Possibly hotter than Mies?

When reading the Somol and Whiting article on the Doppler Effect, I kept imagining the described 'hot' and 'cold' architecture on a visual scale, hot on one side and cold on the other. In K. Michael Hays's essay "Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form", Hays describes the Barcelona Pavilion as "an event with temporal duration, whose actual existence is continually being produced, or whose meaning is continually being decided" This could not be more literal for this particular example of HOT architecture. The original pavilion was destroyed after it was made and was only ever an object representation of economic prowess. 50 years after it was destroyed and ever since then, we have been chasing the ghost of Mies for the feeling of the original pavilion. 

I wonder, which architectural object is boiling hot? Is the Barcelona Pavilion at the absolute 'hot' end of the scale or is there an even hotter piece of architecture? I feel like Hetherwick Studio's Vessel could come close, and from now until forever we're going to "continually decide" on its importance and what it meant to New Yorkers and tourists even when it is no longer standing.        



                                                                                        





Comments

  1. Adrianna, you make a very interesting point regarding the "hotness" of the built environment. I agree with you that the Barcelona Pavilion is one of the 'hottest' pieces of architecture. I think of hot architecture as being critical and architecture that separates itself from the norm which can be interpreted in different ways. So maybe there is not one singular hot-cold scale but rather multiple ones that respond to different aspects of this concept.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would like to throw out another building in New York for discourse - are the Twin Towers on the 'hot' end of the spectrum? These are obviously tremendously emotionally charged and I know their examination is painful for a lot of people. In the context of this discussion, Americans have memorialized the events of that day and we understand that trauma through the absence of the physical structure, but to those who attacked us, its significance is something completely different. The chasm between the two sides and the meaning taken from such a historical event I think touches on a more volatile nerve than Mies or the Vessel. I'm interested in how something like this fits into the spectrum.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I wonder if it is possible to read history as a point of hot architectures? The Pyramids of Giza, Taj Mahal, Najaf cemetery, etc. These hyperbolic examples that demonstrate a marriage of circumstance, resources, and logic seem best suited to gaining comprehension of why these things come into being. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular Posts