Integrated into their architectural designs using spiral
forms.
 She is an architect known worldwide for her talent in
various disciplines such as painting, graphic arts,
three-dimensional models and computer design.
PROJECTS CONSIDERED FOR STUDY:

 Museum of Art, XXI (MAXXI),

Rome, Italy.

 Phaeno Science Center, Wolfsburg,

Germany
CONCEPT:
 "GRAVITY-DEFYING",
 "FRAGMENTARY"

 "REVOLUTIONARY"

A MAIN THEME OF HADID'S DESIGNS EXHIBITS THAT

A BUILDING CAN FLOAT AND DEFY GRAVITY.
MAXXI, ROME
 MAXXI stands for ‘Museo nazionale delle arti del
XXI secolo’ (National Museum of 21st Century
Art).
 The museum will become the joint home of the
MAXXI Arts and MAXXI Architecture and Italy’s
first national museum solely dedicated to
contemporary arts.
 Zaha Hadid architects, out of 273 candidates,
won the architectural competition to design the
building in 1998 with a design that responds to
the form and arrangement of existing industrial
buildings on the site.
MAXII, ROME
 The building is a composition of bending oblong tubes,
overlapping, intersecting and piling over each other,
resembling a piece of massive transport infrastructure
 It acts as a tie between the geometrical elements
already present.
 It is built on the site of old army barracks between the
river
tiber . the centre is made up of spaces that flow freely
and unexpectedly between interior and exterior, where
walls twist to become floors or ceilings.
 The building absorbs the landscape structures,
dynamizes them and gives them back to the urban
environment.
ZAHA HADID
 Zaha Hadid stated: "I see the MAXXI as an
immersive urban environment for the exchange
of ideas, feeding the cultural vitality of the city.
It's no longer just a museum, but an
urban cultural centre where a dense texture of
interior and exterior spaces have been
intertwined and superimposed over one another.
It's an intriguing mixture of galleries, irrigating a
large urban field with linear display surfaces".
THE ARCHITECTURE OF MAXXI
Two principle architectural elements characterize
the project:
 the concrete walls that define the exhibition
galleries and determine the interweaving of
volumes;
 and the transparent roof that modulates
natural light. The roofing system complies with
the highest standards required for museums and
is composed of integrated frames and louvers
with devices for filtering sunlight, artificial light
and environmental control.
GALLERIES, WALKWAY AND MATERIALS
 Located around a large full height space which
gives access to the galleries dedicated to
permanent collections and temporary exhibitions,
the auditorium, reception services, cafeteria and
bookshop.
 Outside, a pedestrian walkway follows the
outline of the building, restoring an urban link
that has been blocked for almost a century by the
former military barracks in Rome.
 Materials such as glass (roof), steel (stairs) and
cement (walls) give the exhibition spaces a
neutral appearance,
SINUOUS SHAPE
 The fluid and sinuous shapes, the variety and
interweaving of spaces and the modulated use of
natural light lead to a spatial and functional
framework of great complexity, offering constantly
changing and unexpected views from within the
building and outdoor spaces.
EL PHAENO
LOCATION:
 Wolfsburg, Germany.
 This being the biggest factory in Europe, employing
more than 50,000 people, is home to some 120,000
inhabitants.
 And receives an average of a million and a half
visitors a year.
 Located in the city center, in an area between the
commercial and office.
 A pass around high speed trains, to the Mittelland
canal bank.
SCIENCE MUSEUM:
 In seeking to be more than the "city volkswagen"
she was commissioned to launch the idea of
creating a museum dedicated to engage children
and young people to the world of physics, biology
and chemistry, in a didactic way.

 Receiving a 180 mil visitors annually.

 URBAN ANALYSIS
 The building appears in the landscape as a
connecting element between the two parts of the
city, establishing a direct relationship with the city
and move through it. Multiple paths pedestrian and
vehicle motion is in the terrain place either inwards
or through building composing a displacement
interconnection routes.
 LANDSCAPE:
 It appears as a mysterious object that arouses
curiosity and discovery.
 The terrain passes underneath the volume as an
artificial landscape with rolling hills and valleys that
stretch around the square.
 The Center captures the surrounding landscape
dynamics in elongated form off the ground, in
aventajamientos crashes and walls that give the
illusion that the building is moving.
 The public path leads bridge-like woodworm-hole
inside the building, promoting interaction between the
inside and outside which enables, as in floor, a fusion
of both.
SPACES:
 The building allows people to walk and climb down one part of the
pavement to get inside. In other places, the ground floor takes
visitors to a public square. Downstairs open broad prospects,
exposing the context of the city, between the concrete cones.
 The building does not tread the earth completely. Much
stands on a square with a series of large inverted
conical shapes with rounded corners that act as legs and
give an effect of weightlessness.
 Dentro de ellas se
desarrollan distintas
funciones como librería,
sala de conferencias y un
auditorio para 250
personas.

