Architectural Innovation as Result of Overlapping Gray Areas
Introduction: Optimism and
Opportunity
By definition, the word opportunistic has negative connotations,
referring to the seizing of circumstance with disregard to principle or ethics1.
For the sake of architectural discourse, I would like to limit the use of the
term to exploit the active agency this word implies as it pertains to
architecture. Idealistic in their architectural theories, Otto Wagner August
Schmarsow, and Gottfried Semper often took opposing stances further segmenting and
compartmentalizing architecture into black and white; in reality, true Architecture
breathes new life in the overlapping shadows of the 1000 shades of gray. It
takes on character as a unique cross generation of ideals. Architectural
innovation is opportunistic. It must be, and it lies within the opportunities
presented by those 1000 shades of gray. It capitalizes on the precise moments
when ideas merge, even if accidentally. Architecture seeks opportunistic
overlaps between form, space, program, material, and budget. The modern
skyscraper rises as tangible evidence of overlapping opportunity. It is a
product of the Industrial Revolution when engineers experimented with iron and
steel structures, electricity, air conditioning, and the elevator2. The
future of the architectural profession demands opportunistic outlook.
 |
Figure 1 - modern skyscraper product of overlap
|
During
the Great Recession3 of
2008 in the United States, many prominent architecture firms sent faithful
employees packing battling the black-hole of the financial market. Many did not
survive. Many are still recovering. But one young man, an opportunist, became a
hero that instilled hope in a grim market: Bjarke Ingels. In his monograph “Yes
Is More!: an archicomic on architectural evolution”, Ingels spells out to the
rest of the architectural profession how he achieved seemingly unmeasured
success and maintained his optimism in such a despondent period. His
philosophy: Yes is more! A closer look at Bjarke Ingels Group (BIG) and the
Mountain Dwellings in Copenhagen, Denmark will illustrate how there is opportunity
in simply saying, Yes!
Not Opponents but
Opportunists
 |
Figure 2 – divergent paths to a convergent goal: a better architecture
|
Their goals were not
divergent; rather, their divergent approaches sought a convergent end. Each saw
a different path of opportunity but collectively laid the foundation for the
Bauhaus and eventually the International Style. These philosophical designers
are much more alike with a lot of overlapping ideas and gray areas than they
would probably admit. They fought toward an opportunistic architecture –
perhaps retroactive, fragmented, and incomplete, their ideas offer mishaps and
overlaps that serve to promote a productive architectural practice.
The Sweet Spot
 |
Figure 3 - the sweet spot creating opportunity for architectural innovation
|
I
am convinced that Semper, Schmarsow and Wagner would have made an incredible
team of architects, together! Just imagine their practice: “SSW &
Associates”. While maybe appropriate for their time, they represent an
antiquated approach to architectural design. The opposing ideas they each
represented only compartmentalized them to a specific sector of architecture –
speaking generally in both word and works. Their divergent approaches
eliminated the opportunity for any coincidence or overlap from which to
benefit. But imagine the potential if they could have settled their differences
working in unison.
Rich
architecture capitalizes on slippage and overlap; but, these men simply
segmented themselves into a limited design field. In the above illustration, the
progression of the Venn diagram shows how their doctrines at first appear as a
simple figure ground relationship (black and white) but then becomes blurred with
intersecting ideals. The coincidence provides ample gray space:
construction/space, space/style, style/construction. However, dead center,
where construction, space, and style concurrently and simultaneously flirt,
lays the “sweet spot” of optimum architectural opportunity.
It
is in the “sweet spot” where the contemporary notion of “mixed-use” was
discovered. Someone simply said, “yes” to this and “yes” to that. Program hybridization simply reflects of our actual
mixed-use society. Achieving the right balance requires rigorous thought and
analysis. The process is simply an experimentation of architectural
ingredients. Opportunity means asking questions. What is the biggest problem?
