Re: Futures: Studio Hani Rashid. University of Applied Arts Vienna 9783035614688, 9783035614664

Table of contents :
Re:Futures

Citation preview

Re: Futures

In memoriam Zaha Hadid, Peter Strasser and Reiner Zettl

Edition Angewandte Book Series of the University of Applied Arts Vienna Edited by Gerald Bast, Rector

Hani Rashid Sophie Luger (Eds.)

Re: Futures STUDIO HANI RASHID University of Applied Arts Vienna

BIRKHÄUSER BASEL

Index INTRO

Hani Rashid

P. 8

Gerald Bast

P. 10

Matthew Ritchie

P. 12

Hans Ulrich Obrist, Hani Rashid

P. 14

Deep_Futures Lab University of Applied Arts Vienna Architecture as a Strategic Process for Designing the Future Warmest Regards, The Future In Conversation

DEEP_FUTURES LAB 2011 – 2016 STUDIO WORK & DIPLOMA PROJECTS

WINTER SEMESTER 2011/12

P. 26

SUMMER SEMESTER 2012

P. 46

WINTER SEMESTER 2012/13

P. 74

SUMMER SEMESTER 2013

P. 98

New Works for Cities yet to be Built Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City

WINTER SEMESTER 2013/14

P. 108

Über Port

4

Re: Futures

Exhibitions & Study Trips

P. 130

SUMMER SEMESTER 2014

P. 138

WINTER SEMESTER 2014/15

P. 164

SUMMER SEMESTER 2015

P. 190

WINTER SEMESTER 2015/16

P. 220

Gerald Bast, David Benjamin, Barbara Imhof, Edward Jung, Hani Rashid

P. 249

SUMMER SEMESTER 2016

P. 262

Plug-In Park Avenue — Über HQ Redhook Redux Visual Literacy Redux — Museum Row Frankfurt Super-Span Spectacle Space Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion Antarctica Re-Cyclical

APPENDIX

Biographies

P. 292

Students

P. 295

Imprint

P. 296

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

5

6

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

7

Hani Rashid at the Diploma Presentation of Stefan Ritzer SS2015

Diploma Presentation Peter Mears WS2015/16

Deep_Futures Lab University of Applied Arts Vienna

Hani Rashid

The real challenge for architects is to produce works that have the potential to positively impact our future cities, urban spaces, architecture, and therefore the immutable spirit of humankind. Teaching architecture today in the post-information age requires both the agility and the desire to embrace constant change, especially when it comes to “designing” pedagogy. Any radical position today can be easily and expediently co-opted by mainstream practices and transformed into a new normal. Perhaps the most obvious yet profound question to ask within a pedagogical framework is how the role of the architect might evolve as we venture into the near and deep future. More than ever, there is a pressing need to rethink and retool our discipline as well as to reconsider our pedagogical methods in such a way that we can not only anticipate, but also shape and meaningfully contribute to the moving target that is the future. Over the past two decades, there have been monumental shifts in our discipline on which the increasing importance of technology, from global networks of production to the ubiquity of social networks, has had an immense impact. The playing field on which new ideas are now disseminated and vetted has been altered, dramatically affecting education, practice, and the communities we build. All told, these influences are profound and relevant to how one approaches education and how one inspires and stimulates the next generation(s) of architects, theorists, and practitioners. Architects were once the essential protagonists when it came to questions regarding the future of our cities. Such figures as Buckminster Fuller, Ralph Erskine, Yona Friedman, Constant Nieuwenhuys, Paolo Soleri and many others met the notion of the future of cities, and even our planet, head on and without compromise. Today, cities are changing dramatically by virtue of a myriad of factors, and looming large amongst them is globalization and the socio-political and economic flux that has resulted therefrom. Coupled with these are the profound technological innovations on the horizon that will have the potential to

8

not only enhance our lives but by extension also affect how we inhabit our cities. The insight of the architect, with respect to how and what we build, has perhaps never been more critical. Architects, however, run the very real risk of becoming irrelevant with these and other dynamics at play. On the one hand, there is the profession’s growing reliance on “experts” and consultants; on the other is the shaping of an urban realm that is increasingly controlled by politicians, economists, technocrats, real estate magnates, activist groups and other stakeholders. It is therefore imperative that, moving forward, we enact a pedagogical trajectory towards the redefining of what the “expertise” of the architect is or should be. The Deep_Futures Lab in Vienna at the Institute of Architecture at the University of Applied Arts is designed to tackle such issues. The program is focused on providing students with critical tool sets that promote new ways of theorizing and designing architectural solutions. In considering how architects are to be educated in order to gain their “expertise”, some hard and important questions need to be asked. How do we revise, or rather rethink, the necessary skill sets with which architects need to become adept? How can the conflicting requirements to be both generalists and knowledgeable “experts” be reconciled? And although “making and managing policy” is critical today in affecting change, what other methods are there for working against the status quo, in search of new and exciting possibilities? Innovative visionary architects have always questioned prevailing rules, dogma, and older methodologies; so while architects are professionals we also must be creative, innovative, and maintain an aspect of the renegade. With that in mind, how does the architect again confront radical thought and produce provocative positions and ideas? At the Deep_Futures Lab, we have coined the term “spatial engineer” to articulate a redefinition of our discipline and pursuits in architecture, using this nomenclature to illuminate what one might say is our “core competency.” In other words, our expertise resides between the realms of art and engineering. Our domain is a terrain of spatial

Hani Rashid

Hani Rashid, Sanford Kwinter, Greg Lynn, Klaus Bollinger, Joseph Giovannini, Brian Cody, Zaha Hadid at the Diploma Presentation of Abraham Fung SS2015

concerns set against the realities of quantitative logic, be that in the realms of structural engineering, economic constraints, environmental sustainability and so on. Namely, the proficiency that we need to hone is (as it always has been for the architect) that of “building” an assembly from many disparate parts, vectors, and phenomena. It is with this somewhat ambiguous but nevertheless critical label of the “spatial engineer” that we understand our “expertise”, enabling us to work alongside other “experts” who are crucial to the designs of our buildings, environments, and cities. We have entered an era of rapid change in which the autonomy of the singular visionary is no longer viable. Today, and even more so in the future, the collaboration between the architect and other disciplines with diverse areas of expertise is key to harnessing the many opportunities that lie before us. As architects, our ability to traverse art, science, business, philosophy and engineering brings relevance to our discipline and places it in a key position.

Deep_Futures Lab University of Applied Arts Vienna

9

Architecture as a Strategic Process for Designing the Future

Gerald Bast, Rector

At the University of Applied Arts in Vienna, architecture is taught as an integrative discipline with a particularly strong international orientation, bringing together artistic, technical, and organizational aspects against a social background. The class/studio system with three international professors of architecture makes it possible to maintain these high standards. This system makes for an internationally networked institute. But Architecture at the Angewandte, however, also means engaging with all realms of life. It is the current three-dimensional manifestation of all facets of our culture and, as such, it is the product of a design process. The implementation of a design which is able to transgress the boundaries of the status quo calls on an innovative methodology for social strategies – and it is for this reason that strategic training has been promoted in the development of the Institute of Architecture at the University of Applied Arts Vienna: architecture understood as an urban, social and aesthetic strategy. The professional activities that the students are prepared to deal with in their training is undergoing constant change. Especially with digital data processing and the virtualization of architecture, this change has been enormously accelerated and the speed of change is set to continue. The graduates show a high degree of flexibility in responding to new situations and have an excellent grasp of the most recent technologies and tools. They are certainly ready to tackle tasks in all fields of architecture and have the necessary organizational skills not just to survive in a production process that is constantly becoming more complex. Since forward-looking planning is starting to assume heightened importance in the wake of globalization and the dominance of the economical model, the fact that the graduates are familiar with strategic planning through their training enables them to recognize and anticipate future scenarios and respond to their complexity with adequate solutions.

10

The program of Studio Hani Rashid is especially geared towards encouraging the development of conceptual, practical and critical skills and the means for creating new, compelling, and future-oriented architecture. In this particular case, architecture is understood first and foremost to be an experimental investigation of the conditions of atmospheric and aesthetic effects in an environment that is increasingly challenging, so as to be able to respond intelligently and efficiently to current habitat-related issues. The city of the future is seen as a lab for environmentally related, scientific, phenomenological, and humanistic as well as simply pragmatic challenges that lead to new ideas and radical possibilities in architecture so as to promote human interaction, technological flow, and ecological intelligence. This book, featuring projects by students of Hani Rashid’s architectural studio at the Angewandte, is also a product that is programmatic towards the understanding of architecture at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna. It sees itself as a site of free artistic and scientific expression, as a place of open debate and a development lab for artistic visions whose effects will be applied in the future. Our goal to be one of the world’s best art schools – and to remain so – is intricately linked with our constant work on the permanent further development of our standards of quality and the continual renewal of creative potential, as well as the uncompromising advocacy of the freedom of art and science. The architecture projects presented in this book are certainly eloquent testimony of this.

Gerald Bast

Architecture as a strategic process for designing the future

11

Presentation of Lea Dietiker SS2016

Patrik Schumacher at the Diploma

Klaus Bollinger, Sanford Kwinter, Kazuyo Sejima

Daniel Prost and Peter Mears

Warmest Regards, The Future

is changing fast; the world is everting, turning inside out. The American Association for the Advancement of Science recently published a study showing that we have definitively, even defiantly, crossed four of the nine planet-wide

Visiting Studio Hani Rashid in Vienna, I became aware of how much we all want to avoid this discussion and concentrate on the un-built, the yet-to-be-imagined. Can’t we just have all the gorgeously photoshopped technotopias and artisanally textured apocalypses that have been promised to us for so long already? Can’t the planners, the professors, the politicians and the technocrats, save us; absolve us from the drudgery of real architecture, the real future? Just asking this question reveals its absurdity. Several new strains of flu virus emerge every year; predicting the one for which a vaccine will be produced is just one problem. Which strain will flourish, which will perish, depends on human choices, on our management of the first decision. Persuading the various human constituencies about whether or not they should produce, stockpile and distribute the vaccine all depends on the successes of the past, the politics of fear and desire. Prediction, for architects and epidemiologists alike, is a guessing game with all-too-real consequences. If we are to truly engage with the future, we will have to imagine it more carefully, with all its long shadows and dubious compromises. Insofar as the role of the artist, or architect, remains experimental, we must anticipate and explore the full perimeter of being and the mental frameworks without which it cannot be imagined – or countered. But hold on; that perimeter

If buildings are defined by “programs”, then the definition of “program” must evolve. Our existing affinities with transhuman systems such as communication networks, farming collectives, adaptive epigenetics, stock markets, rapid transportation systems, recreational drugs and online gaming systems already foster complex interdependencies. Given sufficient scope in terms of time and space, perhaps a new definition of “program” that includes atmospheric responsibilities and social connections – along with the economic program – can be deduced, helping to define whatever we choose to accept, or solicit, as the true locus of ourselves. As the bird-bath of the mirrorself evaporates in the heat of global warming, the only way to communicate – to build at all – may be through the language of rapidly evolving systems: to coerce, copulate, collaborate, and corrupt, adopting a viral politics, a broad-cast architecture based on continuous connection. In a similar spirit, Frederick Kiesler once proposed “co-realism,” a theoretical model with four poles (humans, forms, space, and time), while critiquing the modernist reduction of home to a diagram of functionality as “the mysticism of hygiene.” Through all this, we have to make sure the question of the future always remains open. But this is extraordinarily difficult! Imagination is a form of information that is embedded in the future: like a

Matthew Ritchie

One of the most difficult problems that architecture still faces – as does science and art – is a bias against literal representations of the “useful” future. Main- taining enough space between the infinite hopes of “prediction” and the compromised reality of actuarial “predictability” occupies a significant part of our shared mental structure. We fight against being too precisely located in space and time, even while we hope that we are exactly where and when we are “supposed” to be. We do not really want to meet the future, because it contains our own absence. Architecture, in its doubled form as thought space and built space, travels through time at a slower rate than its makers and so inherits the task of presenting the past to a future that will always just miss us at the station, always wondering: what was it like, back then?

