See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/299281607

Neo-Organic Architecture: The latest trend in

Architecture

Conference Paper · November 2014

CITATIONS READS

0 1,467

1 author:

Zeinab Elmoghazy
University of Dammam
4 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Zeinab Elmoghazy on 21 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Neo-Organic Architecture: The latest trend in Architecture
Zeinab Ahmed Abd ElGhaffar ElMoghazy
Assistant prof. University of Dammam- KSA

Abstract: It is apparent that the world is changing and accordingly architecture is

following the path. The last decade has witnessed a shift in a new approach in
architecture, which this paper coins as Neo-Organic Architecture. This approach has
been dominating the architectural practices, and many architects have changed their
strategies in architecture to follow it. It tracks the principles of organic architecture,
satisfies the criteria of sustainable architecture and, to the great surprise is an
offspring of Deconstructivists architecture. The seemingly opposing trends are uniting
to produce the aesthetical architecture that could be recognized as iconic. Architects
marked as Deconstructivists are changing their output architecture. Suddenly smooth
lines, fluid curvilinear forms and aesthetic values could be monitored in their work.
Interest in eco-friendly solutions in their buildings is accentuated. Even their concepts
explanations are modified and for the first time it seems that architecture is getting its
concepts from science and nature instead of philosophy. Organic flavor is beginning to
dominate their designs with its attachment to its surroundings instead of being in
complete diversity with it. Their buildings are turning into icons that mark its places
and its designers. New architectural practices are also adopting this trend competing
and producing the most fantastic collection of Iconic Neo-organic buildings. The
unbelievable technological progress with its impact on drawing and visualization,
manufacturing (CAD/CAM), structure and materials, are all shifting architectural ideas
and helping in opening the doors widely in front of creativity and innovation.
This paper identifies this new trend and tries to comprehend it. It tests its prevalence,
looks into the factors that led to it, analyses its main features and studies how it is
different and dependent on deconstruction architecture and organic architecture. It
also looks into the sustainable features in it. The paper sees if this approach is up to
being established as the recent architectural style for contemporary years and the
years to come.
1-Introduction
Since the world is changing, architecture is fully obliged to follow the path allowing
all what was dealt with as impossible to be possible and all the dreams of architects to
come true. The sustainability rush in all fields and the extraordinary technological
advances has affected architecture, causing a paradigm shift in thinking and executing
methodologies leading to a new trend that this paper coins as Neo-organic
architecture. It looks as if it is the re-rising of Frank Lloyd Wright’s organic architecture
with its philosophies and aspirations and at the same time it is the offspring of
Deconstruction architecture with all the freedom it gave to architects and its paving
the road in front of viewers to expect the unexpected. Deconstruction architecture led
automatically to unlimited technological advances. Due to the difficulty in executing
the jogged clashing shapes, architects needed programs to draw their ideas and
needed additional programs to experiment them and furthermore other technologies
to execute them. But how could organic architecture and Deconstruction architecture
come together in one style?
2- Organic Architecture
The term “Organic architecture” was coined by the Frank Lloyd Wright at the
beginning of the twentieth century to describe his work. By getting deep into his
writings, it is found that he deals with this kind of architecture as a philosophy rather
than an architectural style. The main point in this ideology was insisting that
architecture should have a strong relationship with both its site and its time. "Organic
architecture is architecture appropriate to time, appropriate to place, and appropriate
to man."( Rattenbury, 2000,p.12) Organic architecture respects the properties of
materials. Frank Lloyd Wright took Sullivan’s “form follows function” to another level,
asserting “form and function are one”.
Organic Architecture, as Frank Lloyd Wright defined it, means not just looking at
nature but looking into it. “Although the word ‘organic’ in common usage refers to
something which has the characteristics of animals or plants, Frank Lloyd Wright’s
organic architecture takes on a new meaning. It is not a style of imitation, because he
did not claim to be building forms which were representative of nature. Instead,
organic architecture is a reinterpretation of nature’s principles as they had been
filtered through the intelligent minds of men and women who could then build forms
which are more natural than nature itself.”
(http://www.pbs.org/flw/legacy/essay1.html)
The relationship between architecture and its surrounding context, nature or
environment remained as a crucial case for many architects after Wright. Each
interpreted this relation in his own way; whether by inspiring, imitating, integrating,