What is the biggest potential? The answers to those questions inform design. It
is possible to orchestrate equilibrium between construction, space, and style? Semper,
Schmarsow and Wagner did not push the opportunity far enough to realize the
potential of their endeavors. What was then
only contrasts with what is now. Contemporary approached to design however are
recognizing potentials opportunities for overlap and focusing on the gray areas
as a specific design approach.
The BIG Picture
In order to find that one perfect shade of gray
opportunity, one has to step back to identify the other 999 that simply do not
quite work this time around. Ingels is an architectural genius for no other
reason than he sees the world differently, even optimistically. He see the
bigger picture. “While it may seem
odd to call the Copenhagen-originating Bjakre Ingels Group an American
practice, make no mistake, it is. The business-minded, nimble-footed,
publicity-savvy, and shamelessly optimistic practice continues a long line of
uniquely American architects on the make… For the Great American Architects,
smaller-scale concerns which preoccupy their overseas cousins such as details,
materials, and craft are often simply beside the point. Few in America have the
time or money to worry about – not to mention a technical ability to realize –
such things. The American Architect is thus left with the big idea, the big
picture, the big move…7. BIG caught
a glimpse of the American Dream and has consequently opened shop in the Big Apple.
While one of the youngest architects to ever be
considered for a Pritzker Prize, it is not outlandish after digesting his
extensively opportunistic body of work. He does not critique the past or the
present. He focuses on producing a bigger and better future. He is
idealistic. He is optimistic. He is opportunistic.
“We believe that today’s environmental problems
are not political, economical or even ecological – they are simply a design
challenge”8. Optimism is the best vantage point, and Ingels has it. He
does not seek problems. He seeks solutions. He seeks the sweet spot of
opportunity. Architecture is and must be opportunistic to remain creative. It
should not have to choose between corporate pragmatism and utopian idealism. It
must choose both to survive. Working opportunistically, BIG undertakes an
intentionally wide range of projects, from small installations to speculative
propositions and larger urban influences - independent of size, program, or
cost.
 |
Figure 4 - BIG projects arranged programmatically.
|
Architecture
is a service. Architects are service providers. At times the profession needs
to take a step back to refocus and realize that is it in the business of
service providers. Bjarke Ingels more than anyone on the forefront of
architecture not only understands this reality but also embraces it as a
celebratory approach to design. That approach is his BIG picture. The concept
of architectural program surfaces from attempting to meet the needs of a
client. It is an analysis – a study for the best-fit or best accommodation for
the assessed circumstance. Semper, Schmarsow and Wagner most likely would have
approached programmatic design as a scientific method for calculating and
assigning square and cubic footages to a building. Bjarke Ingels however seeks
to mix and match and change things up. He doesn’t get caught up in the little details
so much as try to please the clients’ big picture as well. His approach does
not negate square footage requirements, it simply sees them malleable raw
materials rather than defined results. Ingels simply seeks to please and tries
to remain flexible and open to the client in a way few others have been able to
achieve.
Yes Is More!
Ingels
shows by word and deed how untapped innovation only comes through
experimentation. Opportunity lies within the parameters set by a design problem
– even if they are broken later. Design challenges us to do what has never been
done before. As for BIG, their buildings look different because they perform
differently. BIG exploits the grayest of gray areas, which for far too long has
been no-man’s-land. In his monograph –
he embraces the necessary crossbreeding of disciplines to communicate bigger
architectural ideas. Traditional architectural publications dedicate a space
for the visual and a space for the text. Ingels does not choose text over
visual. He says yes to both by presenting his manifesto and approach in comic
form. It is re-Evolutionary. Applying reverse logic, BIG treads the highly
marketable middle ground – or the gray space. BIG is able to do so because they
choose the path of least resistance – it is also the path of most resistance.