12

environmental boundaries within which humanity can safely operate. It is a signature of such nonlinear systems that they accelerate, engulfing their participant elements and entities. Following the general policy of ignoring this problem has already consigned tens of millions of stateless humans to the limbo of a humanity that Giorgio Agamben refers to as homo sacer, with the planetary system that sustains us all fast becoming a terra sacra, or cursed earth. We are all next. Outpacing this new nature – the synthesis of physics, biology, and chemistry that defines the perimeter of being – will require a new kind of architecture.

Matthew Ritchie

fundamental particle, it cannot truly exist without measuring itself – but to measure itself is to fix itself in time, placing itself inside a picture already past. Francisco Varela proposed the concept of “protention” to complement memory – or what he called “retention” – and to give a name to our ability to anticipate any variation in advance of our own direct experience of it. But we are not just dealing with human concepts of causality anymore. It is very likely that consciousness is partially a quantum-based process and enjoys more degrees of freedom within the fixed structure of time than we are yet able to imagine. So to imagine a conscious architecture, of which we are a part, we might need some more terms to complement Varela’s ideas of “protention” and “retention.” “Projection” seems useful for reflecting the deep-seated human need to project our hopes and desires into the future, a kind of eudaimonic imagination, while “reception” seems a suitable term for describing how we might accept and accommodate the quantum effects that we cannot yet measure or register. One characteristic of any art, science, or architecture capable of addressing this state would be to have interconnected models of time, new kinds of both thought and built structure that could “project” and “receive” multiple forms of information. Such structures would, in some sense, be alive, with minds and dreams of their own. They would be buildings that anticipate the inevitable de-lamination and repair of their skins, that strive to be useful for multiple generations of users, whether they be refugee centers or gaming franchises (or some unholy combination of both) in the contemporary “Great Game” which is unraveling the “ordered” world; not just in Vienna, Athens, Sevastopol and Aleppo, or in Central America and Africa, but within every warming sea, every particularized molecule of air. Even if we imagine that oceans of time and space still separate us from catastrophe, the eversion is coming; the world turned inside out. If political power constitutes itself through relations between multiple forces, then Foucault’s proposal that life must enter into history and form a “government of souls” must now be expanded to include all connected objects and systems, from building systems to power grids and social networks; all of our larger “selves” distributed through multiple systems and modes of being. Dare we imagine ourselves meeting it? Dare we build towards it? This is the challenge, and the opportunity, embraced by Studio Hani Rashid.

Warmest Regards, The Future

13

Let’s first discuss the beginnings of this Antarctica project and your ideas for actually developing cities there for the 21st, 22nd, 23rd centuries. I am very interested in this because I was friends with Ralph Erskine, a member of Team X, who had also designed fantastic structures for the extreme north. I was wondering what your inspiration was. Was Erskine an inspiration?

Hani Rashid

That’s very interesting because, due to the depth of your knowledge of Erskine, I was actually going to throw that question back at you. It seems to me that in the 1960s especially, and a little bit before and after that, up to the early 80s – it was a very fervent and fertile moment for visionary thinking in all disciplines, and especially architecture when it came to ideas about the future of cities and planning what one could call utopias. In particular Team X, and of course Archigram out of London and UFO of the Florentine school, HausRucker in Austria, the Metabolists in Japan, the list goes on, were all proving that it was indeed a remarkable and prolific period in architectural history. I think that, in many ways – as you and I discussed in Venice, and as you pointed out, at the end of the 19th century – there was a lot of advanced thinking and vision as to what the 21st century might be like. And then, for some reason, by the end of the 20th century, we fell into a lull when it came to that sort of thinking, effectively producing few if any visions for the 22nd century and beyond. The statement that you made while we were in the Antarctic Pavilion has stayed with me ever since and has become increasingly interesting to me. I have been thinking about that condition and it has really motivated me to consider not just the future, but the deep future. I think a lot of the malaise and lackluster thinking around this problem has to do with a number of factors. By the mid-20th century, there was some truly remarkable sociopolitically charged and motivated pushback and meditation on the present and the future tied to politics and society as being self-critical and self reflective, especially in the wake of 1968 and the student uprisings in Europe. We also saw some astonishing things come forward from

14

Vienna, such as the work of Haus-Rucker and their wearable inflatables, Gunther Domenig’s remarkable tectonics and engineering feats, and Coop Himmelb(l)au’s eloquent and spectacular protest architectures. Also, as you mentioned, Erskine and Team X put forward some very powerful visionary strategies. This was a very influential period in our history, and so many ideas were generated that I decided we need to seriously revisit many of them, though upgraded according to the times we now live in. I think the work of the Deep_Futures Lab is an antidote of sorts to the somewhat sleepy state we found ourselves in at the tail end of the 20th century and now well into the 21st century. Was there a moment of revelation for you? Because obviously there is a need for space. There is also the disappearance of space as we think of it, if you consider climate change and therefore possible extinctions. Some have described and noted that we’re now living in the age of this new extinction. Gustav Metzger said:

HUO

Hans Ulrich Obrist

Hans Ulrich Obrist in Conversation with Hani Rashid

“ As artists, we need to take a stand against the ongoing erasure of species, even when there is little chance of ultimate success. It is our privilege and our duty to be at the forefront of the struggle. While humanity has moved through extreme crises in the past, time and speed are of the essence. “

Hans Ulrich Obrist & Hani Rashid

Felt across the humanities and the sciences alike, the spectre of extinction looms over the ways in which we understand our being in the world today. Environmental degradation, atomic weapons, threats to communities and languages, global warming, economic collapses, natural catastrophes, life wiped out by genocide, disease and hunger – the constellation of topics around extinction is ever-expanding and as urgent now as ever before. What is extinction and what are we losing? How can we understand global change on a massive scale? How can an individual understand themselves in relation to a collective responsibility? How can artists, scientists, and thinkers imagine new visions of the future? How has the spectre of endings and collapse come to inform artistic and literary practice? What happens after the end has come and gone? What to do next?

HR

I think there’s a parallel track that humankind is moving on, because in fact – a little bit like what we see being discussed in today’s technology realms – there is the idea that, in order to survive on the planet, we’ll need to become, as humans, augmented in one way or the other. I suppose this state of change of what it is to be human has already started. We’re looking at a situation where the only way that we’ll be able to compete with machines and machine learning, and also deal with serious global issues like climate change, hunger, water access, and potential environmental calamity, is to either get off the planet or alter what we think about the planet itself and about being human. I believe that we are already on a strange and somewhat disconcerting path. For example, the soon-to-be-possible inputting of robots into our bloodstreams, or embedding memory implants into our brains and so on, are among many “realities” that are quickly becoming the norm. There is an interesting recent television show from London called Black Mirror, which (albeit superficially and sensationally) touches on many of these things that are increasingly prevalent, fearsome, and exhilarating at the same time. I think that aspect of a new humanism is running in parallel with the planet’s reality and a process of, as you so nicely put it,

or

de-spatialization re-augmentation.

Part of what we did in Antarctica was as if we were applying the same logic of, say, prosthetic implanting, and thereby augmenting the concept of a city. This is very much in parallel with what we are considering in regards to the future of the human body. Most of the projects that we proposed for Antarctica and were shown in Venice as holograms were not really meant to be understood as utopian per se, but rather they were presenting aspects and models for a “potentially utopian” future, perhaps somewhat on the borderline of being “dystopian”. By virtue of being necessary implants, this is required by the fact that we are increasingly in need of what are largely incomprehensible solutions for this planet. Of course, climate change and humankind’s evolution, or some would call it de-evolution, are part of this equation. This is also why today we are already contemplating and working towards inhabiting other planets. Without sounding pessimistic or nihilistic, the human condition needs to be re-tooled eventually if not sooner, especially when it comes to where computing and artificial intelligence is probably leading us. The thinking here is that we need to apply the same sort of logic to our future cities. That’s really the big leap I would say from the 60s that we are responding to; and in dialogue with that idea – with the exception of the Metabolists – most visions from that period didn’t really look at a horizon line in which these mitigating factors, the human and the urban, would be in a state of necessary upgrades. Instead, what they saw was the potential joy of utopian existence; for example, SuperStudio’s powerful ideas about encircling the planet with a single structure. That was an exuberant celebration of McLuhan’s global village and, despite its critical importance, a poem of sorts.

In Conversation

15

HUO

What is interesting is that this also leads us to the notion of an overall architecture project, and of course the question of utopia. I remembered that, in 2002, I saw an exhibition by our late friend Zaha Hadid and Patrik Schumacher. Exactly 14 years ago, they mounted an exhibition called Latent Utopias about experiments within contemporary architecture. Zaha was saying that there should be no end to experimentation. In Patrik’s introduction text, he writes:

“ Latent Utopias focuses on current experiments with radically new concepts of space that are proliferating on the back of the new electronic design media available today. This proliferation of possibilities requires the profession to ‘play’ and experiment. In this respect, the mode of production of the architect is assimilated into artistic processes. The final purpose, meaning, and fulfillment of these experiments lies beyond the scope of the architect/designer and requires creative appropriation through its audiences. 1 “ 1

16

LATENT UTOPIAS – Experiments within Contemporary Architecture. Springer Verlag, Wien/New York

Hans Ulrich Obrist & Hani Rashid

In reading this text about a mutation, it’s kind of interesting what Zaha and Patrik wrote. They say:

“ We do not answer the question of the new needs, demands, and purposes that the new architecture might address with respect to contemporary society. The answers have to be discovered within the various formal experiments that are prolife-rating today. Utopias can no longer be constructed on the basis of explicit intentions; they can only emerge as latent tendencies that might come to fruition when a social practice discovers a vital potential within those strange spatial-material constructs that are thrown into the public domain. Exhibitions are a vital part of this process. The latent social content of the new, strange, abstract spaces that are on the drawing boards of the current architectural avant-garde(s) may be teased out by publicly staging scenarios of another ‘everyday life’. 1 “ So that’s 2002, Latent Utopias. I wanted to ask you if you maybe have some memories of that moment in time, and how do you feel about utopia today? And is your “Antarctica Re-Cyclical” project a latent utopia or is it rather, as Yona Friedman would put it, a concrete utopia?

