Posted by Paul Malo on October 01, 2002 at 16:53:17:
In Reply to: Re: Insight posted by Peter on October 01, 2002 at 16:29:23:
I don't see this as a conventional competition to select a design to be built--or even the select a designer, to continue designing. It seems to be more a matter of "political correctness," deferring to the the media, which is liason to the public--which has been very displeased with what has been shown so far.
If you want to see how this works, check the Dream Team proposal already promoted by the NY Times architecture critic, Herbert Muschamp. We've talked about that here. It goes like this: you get a bunch of architects interested in the exposure provided by the exercise, you "bring them together," they each do their thing, and then someone has the task of collaging a pastiche of their idiosyncratic notions. The Dream Team didn't come up with a design. It came up with ideas for a dozen buildings or so, which were pasted together.
It's possible that some of these "teams" may function as a team, producing some coherent design--but more likely we'll get from most of them more architectural zoos, Las Vegas assemblages of architectural curiosities.
As I understand it, the teams aren't supposed to work together, but are expected to come up with independent proposals. This is what we often know as a 'design charette' when a group of designers, or several teams of designers, come up with ideas during a limited period of time. The intent is not, as in a competition, to produce any single design for the project, but simply to generate ideas, which may be exchanged. I don't think the current WTC process will amount to much more than that.
Free 3D Models