Prada Epicenter: Architecture as Advertising

Prada Epicenter: Architecture as Advertising

By Rachel Gamble

Recently, companies have become increasingly creative with their marketing, in an attempt to stand out. Modern-day companies have begun to turn to architecture in order to establish their own unique public identity. Thus architecture has taken on a new role: that of an advertisement, through which companies can convey their message to the public. Now more than ever, architecture, like a billboard or signage piece, has the ability to define the image of the company.

Prada is an example of a company that has begun to employ commercial architecture to represent itself to the public. In the Prada flagship store in New York, we see how the design decisions of Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas and his firm OMA communicate the nature of the merchandise within to visitors. Like an advertisement, Rem Koolhaas’s 23,000-square-foot building infers the qualities and ideals of the brand. The New York store was part of a Prada project to rethink the brand’s image. The goal was a space that is representative of the new, revitalized organization that commissioned it. Thus, the building was designed to say that the Prada brand is luxurious, as well as experimental, unorthodox, and technologically advanced.

The architecture of the store thus becomes a kind of narrative – a personal statement on the brand. Rem Koolhaas combined architecture and retail in a variety of ways in the space. When visitors first enter the store, they enter at ground level via a curving, wave-like space that slopes downwards. Merchandise is situated at the bottom of this wooden “wave," in the basement. On the other side of the wave, there are oversized steps that double as a flexible space to display merchandise, and as seats for films, lectures, performances, and other public events. The space is not only a shop, but also a venue that can host cultural events. A concealed stage can unfold out of the “wave” for such occasions, simply by pushing a button. The space reinforces Prada’s new image as not only a brand, but also a cultured company that is innovative and forward-thinking.

The architecture communicates Prada’s image in other ways, such as the wall murals. The main walls were left clear and unobstructed, so that giant Prada wallpaper could be frequently changed to match the theme of the merchandise. Additionally, a transparent, circular glass elevator transports visitors from the top to bottom level. The elevator serves dual functions: a method of circulation, and also a display for accessories such as handbags. Thus, visitors can simultaneously shop and ride the elevator. Furthermore, the large metal display cases which are suspended from the ceiling can be reconfigured to open up space for cultural activities even more. The other display cases include visual and audio equipment to further support public events. The space is flexible: it can easily become more than a shop. Everywhere throughout the store, merchandise is interspersed with interesting interactive architecture and advanced technology. We can easily see how Rem Koolhaas designed the space to reflect the core values of Prada to customers.

The New York shop says a lot about the value Prada places on originality in its products. It also shows how architecture can become a powerful advertising tool. We see how now, more than ever, business owners are hiring architects to produce buildings that are revealing of their company ideals. A unique and creative space, like that of the Prada NY store, suggests that the company that commissioned it is equally unique and creative. It is the architect’s job to take the company’s needs and convert them into architecture. In the Prada epicenter by Rem Koolhaas, we see this unique new ability of architecture to function as a branding tool. 

Retractable stage

Unique wave feature

Movable metal display cases

Compositions: Landscapes & Paintings

By Shawna Hammon 
Lecture - "Making Landscapes: Urban Gardens"

I cannot help but notice some striking similarities in the formal language between the Rem Koolhaas competition entry for Parc de la Villette and a Wassily Kandinsky painting.  Although these two designers lived during different eras, I believe this comparison will demonstrate how this language continues to be used today by designers across the world – it has become the universal dictionary of graphic elements that Kandinsky sought to assemble during his career.

Wassily Kandinsky, a Russian painter, is credited as the first to produce completely abstract works.  He began his studies with law and economic.  He did not begin painting until he was 30 years old.  Kandinsky lived during both world wars and taught at the Bauhaus until the Nazis shut it down in 1933.

Rem Koolhaas, a Dutch “starchitect,” is considered one of the “World’s Most Influential People” by Time magazine.  He is a founding partner of OMA and teaches at the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University.  Koolhaas has published several books, most notably (for the purpose of this blog post), Delirious New York in which he explores the idea of the city as an unstable environment shaped by political and economical forces and organizational tools such as the grid that help stabilize and program the city into its current state of being.

This post will compare the Koolhaas competition entry for Parc de la Villette to Kandinsky’s Composition VIII.  Both projects are layered and explore the juxtaposition between controlled and free conditions.

