Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

Types of Normative Critics and its Example

1. Measured Critics
Arsitek Jepang mengkritik bangunan-bangunan karya Zaha Hadid sebagai bangunan yang terlalu boros, baik di ukuran maupun di biaya.

Zaha Hadid's sport stadiums: 'Too big, too expensive, too much like a vagina'
London-based Iraqi architect under fire as pressure mounts for designs in Qatar and Japan to be scaled back

The design for Qatar's Al-Wakrah stadium. Zaha Hadid says it is inspired by the sails of Arab dhows others say it just looks like a vagina. Photograph: AECOM

One looks like a futuristic bicycle helmet, stretched across its Tokyo site in an aerodynamic sweep. The other has been said to resemble a vagina, rising out of the Qatari desert in a great vulvic bulge. Both are in fact sinuous sporting stadiums by the London-based Iraqi architect Zaha Hadid, who is facing calls for her exuberant designs to be scaled back. This week Japanese sports officials finally bowed to growing criticism that Hadid's scheme for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium was too big and too expensive, saying they would shrink the design by a quarter. The 80,000-seat venue, planned for the site of the current 48,000-seat national stadium, built in 1958, is described by Hadid as "light and cohesive", its structure forming a dynamic bridge that "creates an exciting new journey for visitors". But the design has been met with fury by Japanese architects, who have complained that it is grossly insensitive to its context, looming 70 metres above the area of low-rise buildings and parks in the west of the city, close to the Meiji shrine, where a 15-metre height limit is in force.

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

The 100-strong group, led by Pritzker prize winner Fumihiko Maki, 85,filed a petition against the project earlier this month, protesting that the stadium was two to three times the size of its equivalents in London and Athens, and more than three times their cost, at 300bn yen (1.8bn).

Japanese architects have complained that Zaha Hadid's design for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium is grossly insensitive to its context. Photograph: AP

In response to mounting pressure, the Japan Sport Council has now announced it will scale back the floor space by a quarter to 220,000 sq metres, and reduce the budget to 180bn yen still nearly 40% higher than the government's initial estimates for a new stadium. With its ambitious scale, the project has echoes of Hadid's plans for the London 2012 aquatics centre, which were originally intended to be two such buildings, twice the size, rippling along the edge of the Olympic park like a pair of stingrays. But the realities of a budget got in the way and the scheme was cut in half. The Tokyo news comes as Hadid has been forced to bat off claims that her design for Qatar's Al-Wakrah stadium, for the 2022 football World Cup, is based on the female genitalia, after images of the "vagina stadium" went viral last week. The architect insists that the building's swollen flaps, which part along the roof to frame a central ovoid opening, were inspired by the sails of local dhow sailing boats, but others have ridiculed their labial similarities.
Taken from : http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/nov/28/zaha-hadid-stadiumsvagina

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

2. Systematic Critics
NYTimes menyatakan bahwa desain akhir dari Tower rancangan Jean ini mendapatkan pengaruh dari perhitungan, pemikiran dan permintaan developer untuk membuat sebuah tower yang bisa menjual, dan menguntungkan bagi pihak MoMA dan masyarakat. Tetapi Jean tetap menggunakan gaya desain dia sehingga tercipta sebuah desain yang mengakomodasi permintaan dan tetap menggambarkan ciri khasnya.

Next to MoMA, a Tower Will Reach for the Stars

By NICOLAI OUROUSSOFF Published: November 15, 2007

If New Yorkers once saw their skyline as the great citadel of capitalism, who could blame them? We had the best toys of all. But for the last few decades or so, that honor has shifted to places like Singapore, Beijing and Dubai, while Manhattan settled for the predictable. Perhaps thats about to change. A new 75-story tower designed by the architect Jean Nouvel for a site next to the Museum of Modern Art in Midtown promises to be the most exhilarating addition to the skyline in a generation. Its faceted exterior, tapering to a series of crystalline peaks, suggests an atavistic preoccupation with celestial heights. It brings to mind John Ruskins praise for the irrationality of Gothic architecture: It not only dared, but delighted in, the infringement of every servile principle.

