BIG RED

Parc de la Villette

Bernard Tschumi

(written by: Jennifer Lenn)

        Like any work of art, architecture is a tangible statement communicating an artist's message or idea. The work, in turn, develops its own character defined by its architectural elements. In many instances projects are heavily or completely influenced by its location, people, circulation and, most importantly, the context. In my last blog i wrote about Axel Schultes'  response to the new German government on the Spree river. He used Spreebogenpark as a way to forever inscribe Germany's new identity on the banks of the Spree river. One thousand kilometers away in Paris, France, Bernard Tschumi breaks away from the tradition of referencing context and makes a bold red statement with his design for Parc de la Villette. Tschumi's goal for this park is clearly defined by its deep red structure and its obtrusively enormous scale. The 135 acre park sits on an abandoned plot of land previously used for the French national wholesale meat market and slaughterhouse on  the Canal de l' Ourcq. Rather than recognizing the history of the site or the landscape of the site, Tschumi proposed a park that is completely man made and controlled lacking any organic elements or forms and with a complete disregard for the history of the site.

      Tschumi's design was driven by a competition calling for a design that would respond to Paris' urban redevelopment of the 1980's. The brief for this competition called for an urban park for the 21st century. The contest was a result of the efforts made by President Mitterand to make Paris a more tourist influenced city. Out of more than 470 proposals, Tschumi's Parc de la Villette was most reminiscent in contemporary issues as well as the future while refusing to reference the history of the site. Tschumi developed an open yet direct path throughout the park. There are several open areas in which a more direct path will direct the viewer. From these spaces there are several ways by which a person may proceed through the site. Although the circulation alone may get slightly ambiguous, direction and orientation are always confirmed by the bright red coloring of the structure itself. Such circulation allows for "constant reconfiguration and discovery" throughout the park. Not only does the scale and coloring of the structure orient and define a place of discovery for the visitors but it also serves as a point of reference for the local tourists of the city.

        While aiming to stand out with his big red mess of metal, Tschumi explained the reason to his madness as a result of three principles of organization; points, lines, and surfaces. 

 POINTS Thirty five points make up a grid that defines the spread of the 135 acre site, which Tschumi referenced as "follies". These follies are each different than the next and unique in their own place but given their repetitive nature, they are meant to give the visitors within the park a point of reference so not to get lost in the space.  

 LINES  The lines within the park are just as random and various as the park itself. They are not governed by any means of organization or grid but rather are only directed by specified places of "interest" within the park. 

 SURFACES The surfaces of the park refer to the 85 acres of green space that scattered throughout the site. These surfaces are the part of the park given to the interaction of visitors with the park. The green spaces are dedicated to play, relaxation, socializing and typically to large open gatherings. 

     Parc de la Villette is a piece that stands out with its obnoxiously bright coloring, and excessive size. With complete disregard for the history of the site, Tschumi designed a park whose sole purpose is to orient tourists, being the bright red beacon of reference that it is. This is greatest bond it has to its location. Its size and material boasts the innovations of the 21st century and possibilities of what is to come in the future. As of now this park stands out as something abnormal and out of place but because it has put so much emphasis on the design of the future, it is only the future itself that will ever be able to define the normalcy of this work. Only time will tell the truth regarding the abnormality/normalcy of this project. 

REFERENCES: 

http://archidose.org/wp/1999/02/01/parc-de-la-villette/

http://www.archdaily.com/92321/ad-classics-parc-de-la-villette-bernard-tschumi/

http://www.larch.umd.edu/dsw/larc_263_examples/parc_de_le_villette_site.pdf

Architectural Form and the Garden

 by Arif Javed

            One of the first misconceptions about the nature of architecture that was shattered when I began my architectural education was that architects primarily shape buildings. Over the course of studying architecture it has become apparent to me that what architects really deal with is space. Space is both the material an architect sculpts with as well as what he creates. By the same token, architects also primarily deal with form; the form an architect imagines is what defines the spaces that are created.  It is easy to think about the architectural form of a building and how that form shapes the spaces in and around the building. However, a perhaps less obvious yet just as important and fascinating use of architectural forms is when they are used to shape urban garden spaces. Gabriel Gueverkian’s cubist garden at Villa Noailles in France and Bernard Tsuchmi’s Parc La Villette are both excellent case studies for the use of architectural forms in landscape.