abstracting or devoting their buildings to the principles of preserving nature. It seems
that Wright’s philosophy and aspirations kept rolling from one architectural generation
to another. Each generation adopted it according to its time and place and spirit of its
age according to Wright’s legacy. It seems that it is returning back in a new vision.
‘Neo’ means the revival of a thing with some modification or “the modern form of”
(http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/neo). That is why this paper
suggests the revival of organic architecture in a contemporary gown in relevance and
with the ideas of Deconstructivism and with the help of contemporary technological
tools and new materials.
3- Deconstruction versus Sustainability
While Deconstruction was dominating the architectural practice in the late eighties
and the nineties of the last century, it was facing a lot of criticism because of its
complex chaotic unidentifiable shapes. It created a state of shock to the viewers, critics
and other architects. Deconstruction architects broke all the limits that were there in
architecture just as the philosophy of Deconstruction by Jacques Derrida intended to
destroy any common belief, or any transcendental truth.
On the other hand came the sustainability advocators who were against what they
considered architectural pollution. For them it was “the architecture of the absurd” as
John Silber calls it. It was the architecture of dis-order and for them “An architecture
that reverses structural algorithms so as to create disorder… ceases to be architecture”
(Salingaros, 2008,p.20). The shocking masses were against every notion of balance and
equilibrium. It helped in disturbing nature with much waste outcomes. Some were
concerned with the environmental functionality, others with energy savings, and
others with having a contextual building that blends with the surrounding environment
in harmony and balance.
Science theories were the solution that brought both teams together. Explaining
the chaotic complex forms according to ‘chaos theory’ or ‘complexity theory’ and
giving reference for the fragmented masses to ‘fractals’. This new vision for explaining
deconstruction architecture merged it with natural phenomenon and opened the door
in front of sustainability advocators and nature lovers to accept what was unaccepted.
It helped them to understand the complexity of masses as an alternative to complexity
of life and nature. At the same time it changed the methodology of thinking of many
architects, as they needed to be true to their concepts and explanations.
4- Architectural Paradigm Shift
It is unbelievable the change in methodology of thinking of some of those who are
considered the pioneers of Deconstruction Architecture. Their lines have changed from
broken clashing fragmented lines into smooth curvilinear lines. The masses changed
from explosive dispersed and distorted forms into fluid integrated masses. The
concepts also changed from being vague and in hermetic codes to “in harmony with
nature”. The famous deco element of cocktail sticks could be referred to as a bunch of
tree logs and Daniel Libeskind’s broken skewed zigzag mass for the Jewish extension of
Berlin Museum has become an imitation of lightning in a storm. The anti-hierarchy that
was there in the deconstructive work is following the randomness and chaos in nature
according to the science theories. At the end, it led to the acceptance and approval of
what was “disorder’ to be ‘world’s order”, “anti-hierarchy” to be “natural chaos” and
“anti-form” to be “cosmogenesis” (Jencks, 1997, p.10) which refers to the universe as a
continuous, unfolding event. This new interpretation continued providing architects
with ideas and aims to create a transitional zone between complete disbelief in any
transcendental norms, as the philosophical approach of Deconstruction suggested, and
the complete belief in the mathematical structure of nature.
This trial to connect every action to natural order prevailed. The indefinite shapes
of any building are due to the indefinite non-geometrical shapes of the elements of
nature. Clouds are not circles and sea shores are not straight lines, trees are not
spheres and its leaves are not triangles. It is a symphony of twists and waves in
complete harmony in which the curve is superior over the line. This kind of explanation
attracted the attention of architects who found in it a refugee for their inexplicable
ideas without mentioning freedom in expression or the hermetic codes of the
Derredian philosophical approach of Deconstruction.
After declaring Bernard Tschumi’s as a Deconstruction Pioneer through his design
for the largest Deconstructive building Le Parc de La Villette in 1998[fig (1)], comes his
project of Carnal Dome in Rolle in 2014 [fig (2)] with its spherical shape with
fragmented openings, and his ANIMA cultural center in Italy taking analogies from
trees branches in his façade [fig (3)]. Also Coop Himmelblau, an architect known for his
deconstruction projects such as UFA Cinema center in Dresden [fig(4)] and Musee des
Confluences in France [fig(5)] , changed his forms to be more fluid and organic such as
his chess academy in Bakuin 2010 [fig(6)]and his proposal for a museum of Bihar in
India in 2011[fig(7)]. Frank Gehry, the famous architect for his Deconstructive Vitra
Museum [fig(8)] became the most famous architect for his Guggenheim museum in
Bilbao with its smooth dynamic lines [fig(9)].