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

Commissioned by Hines, an international real estate developer, the tower will house a hotel, luxury apartments and three floors that will be used by MoMA to expand its exhibition space. The melding of cultural and commercial worlds offers further proof, if any were needed, that Mr. Nouvel is a master at balancing conflicting urban forces. Yet the building raises a question: How did a profit-driven developer become more adventurous architecturally than MoMA, which has tended to make cautious choices in recent years? Like many of Manhattans major architectural accomplishments, the tower is the result of a Byzantine real estate deal. Although MoMA completed an $858 million expansion three years ago, it sold the Midtown lot to Hines for $125 million earlier this year as part of an elaborate plan to grow still further. Hines would benefit from the museums prestige; MoMA would get roughly 40,000 square feet of additional gallery space in the new tower, which will connect to its second-, fourth- and fifth-floor galleries just to the east. The $125 million would go toward its endowment. To its credit the Modern pressed for a talented architect, insisting on veto power over the selection. Still, the sale seems shortsighted on the museums part. A 17,000square-foot vacant lot next door to a renowned institution and tourist draw in Midtown is a rarity. And who knows what expansion needs MoMA may have in the distant future? By contrast the developer seems remarkably astute. Hines asked Mr. Nouvel to come up with two possible designs for the site. A decade ago anyone who was about to invest hundreds of millions on a building would inevitably have chosen the more conservative of the two. But times have changed. Architecture is a form of marketing now, and Hines made the bolder choice. Set on a narrow lot where the old City Athletic Club and some brownstones once stood, the soaring tower is rooted in the mythology of New York, in particular the work of Hugh Ferriss, whose dark, haunting renderings of an imaginary Manhattan helped define its dreamlike image as the early-20th-century metropolis. But if Ferrisss designs were expressionistic, Mr. Nouvels contorted forms are driven by their own peculiar logic. By pushing the structural frame to the exterior, for example, he was able to create big open floor plates for the museums second-, fourthand fifth-floor galleries. The towers form slopes back on one side to yield views past the residential Museum Tower; its northeast corner is cut away to conform to zoning regulations.

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

The irregular structural pattern is intended to bear the strains of the towers contortions. Mr. Nouvel echoes the pattern of crisscrossing beams on the buildings facade, giving the skin a taut, muscular look. A secondary system of mullions housing the ventilation system adds richness to the facade. Mr. Nouvel anchors these soaring forms in Manhattan bedrock. The restaurant and lounge are submerged one level below ground, with the top sheathed entirely in glass so that pedestrians can peer downward into the belly of the building. A bridge on one side of the lobby links the 53rd and 54th Street entrances. Big concrete columns crisscross the spaces, their tilted forms rooting the structure deep into the ground. As you ascend through the building, the floor plates shrink in size, which should give the upper stories an increasingly precarious feel. The top-floor apartment is arranged around such a massive elevator core that its inhabitants will feel pressed up against the glass exterior walls. (Mr. Nouvel compared the apartment to the pied--terre at the top of the Eiffel Tower from which Gustave Eiffel used to survey his handiwork below.) The buildings brash forms are a sly commentary on the rationalist geometries of Edward Durell Stone and Philip L. Goodwins 1939 building for the Museum of Modern Art andYoshio Taniguchis 2004 addition. Like many contemporary architects Mr. Nouvel sees the modern grid as confining and dogmatic. His towers contorted forms are a scream for freedom. And what of the Modern? For some, the appearance of yet another luxury tower stamped with the museums imprimatur will induce wincing. But the more immediate issue is how it will affect the organization of the Moderns vast collections. The museum is only now beginning to come to grips with the strengths and weaknesses of Mr. Taniguchis addition. Many feel that the arrangement of the fourthand fifth-floor galleries housing the permanent collection is confusing, and that the double-height second-floor galleries for contemporary art are too unwieldy. The architecture galleries, by comparison, are small and inflexible. There is no room for the medium-size exhibitions that were a staple of the architecture and design department in its heyday. The additional gallery space is a chance for MoMA to rethink many of these spaces, by reordering the sequence of its permanent collection, for example, or considering how it might resituate the contemporary galleries in the new tower and gain more space for architecture shows in the old.