In Conversation

17

The notion of “concrete utopias” is a very interesting way of putting it. I think of Yona Friedman’s trajectory and that of “Constant” also, and that whole moment of understanding the city as a place of action, a place of discovery. Guy Debord’s notion of the “dérive” is very interesting if one overlays it onto the tools that we now have at our disposal; namely, data mining and management capabilities. In a way, I think that what we are really interested in with the Deep_Futures research taking place in Vienna over the past few years is a sort of confrontation with the authorities that technological approaches have over us. Essentially, the technocratic, the overarching idea that engineering solutions are in fact

18

the key to a utopian future – this is something I really think needs to be confronted. Hans Ulrich, in light of this, one of my questions for you is:

Do you see the future of our cities as being precisely and efficiently engineered to the point of complete control and hygiene: in other words, a technological perfection? The Google city project, for example, is centered on the idea that cities need to be very smart: that in the future, your bus will be ready when you are, on time in front of you, your auto-drive robotic car will drive you to wherever you want to go. We’re being sold everyday on this hygienic, mechanistic model of perfection that is, in fact, a far cry from the rough edges of what Yona Friedman and others might have imagined some years ago. However, to get back to your question, I think that Antarctica, as a subject of study, allowed us to begin to form a discourse centered on a certain kind of urgency, especially in terms of today’s environmental and urban realities. Antarctica is by no means a fantasy for the future; even though there’s a fantastical aspect to it as it exists today, and hopefully always will be. The pavilion installation in Venice displayed ideas set 100–150 years from the present day. In fact, it is an interesting moment when we confront the reality of our future as human beings and act upon it conceptually. So again, there is the question and provocation of using technological software when it comes into our hands (as architects and urbanists), because all of a sudden – when you apply robots, artificial intelligence, system thinking, data mining, and all manner of technological means towards making a future – one realizes that these are all impacting our world essentially from a technocratic and business-centered point of view. And if one can reverse the syndrome and utilize these tools for artistic intervention and “chance” discovery, then I think the architect can reassume an important role in such a future, because it is precisely through architecture that technology can be filtered through the medium of humanism. Before we move on to the technology and engineering thread, I’d like to go back to something we discussed earlier when we talked about the avantgarde of the ‘60s. Of course, SuperStudio was also part of your generation, and it’s interesting because Douglas Murphy has just written this book called Last Future. He’s an architect and writer in London. It’s an interesting book where he looks at the impending disasters of the

HUO

HR

I remember it well, Lise Anne and I were on that show. That was the first time we showed our large-scale computer-generated drawings, the M-Scapes. They were extremely early computer-generated three-dimensional drawings executed with relatively high-end software that was newly available to us as architects at the time. Patrik and Zaha wrote a terrific text to accompany that exhibition. However, in hindsight, it’s interesting to note how naïve we all collectively were. That was an exuberant moment for all of us, using digital tools for the first time, and we were all very excited by the possibilities that lay before us. In actuality, I don’t think we were paying much attention to necessity at that moment. Instead, we saw these tools as profound enablers that afforded us the new-found versatility to push architecture into new territories. In the years since then, there has been a slow erosion of the original authority of these digital tools, whereas now they don’t necessarily command the potentials that were unlocked by the Latent Utopias position. Rather, today’s tools seem to be used in a more frivolous way, generating endless streams of similar-looking results across the globe. Architecture as a discipline has seemingly shifted and changed and has become somewhat bifurcated in respect to this. Today, you have a groundswell of a younger generation of architects and urbanists who look upon these tools as a side act to forming polemics, narratives and scenarios for cities, not really informing any kind of potential latent utopianism. I think the recent Venice Biennales have made that quite apparent – the way that architecture is not really staking a claim technologically or holistically, but rather becoming more adept at mending rather than performing all-out surgery. That seems to be the tendency. Although, having said that, what’s interesting to me about working in the Antarctic Pavilion and why, in fact, the problem of “Antarctica” is so interesting, is precisely that when you overlay a notion of urgency and employ the same tools yet again, one has to form some sort of long-reaching vision. All of a sudden, it’s not so much the ability to seduce that’s important – although seduction is a necessary aspect – it’s the prospect of getting powerful ideas across to a public outside our discipline.

Hans Ulrich Obrist & Hani Rashid

‘60s as there was a destruction of the Cold War at that time. I remember a nascent feeling of eco-activism from my childhood in Switzerland. When I was a child in the early ‘70s, that led of course to all kinds of models. There were these ideas in the air of retreating from the world. I just interviewed John Allen last week, of the Biosphere II – one of the largest utopias that almost became part of reality. There were a lot of other retreats at that time also, if you think about all the proposals for megastructures that were conceptually connected to humanity’s salvation. From Buckminster Fuller, for example, there was the great inspiration for Biosphere II, of course, and the Metabolists conjured up all kinds of communities and communes in their thinking and projects. And let us not forget the Californian descendants of that movement and the protests in the streets of Paris in the late ‘60s. There was an apocalyptic feeling of industry, of cybernetic planning, and it’s interesting that now, here we are in 2016 with a renewed cold war looming between Russia and America, in which their relations are seemingly deteriorating. If one looks at Bulatov’s paintings, which came from the Perestroika time at the end of the Cold War, these paintings which might have looked dated a few years ago now look suddenly so “now.” I was wondering, given the fact that there is a similar threat today – although very different than the one that was felt in the ‘60s, but nevertheless a similar sense of threat, what with the threat of terrorism and so on – to what extent do you feel that there is any sort of repetition or, for that matter, difference? Bearing in mind that such models, without any nostalgic tendencies, are still toolboxes, what kind of different models might be needed today? HR

I think the difference is there, although there is a fascinating parallel. I’ve been thinking about this a great deal, especially living and experiencing a very tenuous political situation here in the USA. The presidential election has brought Donald Trump to prominence, who in some ways is acting as a leeching mechanism, feeding on the country’s “issues” such as immigration, unemployment, gender politics, and so on. In an odd way, he has been extracting and making evident the sickness and issues that normally stay beneath the surface. By bringing these deeply embedded issues and problems to the nation’s discourse, there is a kind of parallel with and difference to the Cold War of the mid-to-late 20th century. The major difference between that time and the times we live in now has to do in part with social networking coupled with information overload. I too remember living as a child of the Cold War with a sense of imminent doom, especially with the Cuban Missile Crisis. However, the major difference was that, at that time, the “global village” was just that, a village, and today it’s no longer that innocent. Instead, we are living in a time of the global metropolis or megalopolis. At that time, there was also a curious fascination regarding the issues of the time amongst people in the spheres of art and architecture. In a way, the exuberant outputs of that period were done with a kind of quaint naïvete. When I think about Haus-Rucker-Co. or the more benign version of their discourse: Verner Panton, the notions of free love, spirited interactions, performance urbanism, and so on, showed that the space between people was intimate and coveted; not like today, where the alien and foreign seems to dominate the mindset, and by extension our work and visions of the future. When one thinks of the work of SuperStudio, for example, there is the famous collage of a family picnicking on an infinite, porcelain-tiled gridded landscape, cooking something on a hot plate. This was a provocation, a reaction against the machine while embracing socialization and freedoms. These were the sorts of polemic that came from the intellectuals and artists of the time, a generation who reacted creatively and politically to fear-mongering and political control with strangeness, and humor, at times. Cedric Price’s seminal “Fun Palace” was a celebration of this sort of amazing proliferation of social space, as were the works of Archigram, Archizoom, and others. That was a period of naïve optimism and hope, as opposed to what we see too much of today: resignation and a tinge of melancholy. So, I keep asking myself, why don’t we see that sort of unbridled outpouring of creativity and desire in the conceptual work of our time? In fact, as you already put it very eloquently, we’re embracing a new Cold War that is on the horizon, without any kind of attitude this time to deal with it. The Antarctic Pavilion and the discourses it

In Conversation

19

formed might very well be a little ahead of the curve on this: perhaps the work we proposed, as output, is something that will be more the norm ten years from now. Today, McLuhan’s Global Village and the idea of Spaceship Earth seems tame and slightly naïve in comparison to what we really have now, a kind of hyperglobal state, with minds veering towards inhabiting Mars, eventually abandoning Spaceship Earth. I suppose the curious thing for me is that we are a dichotomy – a society being lulled into a Huxleyan soma-like state and therefore not paying a great deal of attention; and as such a society, being easily enthralled by novelty and innovation. The rhetoric coming out of Silicon Valley these days with the likes of Elon Musk is calling for a new, perfected technological future in which every year, yet another product is launched by Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc., as well as another nudge towards self-driving cars, self-organizing cities, and a self-guided future. I wonder if the endless promises and “advances” aren’t seducing us into a delirium of sorts. The Deep_Futures Lab has been pretty much focused on this reality, and we have been inspecting aspects of what is occurring from an architectural/ technological point of view. In the 19th century there was the imminent arrival of technology; the automobile, the radio, transatlantic flight, and so on. Many docile thinkers were referred to as “19th-century sleepers,” a way of describing how the general population was simply not

paying attention, or the Luddites who were simply not interested and against the new, and finally, there was a handful of innovators paying some attention. I wonder where we sit today with respect to that picture as we find ourselves in a similar environment of technological flux. I do believe that the art world is slightly more in tune than the architecture world because honestly, with the exception of the work that Rem Koolhaas has done with respect to shifting the profession, the bar has been set quite low. These days in architectural discourse, there is a refrain from discussions about technological advances and influences. Instead, tackling social and political issues is the focus above all others. As a result, the outcome of technological progress in our field is often relegated to the placement of solar panels or other environmentally motivated aspects in play, such as windmills or thermal glass and the like, essentially leaving the future of our cities to robots and data-gathering from the likes of Google and others. Cities as mission-critical human domains are an afterthought because all the focus is on the local, on the place, on housing solutions, on community well-being, and so on. That’s the kind of somnambulistic state that we are effectively being lulled into daily, I fear. However, to address your point, it is somewhat frightening today – and more so than in the ‘60s – the potential downside of where this planet could go.

“ Today, McLuhan’s Global Village and the idea of Spaceship Earth seems tame and slightly naïve in comparison to what we really have now: a kind of hyperglobal state, with minds veering towards inhabiting Mars, eventually abandoning Spaceship Earth. I suppose the curious thing for me is that we are a dichotomy – a society being lulled into a Huxleyan soma-like state and therefore not paying a great deal of attention; and as such a society, being easily enthralled by novelty and innovation. “ Hani Rashid

20

Hans Ulrich Obrist & Hani Rashid

HUO

According to Elizabeth Kolbert, we are already living in the middle of a new extinction. It’s perhaps now relevant to think about this and about how we can use knowledge to solve big questions in the 21st century, and of course to break down barriers and create new alliances between the various disciplines. With that, there seems to be only one way to address these looming and big questions. I did a long interview with Billy Klüver, one of your predecessors in the’60s, in which he discussed devising experiments in art and technology with accomplice artists such as Robert Rauschenber and Frank Stella, as well as with engineers from Bell Labs. I think today, these sorts of collaboration provide a way of pulling knowledge and going forward, and these sorts of collaborative structures are perhaps even more relevant than ever. When we met in Pontocina in 2001, and later, when I interviewed you in Rotterdam in 2003, I asked you about this idea of collaboration. In that interview, you mentioned your interest in collaborating and working closely with scientists and experts. I recall that you and Lise Anne had said that you didn’t work directly with scientist groups of collectives per se, but rather that you relished one-on-one relationships with scientists and experts instead. Can you tell me a little bit about how you do your own experiments in art and technology and how that applies to the Antarctica project specifically?

