Thinking Outside the Box

    To me, Bjarke Ingles is one of the most interesting architects of our generation. Are BIG's designs always the best? Well its up for interpretation as all architecture is, but to me, no they are not the best. In fact, I dislike the look of a lot of his buildings but I do appreciate his concepts. 

    First of all, explaining the difference between "Hot" and "Cool" architecture comes into play. Hot architecture relies on wow factor and the ability to stand out from the context by being different while cool architecture blends into its surroundings, unable to stand alone requiring "the context and viewer to complete it, lacking both self-sufficiency and selfconsciousness. 

    Bjarke lives mainly in the realm of hot architecture similar to Zaha Hadid. His work doesn't rely on the context of the buildings that surround his designs but on the concept themselves. For example his work on the building in New York Pictured below stands out from the rest of the skyline. It is hot architecture designed by rotating the normal New York block and inserting a "small" central park inside. While this design doesn't appeal to everyone, including me, the overarching idea makes sense and the experience works. 

    

    

    It's easy to dislike hot architecture. By creating something so polarizing you attract plenty of critics but why should it matter? Who is to say that the future of architecture is all hot or cool or some kind of mix of both? It's easy to design for the present but the way I see it, Bjarke is attempting to design concepts for the future wether it's with his 3D printed self-sustaining city on mars, his floating town, or even the Google offices that reimagines collaboration I don't see why he cant. His designs work with his concepts and the concept is often far more important.