Among them develop variou

functions as a library,
conference rooms and an
auditorium for 250 people.
TECHNIQUES AND MATERIALS:

 Concrete. The roof structure is steel.

 Facade: Has only large portions of concrete.

 Glazed areas: They used large glass shades.

Furthermore you can see skylights, respecting the
diamond pattern was made in the concrete.
 Were used in construction, 27 cubic meters of concrete
and more than 3,500 steel beams.
CONCLUSION:
 Her works has revealed that Zaha Hadid is an
independent and energetic person who has
authentic works and brave enough to speak up
about her own taste. As a woman, her design
metaphors has represent the spirit of “sharp-
energetic-feminine” figure in architecture.
BERNARD TSCHUMI

Bernard Tschumi is widely recognized

as one of today’s foremost
architects. First known as a theorist,

In the 1970s he taught at the

Architectural Association school in
London and during this period he
developed the ‘strategy of
disjunctions’, a theory based on his
belief that contemporary culture
and architecture were best
expressed by fragmentation as
opposed to the classical ideal of
unity.
 Tschumi often references other disciplines in his
work, such as literature and film, proving that
architecture must participate in culture’s
polemics and question its foundations.
GLASS VIDEO GALLERY-1990

 The video gallery was the first

work to deal with
the concept of the envelope.
It is about the movement of
the body as it travels through
the exhibition space and
about the enclosure, which is
made entirely out of glass
held by clips, including its
vertical supports and
horizontal beams.
GLASS VIDEO GALLERY
 The resulting structure gives
priority to the image. The
monitors inside provide
unstable facades, while the
glass reflections create
mirages that suggest limitless
space. At night, the space
becomes an ensemble of
mirrors and reflections
BRIDGE CITY LAUSANNE, 1988

 Programmatic and spatial

transformations are the basis of
the intervention. Instead of
adopting the conservative
strategy of concentrating only
on the lower level of the valley,
the project takes advantage of
Lausanne's existing bridge
typologies by radically
extending them
 Along the valley's north-south axis,
the inhabited bridge-cities use
BRIDGE CITY-1988 the program to link two parts of the
city that conflict in both scale and
character.

The concept of the urban generator not

only creates the possibility of new spatial
links within the existing city, but also
encourages unpredictable programmatic
factors or new urban events, that will
inevitably appear in coming decades
BRIDGE CITY Each bridge accommodates
two categories of use: in the
core element, public or
commercial use, and at the
deck level, pedestrian traffic
and related uses
ACROPOLIS MUSEUM-2001-2009
 Located at the foot
of the Acropolis, the
site confronted with
sensitive
archeological
excavations, the
presence of the
contemporary city
and its street grid,
and the Parthenon
itself.
ACROPOLIS MUSEUM

Combined with a hot climate

in an earthquake region, these
conditions moved us to design
a simple and precise museum
with the mathematical
and conceptual clarity of
ancient Greece.
ACROPOLIS MUSEUM-SECTION AND VIEWS
PARC DE LA VILLETTE- 1982-1998
 During the early 1980s, after President Mitterand took office,
Paris was undergoing an urban redevelopment as part of city
beautification, as well as making Paris a more tourist influenced
city. In 1982-3, the Parc de la Villette competition was
organized to redevelop the abandoned land from the meat
market and slaughterhouses that dated back to 1860
 La Villette has become known as an unprecedented type of
park, one based on “culture” rather than “nature.”
 Unlike other entries in the competition, Tschumi did not design
the park in a traditional mindset where landscape and nature
are the predominant forces behind the design [i.e. Central
Park]. Rather he envisioned Parc de la Villette as a place of
culture where natural and artificial [man-made] are forced
together into a state of constant reconfiguration and discovery.
PARC DE LA VILLETTE
 A system of dispersed
“points”—the red enameled
steel folies that support
different cultural and leisure
activities—is superimposed on
a system of lines that
emphasizes movement
through the park
 La Villette could be
conceived of as one of the
largest buildings ever
constructed — a
discontinuous building but a
single structure nevertheless,
overlapping the site’s existing
features and articulating new
activities
 It opposes the landscape notion of Olmstead,
widespread during the 19th century, that “in
the park, the city is not supposed to exist.”
 Instead, it proposes a social and cultural park
with activities that include workshops,
gymnasium and bath facilities, playgrounds,
exhibitions, concerts, science experiments,
games and competitions
PARC DE LA VILLETTE
He designed a number of
small experimental
constructions that he
called ‘follies’, playing on
the double meaning of
the French word folie as a
state of mental
imbalance into the
pavilion.