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

But to embark on such an ambitious undertaking the museum would first have to acknowledge that its Taniguchi-designed complex has posed new challenges. In short, it would have to embrace a fearlessness that it hasnt shown in decades. MoMA would do well to take a cue from Ruskin, who wrote that great art, whether expressed in words, colors or stones, does not say the same thing over and over again.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/arts/design/15arch.html?_r=0

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

3. Doctrinal Critics
Kritik oleh Mark Faverman ini menyebutkan bahwa walaupun banyak pandangan negatif untuk karya-karya dari Frank Gehry, di masih menganggap bahwa Gehry adalah arsitek yang memiliki logic dan metode implisit dari setiap karya-karyanya, yang memang sebagian besar bertema ikan, sisik, ataupun sclupture. Selain itu dia juga meyakinkan pembaca bahwa Gehry adalah arsitek dengan gaya organik yang sangat unik dan futuristik.

Frank Gehry's Dancing House in Prague

An American/Czech Architectural Masterpiece
By: Mark Favermann - 06/08/2009

Prague is a city known for its magnificent Gothic, NeoBaroque, Neo-Gothic and Art Nouveau buildings. In harsh contrast, in Prague's outskirts, there are examples of Soviet inspired, Stalin era no frills and little style industrial and apartment structures. To strategically make a visual statement in strong opposition to Eastern Bloc aesthetics, soon after the fall of communism, a Dutch investment company began to plan and develop what was to become The Dancing House. The Dancing House is the common name for the Nationale-Nederlanden Building in downtown Prague. Also referred to as The Fred and Ginger Building as it vaguely resembles the 1930's Hollywood dancers Fred Astair and Ginger Rodgers, the whimsical structure was designed by Canadian-American Frank Gehry in cooperation with Czech architect Vlado Milunic in 1992. This was a few short years after the fall of Communism in Eastern Europe. At the time, it demonstrated an embracing of contemporary and significantly American global culture. The structure was built on a vacant lot overlooking the river that once housed a building that had been destroyed by late WWII bombings of Prague. It was planned to incorporate a cultural center. This building was very controversial at its inception. Not only did it standout stylistically, but it was asymmetrical. and to many, it was glaringly out of character to its more traditional setting. By those in opposition, it was often referred to publicaly as The

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

Drunk House. In private, one can imagine what it was called. Critics claimed that the building fought with its environment and demonstrated disdain for its context. Even after over a decade, there are many who still hate the building. Others championed it as a statement of liberation, freedom and democratic beliefs. Here was architecture as politics.For decades, Czech President Vaclav Havel lived next to the site. He favored it and desired that it become an inspirational cultural center for the new age emerging. Today, there is a French restaurant on the top floor with wonderful views of Prague. The tenants include several multinational firms. However, disappointingly to many, the plans for a cultural center were never realized. Best laid plans, etc. The design tools and techniques used on this building were the test runs for the processes used on all of Gehry's future projects including the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao as well as others. The use of curves on the building mimic the aerodynamic shape of airplanes and and sports cars; the software that his firm has refined was previously used to design French jet aircraft. Though Gehry's buildings often appear to have a random quality, there is a method or intrinsic logic to everything he does. Each of his structures in the last 25 years or so include radically sculptured organic shapes that have pronounced visual gestures and forms. There is a figurative quality to this building. The sweeping curvy female figure attached to the male straight one that composes the two sections of the building. Other buildings like his Guggenhiem Museum in Bilboa references scales and fish shapes. Fenestration or window design in this building can be seen reused in the Stada Center at MIT in Cambridge, MA. Gehry recycles architectural elements and design pieces. His architectural style is strongly stated in all of his works. His best works, like the Dancing Building in Prague, always surprise and often confound viewers in compelling ways. However, many react negatively to his designs as the architectural results can seem unworldly and out of balance. Gehry pushes the envelope and even tears it open. Gehry also uses maleable and unexpected materials that often shimmer, reflect and even sparkle such as corrugated as well as stainless steel, polished aluminum, chain link fencing and wood along with various transparencies and tints of glass. The