Fig (1), Parc de La Villette, Bernard Tschumi, 1988 Fig (2), Carnal Hall at le Rosey, Switzerland,
Bernard Tschumi, 2014

Fig (3), ANIMA Cultural Center, Italy, Bernard

Tschumi, 2014

Fig (4), UFA Cinema Center, Germany, Coop

Himmelblau, 1998
Fig (5), Musee des Confluences in France,
Coop Himmelblau, 2001
fig (6), Chess Acaemy in Baku, Azebaijan, Coop Fig (7), Heritage Museum Patna, India,
Himmelblau, 2010 CoopHimmelblau, 2011

Fig (8), Vitra Museum, Germany, Frank Gehry, Fig (9), Guggenheim Bilbao, Spain, Frank
1990 Gehry, 1997

Fig (10), The Contemporary Arts Center, USA, Zaha Fig (11), Vitra Fire Station, Germany, Zaha
Hadid, 1997 Hadid, 1990
 Fig (12) Madrid civil Court of Justice, Spain, Zaha Fig (13), Dubai Opera House, UAE, Zaha Hadid,
Hadid, 2007 2006

Fig (14), ribbon of fabric swirls around itself, JS Fig (15),Changsha Meixihu International
Bach Chamber Music Hall, UK, Zaha Hadid, 2009 Culture & Art Centre / Zaha Hadid Architects,
2013

Zaha Hadid is the most stunning example of this shift. Her methodology of dealing
with architecture has completely changed from fragmented distorted explosive forms
with flying beams and anti-gravitational masses [fig(10), (11)] towards more smooth
organic lines that twist in complexity and complete each other whether inspired from
the tornado like Madrid civil court [fig(12)] or from sand dunes like Dubai Opera House
[fig(13)]. It is a “coherent integration” as Hadid herself puts it in her explanation for the
project JS Bach Chamber Music Hall in UK [fig (14)].
“The design enhances the multiplicity of Bach’s work through a coherent
integration of formal and structural logic. A single continuous ribbon of fabric swirls
around itself, creating layered spaces to cocoon the performers and audience with in
an intimate fluid space.” said Hadid. (http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-
5806-zaha-hadid-architects-designs-homage-to-bach/).
This phrase could be applied to most of Hadid’s recent work. Her masses were
given more characteristics such as fluidity and floatation. Sometimes it is even melting
on each other and in its site such as her Changsha Meixihu International Culture & Art
Centre [fig (15)]. Many architectural practices all over the world are following the steps
heading towards the same smooth curvilinear lines with organic flavor in their designs.
Calatrava Architects, Fosters architects[fig(16)], Jean Nouvel Architects [fig(17)],
Snohetta Architects [fig(18)], BIG Architects[fig (19], UN studio[ fig(20], Nüvist
architecture & design[fig(21)], MAD Architects [fig(22)], Herzog & de Meuron[fig(23)],
Mecanoo Architects, Henning Larsen Architects, Leeser Architects, Henenghan Peng
Architects, Aedas, Lava, OFIS Architects, SANAA Architects, …etc. are all well renowned
practices that are benefiting from the new technologies to create organic features.

Fig (16), Smooth fluid curvilinear lines with Fig (17), Louvre Museum, Abu Dhabi, UAE, Jean
patterns articulation, Rimini Seafront and Mixed Noouvel, 2007
Use Rimini, Italy, Fosters Architects, 2008

Fig (18), King AbdulAziz Cultural Center, Fig (19), National Library in Astana, Kazakhstan,
Dhahran,KSA, Snohetta, 2007 BIG Architects, 2009

Fig (20), Guangzhou Museum, Three Museums Fig (21) Mosque in Remembrance of Sinan the
one square, Guangzhou, China, UN Studio, 2013 Great, Turkey, Nüvist Architecture & Design, 2010
 Fig (22), New Opera House and Cultural Center Fig (23), Bird’s Nest, Beijing Stadium for Olympic
in Harbin, China, MAD Architects, 2014 Games, China, Herzog & de Meuron, 2008