HR

Since that interview, – I think it was 2001, and I think the interview you are referring to was in Rotterdam around the same period at the NAI – what’s really changed and what’s now quite interesting is that over the years, and by virtue of my becoming more of a practitioner who spends time designing buildings and cities, thereby venturing back and forth between practice and academia, I’ve been fortunate enough to meet some quite remarkable people in the world of science and technology. These are the interesting collaborators and people who inform the work, the teaching, and the thinking as well. For example, some groups we have worked with recently that are focused on artificial intelligence have joined us on masterplanning projects in China, for example. Another friend of mine is spending his resources on constructing a “brain” in Seattle on the West Coast. He and I have discussed building materials and cladding systems that react to all sorts of environmental data. These guys are looking at space from the point of view of inventions rather than other, more normal, parameters. They are focused on bringing electronic intelligence to every aspect of our lives. The more exposed I become to all these sorts of inevitable realities, and the more I consider the impact they will have on our lives, cities, and space, the more I’m intrigued by the future of the ways in which we will design buildings and cities. For example, even the very topical idea today that we’ll soon be able to print our buildings and perhaps even affect a change of materials in the printing process

In Conversation

– say from a cementitious material to a glass – is intriguing, inspiring, and very powerful in terms of how it will change so much in a way that we thought might never happen in terms of buildings. These are things that I’m seeing today as prototypes and that are worth contemplating working with. That’s the sort of palette that has informed the Antarctica project; so, in effect, my teaching and practice are actually based not so much on hypotheticals but rather on what I see as inevitable realities. The acceleration now in the advent of new things that are coming into our fields is so rapid that one doesn’t even have time to sit back and fantasize about the future because in most cases when one looks, the future has already happened to a certain degree. I think that might be the big difference between what was an almost placid, quiet period in the mid-20th century with respect to dramatic change and where we are today. If you were standing in the shoes of an architect in Florence in 1967, and designing a city that “could” surround the planet, you were able to do so in such a naïve, blissful state of mind in that period. Today, it would not be possible to do that work or those drawing(s) without realizing that, indeed, one could potentially do that project as a reality and not, as would have been the case at that time, as a fantasy. And today, one has to be interested in a vast number of people who are actually out there producing all the bits and pieces of the whole picture. Today, architecture is a little bit like product development, for which the culture of making the future needs a lot of moving parts. There are many people working on the discreet smaller parts of an entire picture. However, they – or more precisely, we – don’t have any idea that the whole story is some kind of fusion of various ideas and concepts that gel and come into play simultaneously. That’s the nature of the period we’re really in today. There are so many specialized aspects that are necessary to grasp in terms of the entire story. It really behooves all of us to go into a dialogue with the future and not simply accept it as a given. It’s a collaborative effort that has to be embraced now. It’s the only way that the promise of progress will take hold. It’s “old school” to refer to disciplines as separate compartments. To create work these days as an architect, I believe one has to act and think more like a filmmaker and less like a heroic character, which is really how architects have seen themselves in the past. Being more in a directorial mode as a practitioner and teacher it is critical to being able to shape-shift according to what a project or collaboration requires. Yes, things have certainly shifted dramatically from the last time we discussed this. It’s funny how we’re still very much working in camps and holding on to our individual territories and disciplines, even though the gravitational pull is to move out of a mode of introspective individualism. The whole notion of the individual author, the lone wolf sitting in the corner developing the future, seems so outdated.

21

HUO

It would be good to hear a little bit more about the different chapters and projects exhibited in the Antarctic Pavilion. How did you structure them? The reason I ask is because I’m particularly interested in this aspect of the organization. I was very close to Édouard Glissant, the philosopher, poet and writer from Martinique, who said that basically, continental logics are very 20th-century because they are homogenized and also often too discreet. He posited that the archipelago is a more appropriate form or format for the 21st century. In fact, he draws on the model of the Caribbean archipelago, where he’s from: that it’s not because we’re incompetent when autonomous, but that autonomy or strict borders are somehow threatening to identity. It’s actually through these zones of contact, as in the case of the islands, that their identity only gets richer, becomes more hybrid by shifting overlapping edges. That’s obviously key to the moment now when we have all these new forms of lack of tolerance surfacing, in which separation and segregation seem to be the rule. It is a very important statement, this idea Glissant refers to about the archipelago as a welcoming, sheltering kind of space. And it seems to me, looking at the exhibition in Venice, that your vision for Antarctica is not a continental one, but more an archipelago of these different interconnected islands. I wanted to ask you first: if that is philosophically the correct approach, what is your view of the archipelago notion? And if not, what would be another image or metaphor?

HR

The archipelago analogy is a perfect one, especially if you think of it as a shape-shifting archipelago in constant dialogue with other islands which are in constant movement according to some kind of fluid and dynamic logic. The “chapters” you are referring to in the Venice pavilion were based on taking seven discreet exponents of impending change, or flux, and dissecting them one by one in terms of their potentiality for creating new cities. One of the chapters covered, for example, was the one about feeding the world. We all know that global meat consumption is very bad for the planet, and we all know how that interplays with the consumption of oxygen, pollution, using vast swaths of land, and so on. A storyline was formed as to whether factories for global food production in the future might be better off being placed in one centralized location: in this case, Antarctica, thereby making use of its extreme climate of freezing temperatures and powerful wind gusts. With that in mind, developing a system of breeding protein for consumption by way of insects rather than livestock is a way of producing a great deal of food at an extremely accelerated pace, thereby solving – through city planning – a problem we already have today and which will undoubtedly become even more severe in the future; that of so many people suffering by virtue of not having enough access to

22

food. The project made evident how a city might grow and shrink according to its food consumption needs over time. That project, as an “archipelago,” could evolve and form around the spawning and harvesting of fish and fisheries, and at the same time make use of 200-plusmile-an-hour winds to generate power by way of new carbon structural technology and hydrofoil wings. The concept is that one could utilize nature coupled with new material technologies to produce a foundation for a new city that could harvest power and natural resources in a completely cyclical loop with nothing lost. The calculations showed that these hydrofoil wings could produce as much energy as today’s nuclear power plants while being completely safe, and engineered in tune with the earth’s dynamic forces which are always around us. Another project dealt with the emergence and prevalence of new nomadic societies, represented by the Assanges and Snowdens, for example, amongst various others, who find themselves outside of borders by choice or by force; those people who are not part of any particular state or place and don’t carry legitimate passports but collectively lead a society of sorts by virtue of social networking. Also, consider Syrian refugees. They too exist in a borderless state, and add to that intellectual nomads and artists; they too have this mode of existence. So in the future, in Antarctica, there could be a way of producing a stateless city and environment. People who, in today’s world, circulate in a state of constant limbo might find a place such as Antarctica, which has no borders or state ownership, appealing and accommodating to such an existence. This would be a city that would allow such a population to coexist and to create their own communities, environment, and political systems. That may sound like a somewhat naïve utopianism, but in reality it is something that we’re already seeing in today’s world, which is seeing the rise of people who are self-displacing by virtue of wanting to opt out of society, war zones, information networks, or any other assemblies of control. In another project, we took on the idea of culture and sports, especially as it utilizes and is tethered to televised and internet media structures, by conceptualizing a city based entirely on the idea of hosting the Winter Olympics. We looked at robotic construction and extrapolated robotic architectural assemblies from that which could transform according to certain input and programming. The idea is that we would look at an architecture that could mutate into different forms of stadia or housing, or other needs according to demand, spectacle, and even anticipatory artificial-intelligence inputs of data. Another proposal for the deep future of Antarctica is the thought of producing an immense building that would house all the server farms on the planet in the future, which will certainly be many. All cloud computing, all the data management around the planet today is served by a handful of these places.

Hans Ulrich Obrist & Hani Rashid

In this case, to offset the rampant land use and waste that results from this, all the servers would instead be located in one remarkable, 600-meter-in-diameter spherical structure. Algorithms that simulate neural networks were used to generate an architecture that could house the computers needed by each company. The exchange and maintenance of the computers would be done by drones, which would then create a constantly changing environment that would automatically be under continuous refurbishment. This would take all of the pressing demands we will have around the planet for cloud computing, data harvesting, mining and so on, and bring them all into one somewhat sacred place a sort of 22nd-century Pantheon or Ledoux or Boullée-like superstructure. And lastly, there is the seed and life bank, which stems from the idea that a city might be designed solely around the idea of collecting life, protecting it and spawning it; a “city” with no people, entirely operated and occupied by drones. In the summer months of Antarctica, these drones would head out to collect seeds and retrieve them to be brought to this city. The city would act as a massive protective environment, kinetically closing during the winter period and opening and spawning life again in the spring and summer months for all eternity. The crazy thing is that this project is an architecture that could very well be the last building that might survive on Earth, when we inevitably abandon this planet, centuries from now.

In Conversation

23

Christos Marcopoulos, Greg Lynn, Peter Mears at Diploma Presentation WS2015/16

Kazuyo Sejima at the Diploma Presentation of Ewa Lenart WS2015/16

Hani Rashid and Zaha Hadid at Diploma Presentation WS2015/16

Studio Work & Diploma Projects

24

Re: Futures

2011 — —12 — —13 — —14 — —15 25

WINTER SEMESTER 2011/12

New Works for Cities yet to be Built Excerpt from studio brief:

The University of Applied Arts Vienna Architecture program is shape-shifting in 2011 by becoming a threeyear master’s degree program. The collective and individual work of the students in Hani Rashid’s studio will predominantly focus on the concept of the city, and in particular, the notion of city as a laboratory for the deep futures of human interaction, technological and ecological intelligence, spatial and formal play, experimentation and discovery. Students will initiate Deep Futures by investigating both contemporary and future potentials for new, yet-to-be-designed cities. The intention over time is to individually and collectively form the very underpinings and scenarios for such new urban developments. By virtue of two distinct but intertwined key interests, students will be encouraged to analytically, formally, conceptually, and pragmatically explore various architectural scenarios for cities of the near and deep future. On the one hand, an appreciation and exploration of what one might call “obsessive tectonics” and “architectures” of such things as speed, mobility, dissonance, networking and technological symbiosis; and on the other hand, research into the anticipated realities and needs of cities and humanity.

26

Cities, particularly future cities, have been a recurrent subject of intrigue and curiosity for all types of disciplines. Today, the discipline of architecture seeks to realign itself according to methods of creating new technological means (particularly centered around energy resources and sustainability as well as social patterns and mobility) and entirely new forms of cultural expression. Working initially in groups, the program will proceed with a number of sequential exercises, moving from initial research-oriented work to conceptual design work and eventually targeting building, urban architectural solutions and proposals. The first exercise will focus on isolating and delving into important key precedent strategies, predominately the visionary thinking and strategies that were formed in the latter part of the mid-20th century as future city proposals. Investigation of these precedents in terms of their preoccupations with technological networks, mobility, biological and ecological systems, and even concerns such as urban delirium, social experiments, and aesthetic preoccupations, will become the basis for this semester’s studio projects.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

27

Fractown

Melanie Kotz

Fish Market, Bangladesh

Because of the extreme poverty of the general public, Bangladesh is not able to sustain adequate infrastructure that is able to withstand the frequent cyclones in coastal areas. This proposal offers a structure which accounts for the regular flooding in that region.

28

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

WS2011/12

29

Binary City Master Plan, Siberia, Russia

Christoph Pehnelt, Maximin Rieder, Markus Willeke

Binary City is situated in Russia, 2900 km east of St. Petersburg. This location is infamously renowned as one of the most polluted in the world. A border of volumes in the northern part of the proposed city creates a physical filter which aims to prevent the majority of smog from entering the southern part of it. By creating this filter layer, we are able to use the southern part of our site for more open, public and private spaces.

30

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

Janus(c)ity

Kaveh Najafian, Dena Saffarian

Wind Breaker, Iran/Iraq

32

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

The site is mostly located on Iranian/Iraqi territorial lands – an area highly rich in fossil fuels with harsh climatic conditions (dust storms, very hot and humid and no rain). Janus(c)ity is the future version of today’s energy production industries in the region which, instead of being based on the over-exploitation of non-renewable sources, is planned to extract energy and minerals from dust storms.

WS2011/12

33

Meso Master II

Alexander Haid, Daniel Prost, Viktoria Sándor

Machine City, Iraq

The city as a machine supporting all the needs of the inhabitants through the merging of all urban programs into one volume – agriculture, industry, business and retail zones, housing and work areas as well as recreational spaces.

34

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

WS2011/12

35

Silk City

Johan Tali

Suspended Urbanism, India

Silk City is a hyper-dense structure which is able to adapt to any given topography and landscape, accommodating a fast-growing urban population.

36

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

WS2011/12

37

Infinicity

Luis Daniel Pozo, Piotr Konstanty Prokopowicz, Ralph S. Steenblik

Looping City, Netherlands

38

DEEP FUTURES: New Works for Cities yet to be Built

In times of globalization, communication, transportation systems and human interaction will become a key element and a driving force behind the development of new cities. Infinicity’s geometry is therefore based on a variety of highspeed technologies.