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

Guggenhiem Museum in Bilboa, Spain, The Walt Disney Concert Hall in downtown Los Angeles and the MARTa Museum in Hereford, Germany are strong examples of this interesting and often provocative use of materials. His first major project to be recognized was his own residence in Santa Monica, CA. With this unconventionally facaded conventional house, Gehry was able to demonstrate a unique sensibility and personal architectural vision. For the first time, he demonstrated the asymmetry of his future structures carefully crafted using wood, chain link and corrugated steel to transform a rather ordinary structure into a personal and unique architectural statement. He went from being a paper architect with only drawings of his concepts and visions to a physically realized architect. Though there can be a certain rawness to his buildings with his use of seemingly found materials, Gehry is a highly sophisticated designer. He is knowledgeable about European art history as well as contemporary painting and sculpture. It should be noted that Gehry's first recognizable design success was with the creation of a series of cardboard sculptural furniture which are now prized by serious collectors. Gehry also applies state of the art computer aided three dimensional design software to assist in illustrating and explaining his design concepts to contractors and building trades. Critics of Gehry complain that he is a one-trick pony. In other words, his buildings seem to copy each other. This is a strange critique of a highly stylized architect. Didn't Frank Lloyd Wright's architecture have a clearly Wright quality? And H.H. Richardson's? Even Santiago Calatrava's? Secondly, he has been criticized for creating functionless forms that waste resources. Gothic and Baroque and even classical architecture were never purely functional. Modernism attempted architecture as large undecorated boxes, but that was also criticized. Thirdly, his structures overwhelm their intended use for museums and arenas. This building is just making a strong architectural statement. Gehry has always been interested in architecture as sculpture. There are very few modern or contemporary buildings in central city Prague. Those that do exist often seem disharmonious to their surroundings. Unexpectedly, this particular Prague building reflects and actually underscores its neighborhood setting. Gehry must have spent time studying the surrounding large and quite beautiful 19th Century structures. His building makes a distinct even radical statement, but oddly pays homage visually to the broad streetscape. Here, architectural imagination has met urban design historical context. Building as sculptural form, the Dancing House is one of Gehry's most aesthetically resolved structures.
http://www.berkshirefinearts.com/06-08-2009_frank-gehry-s-dancing-house-in-prague.htm

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

4. Typical Critics
Orang mengatakan bahwa masjid identik dengan kubah, tetapi Masjid AlIrsyad ini sama sekali tidak menggunakan bentuk kubah. Bentuk persegi merupakan bentuk utama di masjid ini, arsitek beralasan bahwa bentuk persegi merupakan bentuk terefisien untuk menampung barisan jamaah masjid.

Al-Irsyad Mosque / Urbane

Architects: PT. Urbane Indonesia Location: Kota Baru Parahyangan, Padalarang, Jawa Barat, Indonesia Principal Architect: M. Ridwan Kamil Project Team: Fahry Adhitya Client: PT. Belaputera Intiland Site Area: 8,000 sqm Project Area: 970 sqm Project Year: 2010 Photographs: Emilio Photoimagination

A mosque is a place of worship for Muslimsa place to kneel, stoop ones head and pray solemnly. Oftentimes, it is also used to carry out various other religious activities. The first thing that might catch ones attention about this mosque in Kota Baru Parahyangan (KBP) is the absence of a dome, which is almost always a quintessential characteristic of mosques. However, the architects have informed that the dome is not a cultural/religious identity, hence not a necessity when it comes to designing an Islamic place of worship.

Normative Critics Rr.

Wurandika 36349

The architecture of the KBP mosque is unique in that it uses stacked stones as the main faade to create tectonic effect, while embedding Islamic text/calligraphy on the faade as a graphic element and reminder prayer. The primary shape of the mosque takes the form of a square, which seems the most efficient since Muslims pray in straight rows facing a specific are direction or the Qiblah.The structural columns arranged in such way that the faade seems like it is not supported by any frame. This shape also alludes to Kabah, the most important structure in the Islamic world, to which all Muslims prayers are directed. The tall pole-like structure next to the square building form is called the minaret, an important element for mosque. It was used in the past for someone to call out to all Muslims to prayer on top of the minaret whenever prayer time has come. Today, the minaret still serves the same function, except loudspeakers a used instead. In a way, the minaret has become an icon of mosques; anyone searching for a mosque can one from afar.

With a capacity to accommodate approximately 1,000 people, the mosque is also designed to blend in with nature. The stacked stones allow for natural ventilation without the need for air-conditioning. Surrounded by water, the ambient temperature around the mosque will be lower during the hot season. Once inside, the people are able to look out and appreciate the external scenery.
http://www.archdaily.com/87587/al-irsyad-mosque-urbane/