Rem Koolhaas, a by-product of The Downtown Athletic Club
In"'Life in the Metropolis' or 'The Culture of Congestion'" Rem Koolhaas develops his understanding of the Metropolis through a chronology of events he sees as crucial developments that solve congestion issues. Initially, responses to increased density are easily derived as one plus one equals two. In Coney Island, not everyone could reach the beach considering the crowds. Hence, they used electricity (a modern technology at the time) to increase the window of opportunity for the guests. The loneliness due to the high density and therefore less interest or interaction with individuals, whether proven at the time or not, was considered true, so boom, "Barrels of Love."
The ease at which new inventions were being created to solve problems escalates in his writings as architects, inventors, designers, and so on begin realizing that they can go beyond solving issues and instead curate experiences. The Downtown Athletic club as the seeming culmination of this realization where acts of exceeding absurdity were assembled. Here it becomes clear that the upper class and the creators being paid by them were only coming to terms with the scope of opportunity during this technological revolution.
This writing begins to tone down and rationalize some of the outrageous work by Rem Koolhaas. As a by-product of post-WWII capitalism, he could ride out the wave of money and technology peace-time had to offer. Furthermore, his work seems a clear and more programmatically conservative extension of the Downtown Athletic Club, and in form, a reflection of the programs within, which hadn't been considered in such a style.
I'm rather disenchanted with the current culture we find ourselves existing in as we shape the built environment for the next 50 years. Projects do not get funded unless they 'work.' It's strange that developers would throw money away for these experimental ideas of architecture, and now we cannot even secure funding for projects to address the problems we know and understand. Unsheltered people need housing, and we know it's more expensive on cities to leave them unhoused than it is to rent them apartments, but we don't build them shelter. We know that gentrification segregates communities and exacerbates poverty, but 1 out of every 7 homes is now owned by Wall Street in the US. It's a machine that needs fueling.
ReplyDelete