WS2011/12

39

WINTER SEMESTER 2011/12

Diploma Projects

40

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

41

Rhythmic Embodiment Vienna, Austria

Stefanie Theuretzbacher

This hybrid building of a music school and a pedestrian bridge is a complementary structure to the traffic node and broken urban fabric of Schottentor, Vienna.

42

Diploma Project

WS2011/12

43

Fluxtower Extension of the Two Flak Towers in Arenbergpark, Vienna, Austria

Anutorn Polphong

This project houses a library and living units to re-establish the park condition around the two towers and to unleash and transform the space captured inside the defense towers, returning them to the public.

44

Diploma Project

WS2011/12

45

SUMMER SEMESTER 2012

Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere Excerpt from studio brief:

” The mathematical models are sculptural renderings of trigonometric functions; the mechanical models were teaching aids for showing the dynamics of Industrial Revolution-age machinery. Art resides even in things with no artistic intentions. ” Hiroshi Sugimoto

This semester will focus primarily on building design, where the drivers for the works carried out will be primarily those to do with the way we experience, perceive, and move through architecture. Key words in the studio will be optics, phenomena, and atmosphere, terms that speak to the notion that architecture is, above all else, a way of understanding the world around us and the spatiality we create and inhabit. The design, making, and embodiment of architecture will be the target of the studio and each student will work on an individual building design located in their master plan from last semester. Aspects of the environmental, phenomenological and pragmatic that were the focus of the previous semester’s master plans will be embraced and utilized as a foundation of these projects. The starting point was Hiroshi Sugimoto’s “Conceptual Forms” and the mathematical process that generates them. Intriguing and unexpected programs and uses will be encouraged, as will the use of materials and technologies drawn from the deep future.

46

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

47

TEAser

Andrea Sachse

Tea Factory, India

48

DEEP FUTURES: Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere

SS2012

49

Interstitial Discharge

Matthew Tam

Aquaculture and Water Treatment Facility, Siberia, Russia

50

DEEP FUTURES: Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere

SS2012

51

Grand Prix Circuit

Christoph Pehnelt

Algae Biofuel Research and Motorsport Center, Siberia, Russia

52

DEEP FUTURES: Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere

SS2012

53

Pier Floating Harbor Facility for various Coastal Regions

54

DEEP FUTURES: Optics, Phenomena and Atmosphere

SS2012

55

Melanie Kotz

SUMMER SEMESTER 2012

Diploma Projects

56

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

57

HyperveloCITY a Cultural Cluster in Downtown Los Angeles, USA

The idea is to emphasize and support the use of the existing public transportation system and to create not-so-often-seen public spaces in the densest part of the city.

Sille Pihlak

HyperveloCITY proposes a continuous structure through downtown Los Angeles housing an art museum, an educational institution and convention centre, each directly connected to a subway station.

58

Diploma Project

SS2012

59

HyperveloCITY

SS2012

61

Sille Pihlak

HyperveloCITY

62

Diploma Project

SS2012

63

Sille Pihlak

The Crystal Market

Markus Willeke

Berlin Market Hall and Food Exchange

64

Diploma Project

SS2012

65

Markus Willeke

The Crystal Market

66

Diploma Project

SS2012

67

Markus Willeke

The Crystal Market

68

Diploma Project

SS2012

69

IC Arctic

Jeroen Hendrik S. Roosen

International Center for the Arctic, Tromsø, Norway

70

Diploma Project

SS2012

71

Times Cube³ A Media Cathedral for New York City, USA

72

Diploma Project

SS2012

73

Johan Tali

WINTER SEMESTER 2012/13

EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City Excerpt from studio brief:

Nation X has decided to implement a new, fully sustainable and economically viable city: YXY. Rather than starting the city from a traditional master-planning approach, feasibility study, or other methods, Nation X has opted for the making of an elaborate, fully functional and spectacular world fair expo – the Deep_Futures Expo City: Prototype 001, as an instigator and catalyst for the city´s eventual development. Within the spectrum of the evolutionary history of cities, from their origins as places of mercantile exchange, gatherings of a polis (agora, forum), development around arable land, food supply, access to goods, climatic and environmental opportunities and access to natural resources, etc. cities have historically mostly evolved organically over time – in some cases, randomly – and usually without any anticipation of inevitable change. Traffic congestion, pollution, energy consumption, disrepair, gentrification and obsolescence are all unanticipated events that define our contemporary cities and urban environments. Today, however, the very real premise of building new cities from scratch as centers of intense human interaction can anticipate and even calibrate constant flux and change as we shift from predominantly geographically-centered city thinking to economically and technologically tethered sustainable urbanisms. Today, a new city does not necessarily need (although this is by no means a hindrance) access to connected waterways or fertile arable land, nor does it necessarily need to

74

be located in close proximity to existing infrastructure, sources of non-renewable energy, mineral resources, or even be attentive to climatic variables and stability. Rather, in devising cities from scratch, one could envision urban viability at almost any place, circumstance or domain, providing there is political stability and a need to build. Some variables and necessities for rapidly implementable, sustainable, and viable city growth and economic success include, amongst other things, certain core staples as far as urbanism is concerned. Essentials such as transport systems for people and goods, environmentally sustainable and state-of-the-art-designed and engineered structures, fresh water supply, and waste management would effectively be key drivers for building up a city from nothing. This would be centered on these and other criteria, for which data would be the key driver above all and data in every form would be the means by which such a city would not only sustain itself, but also thrive. The first task will be exploring the geometrical opportunities of a single solid. The 14-sided truncated octahedron is the only Archimedian geometry that is able to create an endlessly repeating closely packed group and will therefore be used as a bounding area for the primary exercise.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

75

Social Encounters

Hessamedin Fana, Lena Kriwanek, Kaveh Najafian

Prototype of a Parliament for the Future

76

DEEP FUTURES EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City

WS2012/13

77

ReReading City

Stefan Ritzer, Maximin Rieder, Klemens Sitzmann

Prototype of a Possible Future Urban Mobility

78

DEEP FUTURES EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City

WS2012/13

79

Circulation Network

Peter Mears, Dena Saffarian

Prototype of a Decentralised Distribution Network

80

DEEP FUTURES EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City

WS2012/13

81

Technocalyps

Abraham Fung, Melanie Kotz

Prototype of a Playground Temple

82

DEEP FUTURES EXPO I: Prototypes for the Future City

WS2012/13

83

WINTER SEMESTER 2012/13

Diploma Projects

84

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

85

Blurred Hyphen

Kristína Rypáková

Vienna Central Train Station, Austria

86

Diploma Project

WS2012/13

87

Kristína Rypáková

Blurred Hyphen

88

Diploma Project

WS2012/13

89

Urban Extraction

Christoph Pehnelt

Naval Design Campus and Cultural Center, La Spezia, Italy

90

Diploma Project

Christoph Pehnelt

Urban Extraction

92

Diploma Project

WS2012/13

93

Re:Trace Memory

Andrea Sachse

New Archive and Art Museum, Cologne, Germany

94

Diploma Project

WS2012/13

95

Andrea Sachse

Re:Trace Memory

96

Diploma Project

WS2012/13

97

SUMMER SEMESTER 2013

EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City Excerpt from studio brief:

This term will focus on the findings of the previous semester Expo City I and will build upon the geometric potential of the chosen primitive, the truncated octahedron. Essentials such as transport systems for people and goods, environmentally sustainable designed and engineered structures, a fresh water supply and waste management are the key drivers for this term’s prototypes for a future city.

98

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

99

Synesthesia

Ursula Trost

Expo Pavilion

The architecture emphasizes the abilities of various spaces to affect the user experience with a focus on their acoustic qualities. The aim is to create a close connection between the interiority of the pavilion and human sensuality.

100

DEEP FUTURES EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City

SS2013

101

Fabrication Past Additive Manufacturing Techniques Expo Pavilion

Daniel Rhomberg, Stefan Thanei

We are arguably witnessing the dawn of additive manufacturing in the built environment. This is subsequently allowing us to depart from the idea of assembly as a way of designing and building. This project sets out to investigate the implementations of this model.

102

DEEP FUTURES EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City

SS2013

103

Binary Cycle, Future Urban Mobility Expo Pavilion

Daniel Prost, Stephan Ritzer

Around 100 years ago, cars radically changed the urban fabric. New technological developments, such as electric cars, haven’t done that so far. Addressing this phenomenon, the pavilion presents itself as a radical utopia provoking new relationships between “transportation surfaces” and buildings, driving possibilities, spatial experiences and finally a new urban set-up for the Deep Future City.

104

DEEP FUTURES EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City

SS2013

105

Daniel Prost, Stephan Ritzer

Binary Cycle, Future Urban Mobility

106

DEEP FUTURES EXPO II: Prototypes for the Future City

SS2013

107

WINTER SEMESTER 2013/14

Über Port

Excerpt from studio brief:

With the inevitable surges in population to which cities are being increasingly subjected, one of the most important influences on a city’s growth, longevity and sustainability into the distant future is location, which includes the accessibility and efficiency of its urban ports of entry. The HyperPort Studio will focus on the future of access between city centers and its relationship to transport and mobility, which includes lighter aircrafts, cleaner fuel and quieter means of transportation. The study and implementation of new innovative ports of entry between cities and nations can speak to the potential progress of a city’s viability and vitality. Creating urban gateways, urban portals, transit hubs and border controls for people, goods and information are key drivers of a vital and successful urbanism which ultimately affords a city its longevity, viability, and above all its vitality and importance as a place. The speed and glamour of flight still has an allure, despite all the tedium associated with most air travel today. Commuting between cities is essential, especially in densely packed urban corridors, and this reality will become increasingly evident, especially in cities that are in close proximity. This which will require increasingly efficient and seamless means of movement between their respective city centers.

108

Compared to today’s airports, which are for the most part located relatively far from their city centers, seaports and train stations are a hopelessly antiquated and less desirable means of efficient travel for both crosscity commuters and tourists. With the proliferation, accommodation and growth of smaller regional jets (net-jets, porter airlines, etc.), certain cities will incur an advantage over others when urbanites are able to travel in close proximity to their urban cores. For cities to evolve, a new system of transport must emerge with smaller, more agile, intelligent ports of entry that are in close proximity to city centers and urban cores. Ultimately, it is efficiency and speed that will dominate travel and commuting; and with that in mind, this studio will focus on the topics of speed and mobility. The HyperPort will act as both a catalyst and protagonist for a city’s viability and successful future, and can be construed as a new category in and of itself: a sort of hybrid typology combining airport, seaport, cargo port, border-crossing station and city-linking transport hub.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

109

Über Port

Daniel Rhomberg

Transportation Hub

110

DEEP FUTURES: Über Port

WS2013/14

111

Über Port, Urban Compression

Daniel Prost

Hyperloop and Maglev Station, Shanghai, China

112

DEEP FUTURES: Über Port

WS2013/14

113

Über Port

Lea Dietiker, Viktoria Sándor

Train and Ferry Station, Singapore

114

DEEP FUTURES: Über Port

WS2013/14

115

Über Port, Arc de Celerité

Arpapan Chantanakajornfung , Lenka Petráková

Train Station, Istanbul, Turkey

116

DEEP FUTURES: Über Port

WS2013/14

117

WINTER SEMESTER 2013/14

Diploma Projects

118

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

119

Peripeteia

Luis Daniel Pozo

The City Above the Skies

120

Diploma Project

WS2013/14

121

Luis Daniel Pozo

Peripeteia

122

Diploma DiplomaProjects Project

WS WS2013/14 2013/14

123

Luis Daniel Pozo

Peripeteia

124

Diploma Project

WS2013/14

125

Sonosphere, a Sonic Filter

Ursula Trost

New Drama School, Vienna, Austria

126

Diploma Project

WS2013/14

127

Ursula Trost

Sonosphere, a Sonic Filter

128

Diploma Project

WS2013/14

129

The Essence 2012, the annual exhibition of the University of Applied Arts Vienna at Künstlerhaus, Vienna

Exhibitions & Study Trips

130

Exhibitions & Study Trips

Studio Hani Rashid – SEMESTER University of Applied Arts Vienna

131

Exhibition opening of Antarctica: Re-Cyclical at the Antarctic Pavilion, Venice in SS2016

Studio Hani Rashid WS2011

Wolf D. Prix, Greg Lynn and Barbara Imhof at the exhibition opening of Antarctica: Re-Cyclical SS2016 at the Antarctic Pavilion, Venice.