Simply saying yes to everything may seem like the easy way out, but in fact it
may only make the process more difficult. They embrace all resistance. They say, “yes.” In a sense, BIG has simply
freed their hands of the constraint of limited resistance. What could be more
opportunistic than that? “Rather
than whining about resistance, obstacles or failure, we say yes to reality, the
city, life
when we bump into it. And we get so much more in return. YES is More!”9. “Less is more.”10 “Less is
a bore.”11 “I’m a whore.”12 “…,more and more, more is
more…”13. “Yes we can!”14
“Yes is More”.15
 |
Figure 5 - BIG: Yes if More monograph
|
BIG
seeks architectural evolution through the both/and method. He does not choose
either/or. He says Yes! to both. Ingels proclaims both/and as an opportunistic
approach to design deluge. A “why not?” approach. “The work an architect gets to realize in his/her career is the
result of random opportunities and chance. Architects can hardly plan their
career, or decide what they want to do, or where. We have to respond to
accidental challenges through opportunistic improvisation, mutation and
migration of ideas. And often the story we tells a product of post-rationalization
of hindsight”16. Ingels’ unruly approach to client interaction takes
pleasing to the next level. He says yes to
everything. BIG is able to hit the “sweet spot” of architecture more frequently
because they aim for it more frequently. He has the mentality, “Let’s take it
and run with it!”. He declares his approach to be middle ground – the third
option.
Consider
the firms bio:
“Bjarke
Ingels Group - BIG - is a Copenhagen based group of 50 architects, designers,
builders and thinkers operating within the fields of architecture, urbanism, research and development. Historically the field of architecture has been
dominated by 2 opposing extremes. On
one side an avant-garde full of crazy ideas. Originating from philosophy,
mysticism or a fascination of the formal potential of computer visualizations
they are often so detached from reality that they fail to become something
other than eccentric curiosities. On the other side there are well organized
corporate consultants that build predictable and boring boxes of high standard.
Architecture seems to be entrenched in
two equally unfertile fronts: Either naively utopian or petrifying
pragmatic. We believe that there is a third
way wedged in the no mans land between the diametrical opposites. Or in the
small but very fertile overlap
between the two. A pragmatic utopian architecture that takes on the creation of
socially, economically and environmentally perfect places as a practical
objective. In our projects we test
the effects of scale and the balance
of programmatic mixtures on the
social, economical and ecological outcome. Like a form of programmatic alchemy we create architecture by mixing conventional ingredients such as living, leisure, working,
parking and shopping. Each building site is a testbed for its own pragmatic utopian experiment. At BIG we are
devoted to investing in the overlap between radical and reality. Choosing between them you condemn yourself
to frustrated martyrdom or apathic affirmation. By hitting the fertile overlap,
we architects once again find the freedom to change the surface of our planet,
to better fit the way we want to live. In all our actions we try to move the
focus from the little details to the BIG picture. 17(italics
added for emphasis.)
Once
upon a time there were two ways to approach architecture. Now, there is a new
way to approach architecture. Ingels has practically wedged a new pedagogy of
architecture where for so long there were only two. Ingels refuses to accept
the naïve utopia and the petrifying pragmatism. He says no by saying yes to
both. His paradoxical approach actual makes sense. If neither fit your needs,
make one that does. BIG has revolutionized modern practice simply for not
accepting the norm. They defy the norm. BIG is innovative, surprising,
trailblazing, radical, unruly, and irreverent. They are revolutionary. BIG
embraces what others avoid. They explore what others abandon. They say Yes!
when others say no.
While
the VM House was under construction, BIG realized that the material palette was
going to fall flat and create a very uninteresting entrance. Inspired to create
wall art by the main entrance, Ingels sought more money from the investors, but
was quickly shot down. Thinking opportunistically, Ingels reapproached the
investors. This time, he pitched them the idea that per modernist tradition
architects often pay tribute to their clients with a portrait. Since their
canvas was much larger, BIG proposed using 10x10 cm ceramic bathroom tiles in
10 standard colors to create “thumbnail resolution portraits” of the clients’
faces. They
would become the artwork. Suddenly there was money in the budget for the
artwork. “With this idea we
literally turned ass-kissing into an artform”18. Ingels
found the sweet spot a.k.a jack pot! There is no hiding his positive
opportunistic agenda. He has revolutionized the
future of the architectural profession. Then again, that is exactly what he
seeks: evolution.