With a close look at these projects, it is found that smoothness, curvilinearity and
the “coherent integration” are not the only features that characterize these projects.
Other features could be monitored in most of these projects whether collectively or
separately. The recurrence of these features proves the presence of a new style in
architecture. The most common ones could be concluded as follows:
a- Complex Curvilinearity: Using the curve is done with fluidity and has its echo that
is neither parallel nor congruent. It is more like drawing a sketch. Processes
adopted from Deconstructivism such as “Scaling, self-similarity, twisting,
wrapping, skewing and displacing” are done to the smooth curve to add the sense
of complexity and randomness to it.
b- Dynamic Fluidity: The intention of giving the building the sense of motion is so
clear in all buildings. Although it is against the static purpose of the building
intended for settling down or resting, yet the daily life is full of motion and if
buildings are intended to be in relation with humans and intended to be a view in
itself for its aesthetic values, just like the sea or trees, they have to have the sense
of motion in them. This sense of motion could be realized by different ways.
Sometimes it is by the repetition of patterns or by its scaling, it could be by the
amount of details in the building that gives the eyes the richness it needs to grasp
attention. It could be by fluid forms that pass by each other in unexpected tilted
and skewed juxtaposition.
c- Coherent Integration: Architects intended to gather all the elements of the project
to integrate with each other as a coherent whole. The “coherent integration”
could be monitored between the concept and mass, between the building and the
site and between the exterior and interior. The landscape is an essential part of
the design of the building. It is an extension of the interior lines and complements
with the masses.
d- Parametricism: This characteristic takes integration to a higher level. Each element
of design acts as a variable that is dependent on other variables, just like the
parameters of the mathematical equation that differ by the differing of any other
parameter. It changes the building into a set of inter-dependable parameters,
starting from the urban design till the details of interior design. The differences
 between masses become indistinguishable; instead fluid lines complement the
masses with each other. Organic curvilinear lines continue to form the interiors in
parametric integration [fig (24), fig (25)]. Patterns are also present parametrically
moving fluidly with the curvatures of the mass to become dense in parts and
scattered in other parts, sometimes solid and in other times transparent. This
gives more accentuation on the different articulations in the form of the mass.[fig
(26),(27),(28)] This parametric design would have never happened without the
presence of CAD/CAM technologies that allowed the production of multiple,
though diverse units in mass production so decreasing costs.
e-

Fig (24), Lines of masses complement with the Fig (25), The exterior lines of masses continue
landscape and the site lines, Abu Dhabi Arts inside to create the interior design, Abu Dhabi
and Performing Center, UAE, Zaha Hadid, 2008 Arts and Performing Center, UAE, Zaha Hadid,
2008

Fig (26), Ras AlKaima Hotel (Cobra Hotel), UAE, Snohetta, 2008

f- Patterns Articulation: Although patterns were condemned by both modern and

Deconstruction architectures yet it gets a powerful return back to architecture in
this contemporary style through becoming an innovative and powerful means of
articulation. It returns back with more meanings and functions than just giving
aesthetical values. Patterns have three levels; it can only be an ornament whether
decorative or hiding undesirable feature. The second level is being an integral part
 of design emphasizing and accentuating on different features or concepts [fig
(29)]. The third level is to be an essential partner in problem solving of some of the
crisis or aims of the building itself [fig (30)]. Of course the digital tools facilitated
the usage of patterns on all levels.
“The role played by the computer has likewise been acknowledged. Design
software has enabled architects to play with textures, colors, patterns and
topologies in highly decorative ways” (Picon, 2013, p.10)

Fig (27), Fluid lines such as the silhouette of
sand dunes connect the masses up and
down in an organic random essence,
capturing the moment of wind moving the
sand dunes
Fig (28), Patterns from masses continue to
cover the tower and increase and decrease
parametrically with the undulation of the
mass

Fig (29) the tessellation pattern came from
the sense of dynamism which characterizes
The transport company, New cargo
headquarters, Sydney, Tony Owen Partners.
2010
Fig (30), By mapping the different air flows
and solar direction across the site, different
sized windows are positioned accordingly,
minimizing heat loss in the winter and heat
gain in the summer. Sinosteel
International Plaza, MAD Architects