            Gabriel Gueverkian was the designer of three “Cubist” gardens, which were highly modern gardens designed in the Art Deco style, taking influences from Cubist paintings. One park was a hortus conclusus style private garden designed for a French family that was living in Villa Noailles. This park is triangular in plan and is enclosed on two sides by walls that recede in perspective to the tip of the triangle. The architectural nature of the design of the garden comes across with great clarity due to the way Gueverkian used strongly defined geometric forms to divide the space. It seems clear that the architect viewed the design as a composition of forms within space. Gueverkian’s careful placement of greenery, selection of geometry, and changes of elevation all contribute to the way the garden is experienced.

              Another highly modern garden that embodies the way that architecture can be used to shape space is Bernard Tschumi’s Parc la Villette in Paris, which came about 50 years after Gueverkian’s work. Tschumi’s Parc was done as an experiment in deconstructivism. I think Tschumi’s essential thesis for this project was an examination of using architectural form to shape an urban green space and in turn shaping the experience of the occupants of the park as they move along. He wanted to challenge the way parks conventionally function: as places for ordered, static relaxation. To do this he imposed a grid system of 35 structures called follies on the park that provide points of reference to people walking through the massive 100+ acre green space. This ordered grid of structures is the counterpoint to a free and unsystematic collection of paths that manipulate the circulation through the space. The follies are architectural forms that evenly divide the space and thus form visual landmarks for someone moving through the vast park, but the lines of the path almost force the occupants to get lost trying to find their way to those landmarks. This achieves Tschumi’s goal of turning the park into something that promotes activity, interaction, and movement.

            While these two projects are clearly completely different in terms of design and overall experience of the space they are interesting to examine in conjunction because they both in a way show the range of methods by which architects have used theories of form and space to shape experiences in an open public area rather than something that is more traditionally considered architecture.  Thus, they are a true testament to the ideal that architects are both figuratively and literally sculptors of space. 

Cubist garden

Parc la Villette design diagrams

Parc la Villette

OMA Versus Tschumi: The Parc de la Villette

By Jordan Grant

Last week I wrote about the brilliant design of Rem Koolhaas in Berlin at the Netherlands Embassy; this week is dedicated to a competitor of OMA for the winning design of the Parc De La Villette in Paris- Bernard Tschumi Architects.

First, a bit of history about the site itself- the Parc De La Villette was put forth as a design competition by the city of Paris in 1982-1983. The site had previously been a place for slaughterhouses, but the clearing of the structure put the largest remaining empty space back on the map in Paris. As you might imagine, architects worldwide jumped at the opportunity to submit their entries, and over 470 international entries we received.

Among those entries were works from both OMA and Bernard Tschumi Architects. These two plans were extremely different in almost every imaginable way; it’s interesting to imagine what the space would have been like had Tschumi not been chosen as the architect of one of Paris’ largest parks.

OMA’s submittal for the Parc De La Villette is extremely complex; the plan itself consists of five different stages to develop the site. As OMA’s website describes the project, “The program by the city of Paris was too large for the site, leaving no space for a park. The proposed project is not for a definitive park, but for a method that - combining programmatic instability with architectural specificity - will eventually generate a park.”

The five steps laid forward by OMA were 1) to organize the major programmatic elements in horizontal bands across the site, 2) to place kiosks, playgrounds, barbeque pits, and other facilities mathematically on grid points, 3) the addition of a round forest as an architectural element, 4) to provide connections between the points, and finally 5) to introduce superimpositions.

It’s not surprising that the OMA entry was disregarded when a closer look is taken at that of Tschumi. The winning entry can be described quite simply, as Bernard Tschumi Architects’ website does- “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, in addition to the Museum of Science and Technology and the City of Music on the site.”

This concept of a cultural park rather than the garden-like parks of the past, but instead it was exciting and new and most likely helped this entry stand above the rest. The park today is famous for the red follies (a folly is a building that is constructed primarily for decoration, or is overly ornate or exaggerated compared to its purpose) that are arranged in a grid over the site. The Parc is also noted as one of the first pieces of deconstructivist architecture since Tschumi was greatly influenced by deconstructionist philosopher Jacques Derrida.

The Parc has received its fair share of both praise and criticism, yet no matter what opinions are shed upon the space it is an undeniable fact that Tschumi has created an iconic and successful space in Paris that attracts almost 8 million visitors a year. 

Information and photo sources: http://www.tschumi.com/projects/3/#, http://oma.eu/projects/1982/parc-de-la-villette