 |
Figure 6 - BIG: Yes if More monograph
|
 |
Figure 7 - VM Houses, BIG. Denmark
|
Re-Evolution
BIG
time and again has managed to truly redefine building typologies pushing
architectural engineering just one more step forward. The iconic forms are born
from true originality, an originality that is a byproduct of performance and
program, not solely driven by aesthetic quality. Ingels is not naively
optimistic; He is optimistically naive. While others firms mumbled during the
Great Recession, BIG shifted the perspective back into a
positive light. One professional looking back comments: “There was a time when
we truly needed you; when the bottom fell out, when our hopes and dreams turned
into fears that the things we loved in architecture were gone forever. We were expected
to fall into watered-down careers of sacrifice and conservative goals.
Expecting to spend a life with little opportunity for inspiration. But you
arose as an unlikely hero to lead us through the tough times. You showed us a
way not through conservatism and sacrifice but through a reassurance that
dynamic outcomes were still possible. We needed you then, sir, to know that our
profession was not dead.”19. Setting aside personal preconditions, Ingels
allowed architecture to evolve almost naturally – as a series of responses to the natural environment. BIG’s evolution as a firm
simply followed that of their products. As BIG revolutionizes the approach to
the architectural profession, the evolution of the resultant building forms emerges.
 |
Figure 8 – Yes is More – Bjarke Ingels manifesto on architectural evolution.
Evolution! Political opposition therefore hinders
architectural opportunity. The modern evolution of buildings does not need
another subtle attempt to push the envelope. The modern evolution begs for long
strides toward, bold moves and innovative resolutions.
|
Although
BIG’s famous diagrams and simplistic presentations concisely sum up the essence
of
their projects, they do not deny the time and architectural waster poured into
the design process. “We are
interested in how things actually evolve through accidents and misunderstandings”21.
The fearless approach to design knows no boundaries. The
Five Pillars of Bawadi proposal for Dubai literally turned desert design on its
head. While
anciently and modernly others build pyramids and glass towers in the middle of
the desert, BIG runs from those traditions in search of more sustainable and
more viable solutions. The Bawadi project essentially takes inverts a pyramid,
shades the glass facades from the harsh desert sun, and still provides ample space
to create communal oasis beneath. BIG invents new typologies for a large
program in the desert. BIG’s studio really functions as more of a design
laboratory stumbling upon new ideas. The Escher Tower too puts a twist on
design, literally. A simple, bold move shows how logic can also be aesthetic.
The traditional tower is thinned out allowing the environment to optimize the
interior and to minimize mechanical loads. Then a simple 90-degree twist
maximizes the foothold of the building where wind load is needed most, and
minimizes wind load where the foothold is weakest. The iconic forms are truly
born from originality. The nearly completed 57th Street project in New York
City is another great example of how responsive forms create new typologies. “He
has designed an utterly unexpected form, neither tower nor slab nor even quite
a pyramid, but a gracefully asymmetrical peak with a landscaped bower in its
hollowed core. It looks wild, but it’s born of logic; true originality is the
inevitable endpoint of rigorous thought…In New York’s unsentimental real-estate
climate, he has found fresh support for his belief that making the client happy
is the ultimate creative challenge”22.
 |
Figure 9 – The Five Pillars of Bawadi
|
 |
Figure 10 - Escher Tower
|
 |
Figure 11 - West 57th Street
|
Hedonistic Sustainability
& Ecolomy
BIG’s
addictively energetic and optimistic character runs much deeper than his famous
presentations, or even how he presents himself. It runs much deeper to the core
of his dogma as a designer. And he keeps it simple. Ingels simply has fun. But
he also believes in living sustainably. Ingels says, Yes! to both. “What
if ecology wasn’t about regression – but about progression? What is sustainable
living wasn’t about changing your lifestyle and turning off the lights, turning
down the heat and slowing down? What is we didn’t have to adapt our lifestyle
to sustainability, but adjusted our sustainable designs to the way we want to
live? Instead of trying to change people, we could change the world. We need a
new manifesto for Hedonistic Sustainability!”23. As previously mentioned, opportunity
begins by asking the right questions, but Ingels doesn’t stop there. He goes out
in search of design solutions. That is his sweet spot, his sweet spot, his
Hedonistic Sustainability. Ingels wants to discard
the false protestant notion that it must hurt to do good. So, we can live a
high quality life, live sustainably, and still have fun? Yes. Yes. Yes.