132

Exhibitions & Study Trips

A Speculative Architecture for Vienna, Exhibition, SS 2017 at Aula der Wissenschaften, Vienna

The Essence 2015, the annual exhibition of the University of Applied Arts Vienna at Künstlerhaus, Vienna

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

133

Hani Rashid at Antarctica: Re-Cyclical Exhibition at MMB Museu Marítim de Barcelona, SS2016, Barcelona

Expo City SS 2013, Installation at Studio Hani Rashid

134

Exhibitions & Study Trips

Antarctica: Re-Cyclical Exhibition SS2016, at the 3rd Xinjiang Biennale, Urumqi, China

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

135

The Essence 2015: the annual exhibition of the University of Applied Arts Vienna at Künstlerhaus, Vienna

136

Exhibitions & Study Trips

A Speculative Architecture for Vienna, Exhibition SS2017 at Aula der Wissenschaften, Vienna

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

137

Antarctica: Re-Cyclical Exhibition at the Antarctic Pavilion, Venice in SS2016, Project by Mary Denman, Fady Haddad, Mathias Juul Frost

Study Trip Germany SS2015, Installation by Christo and Jeanne-Claude at Gasometer Oberhausen

SUMMER SEMESTER 2014

Plug-In Park Avenue — Über HQ Excerpt from studio brief:

The corporate headquarters model is under attack. Today, with the ever-present rise of everything from startups to companies such as Facebook, Google, Twitter and the like, we see companies that rise quickly from obscurity; at one moment incubating in a warehouse or garage, then reaching the summit of corporate culture the next. With that, they sustain a radical transformation in their approach to the workplace and, more importantly, the city. These companies are taking over and incising their way into the public realm (virtual and real), therefore impacting city space in untold ways. The Über HQ is the focus of this semester’s Deep_ Futures laboratory work. We will look at how new and quite different cultures of space and business, leisure, commerce and so on are taking over and positing the question: what becomes of these enterprises when they reenter the “atmosphere” of city space and urban culture? How will these Über HQs change the landscape of dense infrastructure, reclaim the idea of image and prowess, situate themselves as dominant forces of change, etc.? The place in question is the very heart of corporate HQ culture, Park Avenue in New York City. This zone, once the home to such major companies as Pan American World Airways, the Seagram distillery company, the Lever Brothers soap company and countless others, is now ripe for the taking. The old notion of stand-alone,

138

singular, heroic monuments to corporate dominance and omnipresence is eroding in the face of emerging social networks (WhatsApp), electric and information technology-based vehicles (Tesla), cross-cultural megasites (Alibaba) and the like. The electrosphere has spawned not only entirely new terrains of human interaction but also new forms of collaboration, new types of products, new hybridized businesses. With these, entirely new approaches to being present and being within city space, and eventually therefore new architectures, are being expressed. Today, Park Avenue is a catalog of 20th-century technologies, models, and approaches to architecture and building design. Scrutinizing this location and re-positioning, retrieving, reinventing and reworking Park Avenue is at the focus of the summer 2014 Deep_ Futures Lab. Students will take on the zone as a place to house and accommodate new typologies of the Über HQ. The studio will explore the notion of “plugin” architectural works, which will instigate an entirely new and radical different approach to building envelopes, spatial programming and urban space in the heart of New York City. Each student will take an arbitrary “aspect” of Park Avenue and develop a series of geometric explorations within the given volume and designated bounding area. The geometric explorations and studies are centered around tectonic explorations tied to notions of networks, intersections and overlay.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

139

Bitcoin Headquarters

Ewa Lenart, Viktoria Sándor

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

140

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

141

Fitbit Headquarters

Moritz Hanshans, Lenka Petráková

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

142

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

143

Zephyr Headquarters

Nora Varga

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

144

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

145

Dropbox Headquarters Park Avenue, New York City, USA

146

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

147

Kaveh Najafian

H+ Biotechnology Headquarters

Noemi Polo, Arpapan Chantanakajornfung

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

148

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

149

Facebook Headquarters

Haitham Al Busafi

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

150

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

151

Amazon Headquarters

Abraham Fung, Artur Staškevitš

Park Avenue, New York City, USA

152

DEEP FUTURES: Plug-In Park Avenue - Über HQ

SS2014

153

SUMMER SEMESTER 2014

Diploma Projects

154

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

155

Volucité

Daniel Prost

Hyperloop Station, Paris, France

156

Diploma Project

SS2014

157

Axonic Intervention

Dena Saffarian

Rebooting Shushtar New Town, Iran

158

Diploma Project

SS2014

159

Save Domino

Florian Fend

New Living, Brooklyn, New York, USA

160

Diploma Project

SS2014

161

Florian Fend

Save Domino

162

Diploma Project

SS2014

163

WINTER SEMESTER 2014/15

Redhook Redux

Excerpt from studio brief:

This studio will focus on the architectural possibilities of a new contemporary urban waterfront by re-imagining the area known as Red Hook, Brooklyn in New York City. Today, the 25km-long swath of Brooklyn waterfront that is anchored by Greenpoint to the north and encompasses Williamsburg, Dumbo, the Columbia Street Waterfront District, and finally Red Hook to the south, is undergoing a rapid transformation due to the complex but predictable causal relationships between re-zoning, rising land values and development interests. The intention of the research and design work of the studio is to refute the typical trajectory of gentrification, urban renewal and the end game of luxury residential development, and to instead focus on proposing an alternate urban and architectural future for Red Hook. Until recently, Red Hook was no more than a waterfront district that had been in steady decline for several decades. However, Red Hook demonstrated its resiliency when it recovered with extraordinary speed from the severe flooding caused by Hurricane Sandy in 2012. With its sprawling warehouses, large abandoned piers and shipping structures, Red Hook has a great potential for radical change; much like other similar precincts

164

in cities such as Hamburg, London or Bilbao, where former docklands and low-lying industrial areas have been reinvented. With an intelligent and creative approach to the latent possibility of flooding, this territory, primarily constituted of waterfront properties and defunct storage facilities, is primed to undergo a spectacular metamorphosis from a derelict city edge to New York City’s latest dynamic and diverse urban destination. The studio projects will study this precinct that sits directly on New York Harbour in detail and will propose eight architectural catalysts for the future of Red Hook. More specifically, on the one hand, they will creatively take on both the potential and challenge of a water-front site: while on the other hand, they will build upon the area’s tradition of light industry, and more recently its artistic and artisanal production.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

165

Augmented Ecology

Hessamedin Fana, Angelica Lorenzi, Noemi Polo, Artur Staškevitš

Redhook Waterfront, New York City, USA

166

DEEP FUTURES: Redhook Redux

WS2014/15

167

Performance Theatre

Viktoria Sándor, Lenka Petráková, Roman Hajtmanek, Piotr Konstanty Prokopowicz

Redhook Waterfront, New York City, USA

168

DEEP FUTURES: Redhook Redux

WS2014/15

169

Performance Theatre

170

DEEP FUTURES: Redhook Redux

WS2014/15

171

Viktoria Sándor, Lenka Petráková, Roman Hajtmanek, Piotr Konstanty Prokopowicz

Urban Pier

Johannes Cziegler, Moritz Hanshans, Jon Krizan

Redhook Waterfront, New York City, USA

172

DEEP FUTURES: Redhook Redux

WS2014/15

173

BMX Supercross Zero

Jalal Matraji, Minerva Zhang

Redhook Waterfront, New York City, USA

174

DEEP FUTURES: Redhook Redux

WS2014/15

175

WINTER SEMESTER 2014/15

Diploma Projects

176

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

177

Logium

Klemens Sitzmann

Future Archive, Diavik Diamond Mine, Canada

178

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

179

Klemens Sitzmann

Logium

180

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

181

Chronos

Maximin Rieder

Proposal for Traffic Wasteland in Favoriten, Vienna, Austria

182

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

183

Maximin Rieder

Chronos

184

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

185

Tumble Rooftop

Magdalena Kraska

GoPro Headquarters, Warsaw, Poland

186

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

187

Thermal Link

Nora Varga

Hot Springs Resort, Budapest, Hungary

188

Diploma Project

WS2014/15

189

SUMMER SEMESTER 2015

Visual Literacy Redux — Museum Row Frankfurt Excerpt from studio brief:

The site is located at the Museum Embankment in Frankfurt, Germany; also known as Museum Row. Frankfurt was chosen due to its status as a global city that is a predominant world financial center where one of the largest stock exchanges in continental Europe, The Frankfurt Stock Exchange, is located. Frankfurt is also among the world’s leading cultural and business hubs for Europe, much in the same way New York is to the United States. It has become a center for commerce, education, tourism, and web traffic. As a result of its central geographic location within Germany and Europe, Frankfurt is a primary air, rail and highway transportation hub.

Themes drawn from certain art movements, or artists’ works along these lines, are used for analysis, inspiration, and to inform the spatial and programmatic embodiment of the proposed museum. 1 Olafur Eliasson and Immersion 2 James Turrell and Luminosity 3 Bill Viola and Liquidity 4 Anish Kapoor and Turbulence 5 John Chamberlain and Kinetics 6 Tomás Saraceno and Space 7 Matthew Barney and Sonic 8 Donald Judd and Autonomy 9 Tom Sachs and Multiplicity 10 Anselm Kiefer and Sublime

The Museum Embankment (Museumsufer) The south embankment of the preeminent river in Frankfurt is called Museumsufer or Museum Embankment because of the considerable concentration of museums located there, perhaps the most notable of which is the Städel Art Institute. On the southern bank, there are nine exhibition buildings in total, such as the Giersch Museum, the German Museum of Architecture, the Museum of Applied Art, etc. Already boasting a number of important museums, the future Museum Row will be redesigned to incorporate theme-based museums as opposed to today’s subject-based museums. The studio will be divided into 12 groups. Each group will focus on an artist and a conceptual theme that will inform all aspects of the semester’s project.

190

11 Cindy Sherman and Incorporation 12 Louise Bourgeois and Uncanny

Student submittals will manifest a multidisciplinary museum of design and art, providing civic gathering space where both residents and visitors can congregate. The museum will embrace the concept in terms of how appreciation of art and social interaction are both encouraged. Its edifice will include galleries, a flexible performance hall, educational space, administrative offices, a formal restaurant, a large café/bar, a retail store, practitioner spaces, archives and other facilities to be determined by each individual group. External spaces for sculpture and project display should be incorporated. Each group will pick one of 12 dedicated areas along the river as their site.

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

191

Museum of Genetics

Angelica Lorenzi, Minerva Zhang

Frankfurt, Germany

Manifesting different rotary algorithms in three-dimensional form, this cluster of buildings houses a showcase of the history of evolution, together with genetic research labs and a centrifuge for extracting DNA.

192

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

SS2015

193

Reality Machine

Nikola Kárníková, Roman Hajtmanek

Frankfurt, Germany

194

Immersive Museum of Digital Art bridging across the Main River, blurring the boundaries between virtual and analogue as well as inside and outside spaces

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

SS2015

195

Maker Museum

Adam Sebestyen, Anna Wawrzyniak

Frankfurt, Germany

Museum focused on new production and manufacturing methods combining exhibition, collaborative work and production spaces within a smart building skin

196

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

SS2015

197

Newflesh Frankfurt, Germany

Daniel Rhomberg

Exploring the possibilities of new 3D printing technologies, the project sees the future construction process as an ongoing performance, generating unfamiliar spatialities and materialities.