g- Elegance and Balance: After the distorted and fragmented masses in

Deconstruction, and although architects tend to complex curvilinearity in their
masses, yet comes the elegant and balanced masses in neo-organic architecture.
The integration and parametricism between the elements of the project assured
the balance between different masses in its proportions and the landscape
surrounding it. After the conflict that seemed to be between masses in
Deconstruction, they all seem now to be in harmony with each other. Just like
mother nature. Although the shapes, forms and patterns of nature are irregular,
yet they are all in harmony and balance.
h- Taking Analogies from Nature: Whether imitating or inspiring from, landforms,
plants, stones or sea waves, are the intension of most contemporary architects
following the neo-organic style. They try to connect their buildings to Nature or to
the surrounding context. They might refer to a certain natural element as concept
of design or in the forms of masses or in the interior design or in the system of
construction or operation. Taking analogies from nature is usually accompanied
with freezing a moment of movement to be reflected in the building giving the
sense of motion to architecture.
i- Following Sustainability Measures: They range from low energy buildings that only
consider energy efficiency to sustainable buildings that consider all possible facets
such as benefiting from sun or wind energy. They intend to be green or integrate
greenery in the design whether in landscape or in the masses. Used patterns are
chosen in sizes and accumulation according to environmental factors such as
sunlight entry or avoiding wind. Adoption of the green building standards has
become a condition in many countries for executing the building. Surely the
buildings following Neo-organic style is mostly far away from economic
sustainability, as it consumes a lot of costs in its design and execution.
Obviously, not all buildings are following all the eight points as an agenda for design
and concept production. But these features are dominating the current architectural
thinking and practice. Its architects are neither referring to Deconstruction nor to
sustainability as an idol. This allows them to be unified under the Neo-Organic style as
the zeitgeist of contemporary architecture.
5-Neo-organic Architecture
A new global architectural language is prevailing worldwide, accepted, approved and
loved by both viewers and critics. It is a “non-orthogonal architecture” that has many
analogies, vivid concepts and dramatic effects. It is the architecture with buildings that
look less like buildings and look more like metaphors, making it easier for more people
to feel connected to. It inspires its forms and concepts from Nature. It is very apparent
that this emergent style is related to a great extent to the organic style of Frank Lloyd
Wright and that it is the rebirth and redevelopment for a style that had great
expectations but was not able to fulfill it because of technological and logistic
limitations. Yet there are some differences that are due to the interference of other
styles, especially Deconstruction, and availability of ultra-materials and technologies.
For example the usage of Cartesian geometry and grids in organic architecture was a
feature that could be justified to the available tools at its time. But in Neo-organic
architecture, no grids are used. Instead fluid, flowing and dynamic architecture is
present. The curve is favored over the line and is the generator of all the elasticity,
flexibility and continuity in spaces and form. Although Organic architecture called for
simplicity and clarity in its masses producing highly pure and easily read forms, Neo-
organic architecture appreciates complexity of forms and masses allowing multiple
meanings and interaction with clients. This could produce vague complicated forms yet
it is compensated with elegance, harmony and balance that preserve the aesthetic
values of the style. Organic architecture used natural materials from the surrounding
 contexts, but neo-organic architecture uses cutting –edge materials that allows more
interaction with the users and help in giving an exceptional and unique character to
the building. Although organic architecture refused ornaments, Neo-organic
architecture respects pattern articulation and uses it as camouflage, in accentuating
certain features and concepts or as an essential partner in problem solving of some of
the aims of the building itself.
Organic architecture arises “from within out” (Smith, 2004, p. 118). And this is the rule
that makes organic building functions like a cohesive organism. Each part of the design
relates to the whole, with a natural integration between exterior and interior spaces.
In Neo-organic architecture the exterior is the key element in the design. The mass
should be eye-catching grasping attention with its uniqueness and complexity. The
mass integrates with the landscape and the site and goes inside the building to
complement with the interiors. It seems that the design is from outside within. The
product of this style is a unique kind of buildings that stand as icons in their contexts,
re-identifying its places and its architects. At a time in which architecture is largely
dominated by economics, technical possibilities and regulations, Neo-organic
architecture struggles for an integral approach that includes ecological aspects,
cultural meaning and spirituality.
References:
Jencks, Charles (1997), The Architecture of the Jumping Universe: A Polemic: How Complexity
Science is Changing Architecture and Culture, Academy Press
Jencks, Charles (2011),The Story of Post-Modernism: Five Decades of the Ironic, Iconic and
nd
Critical in Architecture,Willey, 2 ed.
Picon, Antoine (2013), Ornament: The Politics of Architecture and Subjectivity, Wiley
Rattenbury, John (2000), A Living Architecture: In the Spirit of Frank Lloyd Wright and Taliesin
Architects, Pomegranate Communications
Salingaros, Nikos A. (2008), Anti-Architecture and Deconstruction, ISI Distributed Titles; 3rd
Edition edition
Silber, John, 2007, Architecture of the Absurd: How "Genius" Disfigured a Practical Art, Quantuck
Lane
Schumacher, Patrik (2012), The Autopoiesis of Architecture, Volume II: A New Agenda for
Architecture, Wiley
Schumacher, Patrik (2011),The Autopoiesis of Architecture: A New Framework for Architecture,
Wiley
Smith, Kathryn (2004), The Show To End All Shows: Frank Lloyd Wright And The Museum Of
Modern Art, The Museum of Modern Art,( Studies in Modern Art) (No. 8)
*http://www.pbs.org/flw/legacy/essay1.html [Accessed in 7october2014]
*http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-5806-zaha-hadid-architects-designs-homage-
to-bach/[Accessed in 7october2014]

View publication stats