cake
: eat :: sustainability : enjoy
Hedonistic
Sustainability is a game changer. As previously mentioned, BIG’s buildings look
different because they perform different. They perform differently because BIG
approaches performance
differently. “Economy and ecology need to merge into ecolomy!”24. Ingels would have us all treat
sustainability as investment rather than expense. “Le Corbusier designed
buildings like machines for living, and it triggered a whole new and liberating
aesthetic: An Espirit Nouveau! Ecolomical design teaches us to design buildings
like ecosystems for living, orchestrating the flow of water, heat and energy,
financial and human resources through the building.”25. In essence BIG truly believes we can
design our way out of the ecolomical problem. We
once built architecture without architects. That is how we have arrived at a
sustainability crisis. But it is time to engineer buildings without
engines. We can therefore design opportunistic architecture using technology to
eliminate the machine. The ideal of ecolomy is the same reason why BIG produces
countless study models and countless diagrams. The architectural design process
is a violent and messy process. Ingels expounds, “Resource Consciousness is for
the real world. In the design studio, the more garbage you produce in the
design process, the less garbage you end up building.”26.
Case Study – The Mountain
Dwellings
 |
Figure 12 - VM Houses and Mountain Dwellings adjacency
|
Orestad is Copenhagen’s newest hot
spot of dynamic urban development. Many cutting edge investors have developed
an affinity for the spirit of the place. The political vision for Orestad was
to create an integrated city truly embodying mixed-use – where living and
working, public and commercial, would be mixed freely. BIG sought to escape the
restraints of the urban plan and the city block. He wanted to try something
new, and so he did with the highly awarded VM Houses of 2005 where he currently
owns an apartment
Ingels27. “I wanted to
find a way to escape the straightjacket of a courtyard incarcerated by a all of
program, where every program regardless of scale or activity would be wedged
into the same mould.”27. The
Mountain Dwellings was a commissioned regained through a previously
opportunistic agenda. The client liked BIG’s approach and product and went for version
2.0. It is the second generation of the VM Houses – same client, same size,
same street.
 |
Figure 13 - Massing Diagram
|
Although
the conditions were nearly identical to the VM House, BIG exploited the few differences
to create the VM Houses’ evil twin. They started from scratch on new charting design
territory. As the developer explained his needs, BIG stood by listening eagerly
to hear for opportunities of overlap and opportunity to concoct traditional
architectural ingredients into a masterpiece. “I want two separate buildings: a
10,000 sq. meter condominium next to a 20,000 sq. meter parking structure”28.
BIG’s approach is never typical. Rather that throwing up a standard apartment
building next to a concrete parking structure, they decided to stack the two
programs. They did so in such a way that the sloped parking structure creates a
semi-pyramidal form that serves as a platform for which the housing is
dispersed spread atop. It is genius. It had never been done before. By combining
the two idealistically polarized programs (1/3 housing 2/3 parking), BIG not
only glorifies and celebrates the transportation of the car, they create a
typography unique to Copenhagen. They created a mountain! They create a
vertical suburbia! It is a mountain rising from the flat lands, hence the name.