 

Koolhaas explores two conditions (1) the “culture of congestion,” which is unstable, uncontrolled, and unprogrammed as opposed to (2) “the grid”, which is structured, rigid, controlled and programmed.  The park acts as a “social condenser” through the 43 programmatic bands that are permeable and encourage programmatic mutation.  There is a “dynamic coexistence of activities.”  In Parc de la Villette it is possible to never experience the park the same way twice depending on how you move through and between the programmatic strips.  Koolhaas encourages self-invention, it is the “people’s park” allowed to evolve and change over time.  Participants are invited to make it their own. 

Kandinsky also plays with the notion of geometric versus organic shapes.  He notes that there are exact geometries in nature, like those seen in the formation of a spiders’ web or the veins of a leaf.  Others are freer, organic.  He leaves it to the observer to decipher his paintings and extract meaning – whatever that may mean.  He seeks “effective contact with the soul.”  The observer might not even understand why they are drawn to a certain painting, but that it just feels right.  Kandinsky sought a language for painting – he tried to assemble a universal dictionary of graphic elements for his compositions.  This vocabulary consisted of point, line, plane, colour and texture.

Both men talk about their projects in relation to music – not surprising from Kandinsky, but we do wonder if Koolhaas was influenced by Kandinsky even to this extent.

“How to orchestrate on a metropolitan field the most dynamic coexistence of activities x, y, and z and to generate through their mutual interference a chain reaction of new, unprecedented events; or, how to design a social condenser, based on a horizontal congestion, the size of a park.” – Koolhaas

“As soon as we open the door, step out of the seclusion and plunge into the outside reality, we become an active part of this reality and experience its pulsation with all our senses. The constantly changing grades of tonality and tempo of the sounds wind themselves about us, rise spirally and suddenly collapse. Likewise, the movements envelop us by a play of horizontal and vertical lines bending in different directions as colour-patches pile up and dissolve into high or low tonalities.” – Kandinsky

Citations:

Özkan, Özay. “Strategic Way of Design in Rem Koolhaas’ Parc de la Villette Project.”  MA Thesis Middle East Technical University, December 2008. Dissertations and Theses. Web. 10 Sep. 2012.

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

OMA in Berlin

By Jordan Grant

Berlin invited many new architects into the city after the fall of the war, and each played a large role in what the city is today. I was fortunate enough to see this in person since I was able to spend some time in Berlin before coming to Italy. I was therefore able to relate to some of the places discussed in lecture, yet also found myself feeling disappointed when I discovered how many buildings I didn't have the opportunity to see. Perhaps one of the projects that I’m most disappointed about missing is that of the Embassy of the Netherlands.

Photo Courtesy of OMA

For a brief history of the architect and project- OMA, a name virtually synonymous with that of Rem Koolhaas, is a firm that began in 1975 and is still going strong today. OMA was invited in to Berlin to design the Netherlands Embassy, which completed construction in 2003. The Embassy was originally located elsewhere but the site was sold following the war, which allowed the Netherlands to move their site to a more strategic location called “mitte” (translated it means “center”), which is composed of former East and West Berlin districts. This detail may seem rather insignificant, but it actually drove the design of the building from the very beginning.

Photo Courtesy of OMA

OMA describes the project on their website as “…a disciplined cube with equally disciplined irregularities which aims to facilitate a better understanding of Berlin, confronting divergent ideas about how the city, with its complexity, heaviness, opacity, and beauty, should build / rebuild. Traditional planning guidelines of the former West Berlin demanded that new buildings in the neighbourhood (the Roldandufer in Mitte) reflect the local 19th century architectural style. Planning officials in the former East Berlin were more open to innovation. As a result, OMA combined an obedient approach (strictly fulfilling the block's perimeter) with a disobedient one (building an isolated cube).” (read more on OMA’s website at http://oma.eu/projects/2003/netherlands-embassy)

The 8,500 square meter project is broken down into the following spaces: 4,800 square meters of offices, 1,500 square meters of housing, and 2,200 square meters of parking. It reaches a height of 8 stories, but perhaps the most important and interesting part of the project is the winding path inside the project that divides the 8 stories into 24 different levels. This pathway determines the arrangement of the interior spaces as well as the exterior façade. At the points where the path comes into contact with the exterior, the façade becomes more transparent and the path allows itself to become more visible.

Photo Courtesy of OMA

I believe that this project is absolutely stunning, especially when lit at night. I’ve included a few photos of the project, but if you are interested at all in seeing more I’ve discovered a website which shows beautiful photos of the project that were taken for a magazine feature. Check out the Iwan Baan’s website for the project at www.iwan.com/photo_berlin_dutch_embassy_Rem_Koolhaas_OMA.php.