198

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

SS2015

199

H-i Museum

Moritz Hanshans, Arthur Staškevitš

Frankfurt, Germany

200

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

Hybrid-immersive structure for exhibiting and producing art which combines different spacial qualities found in physical and digital environments

SS2015

201

Autonomous Museum Frankfurt, Germany

Peter Mears

Ambiguous spatial landscape dissolving the idea of classic museum typologies

202

DEEP FUTURES: Visual Literacy Redux - Museum Row Frankfurt

SS2015

203

SUMMER SEMESTER 2015

Diploma Projects

204

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

205

Explorative Synergy

Stephan Ritzer

New York City, USA

Education is one key factor in life and guides us towards our collective and individual future. This project combines a Kindergarten and a cognitive research center into a prototype: exploring, discussing and playing with novel education concepts which potentially extend our supporting capabilities for raising children based on their individual needs.

206

Diploma Project

ESAC

Piotr Konstanty Prokopowicz

European Space Agency Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

208

Diploma Project

SS2015

209

Piotr Konstanty Prokopowicz

ESAC

210

Diploma Project

SS2015

211

In-Between City

Abraham Fung

Master Plan for Kai Tak Development Area, Kowloon, Hong Kong

212

Diploma Project

213

Bioscope Vienna, Austria

Jean-Philipp Reinsberg

Hybrid of a greenhouse, laboratory and a university, whose varying constructed climatic zones are continuously connected and situated in the Botanical Garden, Vienna

214

Diploma Project

SS2015

215

Light Garden Copenhagen, Denmark

216

Recreation and rehabilitation facility in Copenhagen for light-deficiency-related diseases

Diploma Project

SS2015

217

Lena Kriwanek

Tehran Art Factory

Hessamedin Fana

Iran

Vertical museum, auction house and gallery surrounded by a landscape of gardens and informal art spaces covered with a network of canopies to moderate the micro-climate through the design of sophisticated shading and cooling systems

218

Diploma Project

WINTER SEMESTER 2015/16

Super-Span Spectacle Space

Excerpt from studio brief:

This studio will focus on architecture designed for large-scale occupancy situations and mass spectacles. The phenomenon of social networking and other technologies, coupled with a rise in the apparently continuing and perhaps increasing need for large gathering – be they political in nature, entertainment-driven, or even spontaneous events – speak to a future or urbanism in which both of these equal tendencies run in parallel. In other words, the more we seem to be culturally recoiling into what one might call “self-space,” the greater the need for intense human-to-human interaction. This increased need for shared experiences calls for a questioning of the spaces designed for large gatherings, for the experience of “real-time reality,” or some reasonable augmented substitute.

For the purpose of our research, the students will explore, probe and design new architectural solutions and prototypes for mass spectacle; the notions of transformation and transmutation operated as drivers. At the onset of the studio, students who will be put into small groups will question and research the possibilities and potentials for projects that provide new means of accommodating, presenting and providing for large gatherings centered around variables that work in concert as new forms of large-scale gathering venues. There will be four themes each group will be given to explore: 1 Kinetics 2 Cross-Trans Programming

There has been a return to the mass spectacle spaces that, in terms of architectural types, have evolved from the Colosseum and Circus Maximus to modernday stadia, concert halls, Olympic venues, arenas and so on. The space of mass gathering is therefore caught in this intriguing moment of transition in which the extremes of “self-space” confront mass spectacle and event space. Also, when one considers the brandidentity approaches of companies such as Red Bull, Apple, Nike, Facebook and many others, one sees this simultaneity at work: the individual is celebrated alongside or within the notion of mass gathering, spectacle or interaction.

3 Media Tech 4 Sustainable Energy

These four themes speak to tendencies that are now already being employed in stadium design, performing arts centers, ecclesiastical architecture, large assembly halls, extreme sports environments, racing circuits and other related large-occupancy spaces. And finally, the question of presence: the iconic, aura and significance are being discussed for which the city and site will either be fully engaged or provide the necessary backdrop and impetus for the emergence of such places. The groups of students will be given a set of sites coupled with specific programs to choose from: e.g., Seoul with gaming, sport, technology display, or Palo Alto with science and tech, sport, TED, etc. The choice of site, through coupling these criteria with the four themes above, will be used to generate the spectacle-space architecture, thereby adjusting and tailoring programs according to need and place.

220

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

221

Otaku Residency Kinetic Modular Micro-Housing Agglomeration in Tokyo, Japan

222

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

223

Olivia Joikits, Nikola Kárníková, Andrej Strieženec, Minerva Zhang

Performance Center

Arpapan Chantanakajornfung

Berlin, Germany

224

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

225

Arpapan Chantanakajornfung

Performance Center

226

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

227

Alpha-Beta Testing Center

Artur Staškevitš

Start Up Hub and Virtual Reality Testing Center, Silicon Valley, USA

228

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

229

Artur Staškevitš

Alpha-Beta Testing Center

230

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

231

Kinetic Nightclub Toronto, Canada

232

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

233

Roman Hajtmanek, Jinhee Koh, Jalal Matraji

International Transtechnology Center

Johanna Jelinek, Angelica Lorenzi, Alexander Nanu

Research Laboratory for Human Augmentation, Tokyo, Japan

234

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

235

Media Tech. Film Tokyo, Japan

Viktoria Sándor

Augmented Media Space, where invisible data of the surrounding site (Shibuya) is being transformed to become an optimized structure that combines the existing underground transportation hub with an elevated projection space.

236

DEEP FUTURES: Super-Span Spectacle Space

WS2015/16

237

WINTER SEMESTER 2015/16

Diploma Projects

238

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

239

Tectonic Creolisation

Ewa Lenart

Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

240

Diploma Project

WS2015/16

241

Tectonic Creolisation

Ewa Lenart

Trade and Cultural Center for the Tripartite Free Trade Area (TFTA) integrating civic life with highly political functions in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

242

Diploma Project

WS2015/16

243

Too Loud a Solitude Stamford Bridge Stadium, London, UK

244

Diploma Project

Peter Mears WS2015/16

245

Peter Mears

Too Loud a Solitude

246

Diploma Project

WS2015/16

247

Peter Mears

Too Loud a Solitude

248

Diploma Project

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

249

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

Hani Rashid

Welcome to the Antarctic Pavilion here on the Grand Canal of Venice. This certainly is an extraordinary chance for us at Studio Hani Rashid to bring our research and ideas out of our Vienna Lab and into public view. What you behold with the Antarctic Pavilion is the extraordinary output the students and my team have pulled together on our ideas regarding the future of architecture and, in particular, the continent of Antarctica. Here today are my teaching staff: Sophie Luger, Eldine Heep, Sophie Grell, Joerg Hugo, Reiner Zettl and Andrea Tenpenny, who have all helped me run the Deep_Future Lab at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna, where our focus is essentially on the study of the way we – as architects, urbanists and designers – confront the future of cities, buildings and technologies that have an impact on these areas of interest. To set up the panel discussion and exhibition, let me begin by saying that Antarctica is a place with no flag or ownership: yet at the same time, it is a place that boasts the world’s largest freshwater reserves; a place rich in other resources and a place offering untold data on the past and future of our planet. Antarctica is a mammoth land mass that, although completely untrammeled and uncontaminated, is changing thanks to humankind’s relentless need to territorialize and comprehend. It is a place of immense global interest for a multitude of reasons, some favorable and some not. According to climatologists and scientists, in the next 100 to 150 years the climate of Antarctica will change so dramatically that the area will likely see a climate similar to Northern Scandinavia on its southernmost perimeter. As a result, crop growth and wildlife will thrive when the now-deep permafrost finally reveals the millennia-old soils that lie beneath. One could imagine wars being fought over water supplies and land, to name only one serious outcome that could take place when these territories become inhabitable. In reality, this situation compels us as architects, philosophers, scientists and inventors to look at Antarctica as an extremely precious and significant place on this planet. Studying Antarctica under the rubric of discovery and innovation affords us the opportunity to focus on and think about the future of not only this place, but the world in general. We’ll discuss this more amongst the panelists here, who I would like to introduce. However, before that, I would like to acknowledge and thank a great Russian artist who sometimes calls himself a pirate: Sasha Alexander Ponomarev. Sasha invited us to create this exhibition as part of his ambitious plan to hold an Antarctic Biennale where he, along with 20 renowned artists, will journey to the Antarctic next year to perform what he calls the world’s first “upside down” biennale. Also with us today is Gerald Bast, the president of the University of Applied Arts in Vienna, to whom we are indebted for funding this expedition to Venice. Additionally joining us today is my great friend and visionary Edward Jung. Edward is a futurist and technologist, a provocateur and inventor. If you’ve ever used Windows 95, you’ve experienced just one of his conquests in the technology sphere. Edward has a remarkable company in Seattle that deals with inventions of all sorts across the board. I’ve had so many fascinating conversations with Edward on so many topics. We are also happy to have Barbara Imhof here with us today. Barbara is an architect who hails from Vienna and is working, so to speak, on Mars these days. She has quite a commute, but somehow

250

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

manages! Barbara is a terrific visionary, especially being one of the real pioneers in this space of building into the future. Also with us today is David Benjamin, who lives in New York and teaches at the Columbia University Graduate School of Architecture. David is a key figure at Columbia and teaches alongside my partner, Lise Anne Couture, who is also here today. David’s work focuses on the intersection between biology and architecture. His recent project, built in the courtyard of MoMA PS1 in New York, was a pioneering work in biodegradable and sustainable building materials and architecture. It was fascinating to see and experience a work of architecture that was built from organic materials and was able to be broken down after its lifespan and used for food. David is an alluring character tackling the premise of this exhibition and research, that of recyclical architecture. I’m going to give the microphone now to Rector Gerald Bast and I will moderate today’s panel, so you won’t hear much more from me, I hope. However, you never know – I do enjoy talking, I suppose.

Gerald Bast

Thank you, Hani. Hani Rashid is one of the most important architects of our time because he is one who doesn’t just think about the surface of buildings. Rather, he thinks about the future of architecture and cities or, to use his words, the deep future. I really have to say that today, I’m very proud because what we see in this exhibition is the product of several months of hard work by the students and assistants. I want to thank all who participated in these impressive preparations and thanks to you, Hani, and to your team. This is an aspect of “university” that I really like, where there is thinking going on two, three, or even four generations in advance, also combining art, technology, science and philosophy and with that, going to the frontiers or to the “fronts” of our environments across the globe. This, in fact, is the mission of our university in Vienna – to be provocative in a serious and compelling way; to think in terms of combinations which have not been thought of so far. If we don’t do this, then we will simply get lost in pragmatism. If we get lost in pragmatism – and there are a lot of politics that are showing what can happen and what will happen if we do just get stuck in mere pragmatism – we won’t have a future. The mission and the aim of a university is not to simply produce commodities or products or goods. The real mission of a university – and that of the artists, designers, theorists and architects it produces – is to think about the future; to produce our future. This is what we have to do and it really doesn’t matter if these ideas will become reality in 15, 50, or 75 years. It’s rather about the idea of thinking itself; it’s about the way of combining different disciplines and looking at what could potentially happen. Today there are so many people who don’t look deeply towards the future in this way - two or three or four generations at a time. So thank you, Hani and your team. Thank you all for your interest in this way of looking at what could and will happen in the near or the far future. Fifty years will pass by very quickly. We always tend to think that 50 or 70 years seems a very long time. If we look back on history, this is in fact is a very, very short period of time: and we have to show responsibility in using this very short time with our minds; with all of our minds, our hearts, and our souls. Thank you for the interest, and thank you for discussing.