“Denmark is flat as a pancake. If you want to live on a mountain, you gotta do
it yourself!”29. By simply saying yes, Ingels takes paradox and
turns it into conventional design strategy. It is as if he solves a mystery
with each new design. The Mountain Dwellings housing project has it all: large
gardens, urban density, and a penthouse view – from each of the 80 apartments!
 |
Figure 14 - Mountain Dwellings Elevations - Clockwise from Bottom left: west, north, south, east
|
Yes is More
– from within, without, north, south, east, west. The south façade is dominated
by garden spaces and lawn chairs. The north façade opens up to the posh parking
structure. An aluminum screen façade wraps around the parking structure helping
to block views of the cars, BIG also sought the opportunity to develop the
breathable skin into an architectural art piece. The perforated screen was
designed with varied perforation sizes that are arranged in a way that the
screen creates a rasterized image of the Himalayan mountains. BIG literally
captures the bigger picture on the screen. He simply cannot say no. The sloped
nature of the parking structure and the pixelated arrangement of housing
required a slanted elevator. The slanted elevator in the Mountain Dwellings is
the first of its kind in Denmark. It allows access to the houses from
underneath. “The Mountainis our first built example of what we like to call
architectural alchemy: the idea that by blending normal ingredients in
surprising mixtures you can create added value (if not actually gold)”30.
 |
Figure 15 - Plans - From top left: ground, third, and roof.
|
The
form is derived from simple reactions to the environment and program. The
simplistic presentation of concept diagrams should not discount the radical
strategy of approach. Ingels captures
the paradox of this philosophical approach even in his diagrams. He reduces
complex decision into simplified gestures graphically; but, in reality, he
creates complex structures from simplistic diagrams. He seeks opportunity to
communicate this same idea through his graphics. His
approach makes a design passive act: all architecture has to do is
respond to external forces; his simplistic presentation is more of a selective
tactical logic. The complexity of a cathedral of car culture and hillside of
residences comes off in such a simple manner. Ingels presents the Mountain
Dwellings in such a logical rationale, when in reality there is nothing
rational about it. Done it once again. He found the sweet spot of opportunity.
He caught the vision and realized it. His programmatic symbiosis strikes again!
“Ingels has reinvented a type of architecture that seemed immune to innovation.
Using the term “Hedonistic Sustainability,” Ingels argues that there needs to
be more to green
architecture than energy conservation. Framed primarily as an economic concern
it will never participate in the public imagination. “If everybody thinks that
sustainable life is less fun than normal life it’s a pretty unattractive
position.”31. Once again, we have an opportunistic approach to
sustainable design the results in a new building type. Even though the project is
largely private, as are most of BIG’s commissions, they always tie it back to
the community. They seem to give back a portion in generosity to a better way
of living. “Danish poet Soren Ulrik Thomsen wrote an essay called ‘Copenhagen
the Suburban Neighborhood in Upright Position’ as a criticism of the
gentrification and suburbanization of the inner city. The Mountain is a literal
embodiment of the unintended potential of that metaphor”32
 |
Figure 16 - Building Sections
|
Conclusion
“BIG’s work
indexes a threshold of design practice. The days of working with philosophers
are perhaps coming to an end and the esoteric bullshit is evaporating. What
remains are designers who are young, passionate and accessible.”33
The school of thought that Wagner, Semper, and
Schmarsow share is gone. Innovation begged for evolution. Evolution only came
through revolution. BIG is that revolution. I want to reiterate that I do not
argue aesthetics. Although architectural innovation through the Bjarke Ingels
Group is about the product, at the same time it is not. Bjarke Ingels defies
the traditional role of architect. His approach is a philosophical paradox. It
is all about the approach. I am not arguing if his works are considered good
architecture but rather how one man has changed how the world sees
architecture.
BIG’s
opportunistic approach has proven that overlap is opportunity and seizing the
gray space of opportunity opens the door to architectural innovation. The
possibilities and difficulties of saying Yes always weight out the limitations
and regret of saying no. An opportunist never wonders what could have been. He
makes what will become. BIG seems to care most
about making spectacular buildings that have never been built before. At the
present, they seem to excel. Only time will tell how well their simple formal
strategies hold up as more buildings are constructed and markets shift. The
opportunistic approach to architecture is not about the bi-product – be what it
may – it is about the means, the process, and the adventure. BIG has made epic
leaps toward reinstating optimism into the profession. BIG has achieved the
optimistic approach through both success and failure. Those who try more fail more, but those
who try more also succeed more. BIG’s innovative and experimental fingerprints
dot the globe as architectural icons. They symbolize much more than program,
materials, or budgets. They represent opposing ideologies, revolutions,
evolution, communities, professions etc. Most importantly, they represent
opportunity. Is Bjarke Ingels an Opponent or Opportunist? I say Yes!
 |
Figure 17 - Mountain Dwellings creating the sense of architectural elevation
|
Works
Cited:
1. “opportunistic”. Merriam-Webster
Dictionary online. 10 March 2013. < http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/opportunistic>.
2. "High Rise." The New
Yorker. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 March. 2013. <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/10/120910fa_fact_parker>.
3. Wessel, David (2010-04-08). "Did 'Great Recession' Live Up to the
Name?". The
Wall Street Journal. Pg. 63.
4. Wagner, Otto. Modern
Architecture: A Guidebook for His Students to This Field of Art. Santa Monica,
CA: Getty Center for the History of Art and the Humanities, 1988. Print
5.
Semper,
Gottfried, Harry Francis. Mallgrave, and Michael Robinson. Style in the
Technical and Tectonic Arts, Or, Practical Aesthetics. Los Angeles: Getty
Research Institute, 2004. Print.
6.
Schmarsow.
"Empathy, Form, and Space: Problems in German Aesthetics, 1873-1893."
Barnes & Noble. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Feb. 2013.
7.
Reidel,
Jacob. “BIG: The Next Great American Practice”. "Bjarke Ingels Group
(CLOG) [Paperback]." Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG): Kyle May: 9780983820406:
Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. 2nd Edition May 2012. Pg 13
8.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 51.
9.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 19.
10.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 2.
11.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 4.
12.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg .6.
13.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 8.
14.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 10.
15.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 12.
16.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 26.
17. Bjarke Ingels Group. 10 February
2013. <http://www.big.dk/>.
18.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 75
19.
Hanahan,
Jonathan. “BIG: The Next Great American
Practice”. "Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG) [Paperback]." Bjarke Ingels
Group (CLOG): Kyle May: 9780983820406: Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. 2nd
Edition May 2012. Pg 90.
20.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 14.
21. Ingels, Bjarke. Yes Is More: An
Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen, 2010. Print. Pg 26.
22.
Davidson,
Justin. “Pyramid Scheme”.. "Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG) [Paperback]."
Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG): Kyle May: 9780983820406: Amazon.com: Books. N.p.,
n.d. 2nd Edition May 2012. Pg
25.
23.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 50.
24.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 51.
25.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 63.
26.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 52.
27.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 78.
28.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 79.
29.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 76.
30.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 86.
31.
Davidson,
Justin. “Pyramid Scheme”.. "Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG) [Paperback]."
Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG): Kyle May: 9780983820406: Amazon.com: Books. N.p.,
n.d. 2nd Edition May 2012. Pg
25.
32.
Ingels,
Bjarke. Yes Is More: An Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen,
2010. Print. Pg 87.
33.
Burkholder,
Sean. “The Pragmatics of Context”. "Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG)
[Paperback]." Bjarke Ingels Group (CLOG): Kyle May: 9780983820406:
Amazon.com: Books. N.p., n.d. 2nd Edition May 2012. Pg 82.
Images:
1. Diagram: David Polk. Imag:
"High Rise." The New Yorker. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 March. 2013. <http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/09/10/120910fa_fact_parker>.
2. Diagram: David Polk.
3. Diagram: David Polk.
4. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. <http://www.big.dk/>.
5. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. <http://www.big.dk/>.
6. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-vm.
7. Ingels, Bjarke. Yes Is More: An
Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen, 2010. Print. Pg 75.
8. Ingels, Bjarke. Yes Is More: An
Archicomic on Architectural Evolution. Köln: Evergreen, 2010. Print. Pg 14.
9. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-baw.
10. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-ech.
11. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-w57.
12. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
13. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
14. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
15. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
16. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
17. Bjarke Ingels Group. 25 April
2013. http://big.dk/#projects-mtn.
No comments:
Post a Comment