HR





We’ll begin the panel with a presentation from David Benjamin. I believe David will talk about his work on living architecture.

David Benjamin

It’s great to be here. I really love and am inspired by the idea of this studio and the work I have just seen. This idea of thinking about the deep future and possibilities for architecture – to propose ideas, test them out and maybe not get lost in the prag matism or the everyday efficiency of things – is something which is very much a part of my work and practice. I thought I would just offer a few quick thoughts about architecture – specifically about time and materials and adaptation, change over time, continual change over time, and biology. One of my first observations is based on a

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

251

symposium I organized recently at the Columbia University School of Architecture about embodied energy, which is basically defined as the sum of all the energy required to create a product or a building, including the energy required for extracting raw materials from the earth, transporting those materials to a factory, heating those materials and treating them, and then bringing them to a construction site and building something. Embodied energy is an increasingly important topic for architecture. And one of the striking things that we learned after 16 different presenters and a day of discussions is that the things like those which were shown on the screen – which was a catalog of all the embodied energy in our common building materials – are really not sufficient. The data is not sufficient to address the issue, this big issue of environment and energy. And what we really need to think about are flows, energy and raw materials around the world. To do that we need everything from the tiny microscopic scale to the huge scale of the earth and flows of production and consumption. With that in mind, I want to quickly describe one of the projects that we did recently which required thinking in this way. It was thinking on these multiple scales simultaneously, thinking of a kind of flow, which Hani already described, of raw materials and what they mean in architecture and what that could mean for the future. So this is a project that began with an architectural competition and here was our concept for the project. The idea was about growth and change and cycles in architecture and what might be possible through the combination of new ideas, new materials, new technologies and a newly possible integration of biology and computation. In many ways, this project was about thinking of a new kind of material that could create a new kind of architecture with almost no waste, almost no energy, and almost no carbon emissions. The idea was really, if nothing else, to think about architecture and materials within these broader ecosystems and flows and to think that architecture could possibly be designed to disappear as much as it is normally designed to appear. The project is called Hy-Fi. That was the original proposal. We wanted to start with this normal, natural, healthy cycle of the earth, the carbon cycle, and maybe temporarily borrow from the carbon cycle in order to create architecture and then return back to the carbon cycle at the end of architecture. This is very different from the way most buildings are made today. It seems like a kind of magic trick, but it’s actually possible through what is shown here on the video. This is mycelium, which is the branching, root-like structure of mushrooms. It grows in these tiny white filaments and has an ecosystem of its own, a metabolism of its own. It turns out we can harness this growth for architecture because you can combine mycelium with agricultural waste – the byproduct of agriculture, not the high-value part of crops and agriculture, not the corn kernels, but just the chopped-up corn stalks – and you put them in a mold of any shape, and in about five days this mixture grows into a solid object. Our idea was that we could use this natural biological organism, this natural process, and harness it and divert it to create a new building block for architecture, a new kind of brick. Here was this new kind of material that we designed with several collaborators, and this is the new kind of structure we proposed to build out of it, and actually did build in the courtyard of MoMA PS1 in New York City. Here you can see this structure. It’s about 14 meters tall, made out of about 10,000 bricks. You see this architecture that’s at once familiar and completely new, at once digital and biological, high-tech and low-tech, precise and handcrafted, and even has aspects of feeling both new and ancient. If anything was an active technology in this project, it was the ancient technology of the growth of mycelium on the forest floor. We created this project as a test of this idea, and as with a lot of our projects, we like to test it out in the world. Even though this was a test right here and now, it was a test for the future. This is the moment where our idea about architecture, our experiment with materials, material testing, material production and fabrication, all intersected with society and culture. As happens every year with MoMA PS1, 5,000 people came to the courtyard every Saturday to hear experimental electronic music.

252

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

That was fitting for us, too, to test this idea out in culture and in the world. Just to wrap up here, what we really wanted to explore most of all was the idea that we could take architecture and disassemble it after its useful life. In this case, we took our bricks, crumbled them up, combined them with worms and food scraps and bacteria, and we used another kind of living ecosystem to decompose or compost the material back into soil. Within 60 days, this entire building was transformed back into this healthy ecosystem of growth and decay, rather than staying in a landfill for hundreds or thousands of years. The big idea that I think some of our research could offer to this kind of discussion is the idea of designing with biology as an incredible part of our palette of design, and the idea of designing with time in mind and, more specifically, designing things to disappear. I think, as we return to thinking about actionable items combined with the deep future, I’d like to think that we’re getting closer to the idea of having architects be able to specify time or duration in their projects and in their materials. As architects typically specify materials, they think of things like color, texture, and strength. Maybe we should also be thinking about duration. We could think about specifying a two-day material, a two-month material, a 20-year material or a 200-year material and this should be a decision that architects make. Thank you.

HR

That was brilliant. Please let me just ask you one question. I’m wondering if you have started to think about robots and robotically manifested buildings. Is that perhaps the next move with this research? If so, do you think you would bring time-based situations to the equation, or even artificial intelligence?

DB

I think that’s a great question and notion, and we have thought a lot about 3D prin ting combined with this natural living growth, including the idea that 3D printing itself could have time built into it. 3D printing with biodegradable materials could allow a 3D-printed mold, or even more interestingly, could be a kind of 3D scaffold that you grow biodegradable material into. The 3D-printed scaffold would be designed to decay at a certain time and the growth of the living system may remain. Then again, there could be other triggers, including what we’ve been experimenting with: planting seeds within the bricks so when the bricks decay, new things can grow out of them. I think there is great potential, not just for fetishizing only natural things, only biological things, but a new hybrid approach to new times, new challenges and new exciting opportunities using technology with biology.

HR

Thank you, David. Now we will hear from Barbara Imhof, whom I believe will show us some of the work being done with the European Space Agency regarding remote habitats on Mars and elsewhere.

Barbara Imhof

Good afternoon. I would like to invite everybody to come in closer because in a habitat in space, there is no real space, so it feels a little bit more normal for me at least. I would like to talk a little bit about our recent projects, two or three of them. After graduating here from the University of Applied Arts at the studio of Wolf D. Prix, I pursued space architecture at the International Space University. I did a short stint at NASA to design for the human mission to Mars and, with my colleague from this space university Susmita Mohanty, I founded the LIQUIFER Systems Group more than ten years ago. The LIQUIFER Systems Group is a company comprised of space systems engineers, scientists, people from the robotics industry, and also architects and designers. We extend our operational field as architects beyond Earth, beyond the earth’s horizon to the international space stations where one of our

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

253

254

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

2-week Mars simulation with the SHEE simulation habitat and the MOONWALK astronaut rover collaboration, credits: Bruno Stubenrauch, 2016

Edward Jung, David Benjamin, Barbara Imhof

locations is the Moon and the other Mars. At the same time, when we look at this picture, we can also see commonalities with designing for our terrestrial planet here. We also have to realize that the biosphere, this blue dot that Carl Sagan described, has really changed. It has actually extended into a techno-sphere, so that the earth is not how it appears on old photos from space but is now surrounded by satellites, by all kinds of matter and this is all a part of today’s world. This is actually how we have expanded our world, and this is where we work, in this mindset with which we also do a variety of projects. Mostly they are research and development projects funded by the EU Framework Programme, by the European Space Agency, or by other institutional funding bodies. I think on (the day of) the mid-term review, that day I had just come back from this Mars simulation mission. It had combined two projects. One is the SHEE, the selfdeployable habitat for extreme environments, a deployable habitat for a two-person crew and a two-week mission. You can see it’s very small, just 28 square meters. Another project is about human-robot collaboration, and all the developed components of both projects were combined to create a Mars analog where we simulated what it would be like to explore foreign planets or surfaces, extraterrestrial surfaces, in the future. The habitat itself can also be envisioned as a research facility in Antarctica, for example, and for disaster relief. It is very easy to be transported. It can be deployed, which is very important, and you can also fly it somewhere, or you can launch it from a rocket. This is an animation which just shows you a little bit about how the habitat deploys and the interior is organized and then, later on, I’ll show you how it was actually set up for this mission simulation. This mission simulation was very special because it was the first time it happened in Europe. What we see in the animation now is the interior; the outside envelope is deployable, the inside furniture deploys with it; there are two crew quarters and everything folds into itself. For a two-person crew, this is the workspace which later became an astrobiology laboratory. This is the so-called galley which you also know from airplanes, probably. The water cycle is set into a loop: clear water and gray water, black water gets taken out. Water storage is in the ceiling and below the floors. Here you can see a workbench and wet compartment and the so-called hygiene facility. It’s the space lingo for bathroom. What is also very unique is that it has this interface where you can actually open the double door which is sealed and you step into the suits, so there’s no real door. It’s to prevent contamination both ways. This is how it looks in the actual Mars simulation, you see the local mission control center, you see the suitport in the background, (next slide) here is how you step in. The simulation is made to be conducted on Earth and tests equipment and procedures that could be used in a future mission; so there are a lot of prototypes, a lot of experimenting and finding out. Here, you can see the whole communication package as a backpack. The next photo shows the astrobiology laboratory, and this is how the interaction actually works. You had this device and the rover was gesture-controlled. The helper rover also had a “follow-me” function so you could control it with your hand or wrist interface. This was a unique opportunity for me to be part of the team of simulation astronauts. Now: what is the architectural part, what is the conceptual part of such a project, when we look at it? Space habitats or spaceships have to deal with self-sufficiency, limited resources, minimal spaces, life-support systems, and the use of local resources. These are exactly the issues you also had to address when you were designing for Antarctica. Speaking of life-support systems – David just mentioned it – there’s the American biologist Steven Vogel, you said something interesting, that he actually views nature as grown technology which is not made but grown. This ties in with our biomimetics projects, e.g., Built To Grow. I think a couple of you might have seen the final exhibiton at the Angewandte Innovation Laboratory in Vienna. I just want to mention the mobile 3D printers and the algae bioreactor. In our book Built To Grow, we also referenced your (David’s) MoMA mycelium brick tower project you just showed because we experimented with growing special building parts with mycelium. On this picture is the other printer … this was more about recreating or rebuilding an existing MakerBot into our mobile 3D printer, further, into something you can actually imagine and speculate seeing: a self-growing house. This is one of the objects, which is

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

255

interesting because it is actually one material similar to a tree, with all different kinds of structural entities. This printing technology, and you mentioned it just as a question to David, is something which we will see more and more of in the future. Another project: LavaHive was a 3D-printed habitat competition submitted to NASA; part of NASA’s Centennial Challenges, who had actually asked us if we could collaborate with them on designing a Martian habitat base using lava casting. Involving sintering the soil and trying to create a structure with it, this 3D printing process is in its early stages. We are working on the RegoLight project with Bollinger + Grohmann: RegoLight. It is very exciting because we will be working with the German Aerospace Center, developing interlocking elements which will be sintered only by the sun and lunar soil simulant, which is very similar to lunar soil. This will be done in a vacuum chamber so it will really resemble the lunar environment, which will be the first time this kind of experiment is conducted. In the future, when we really want to explore other territories and look for architecture, we could probably imagine that one of our futures in architecture, as architects, lies in space. Konstantin Tsiolkovsky, a very famous Russian engineer, once said, “The cradle of the earth is the cradle of humankind, but we as humans cannot stay in the cradle forever.”

HR

Fantastic. My question, extending from what I asked David, is: do you foresee a future, since you’re in this domain, in which habitats become self-organizing, utilizing artificial intelligence perhaps, according to certain inputs and changing arrays of criteria? Because you’re in the early stages of this research and technology, where do you imagine this will go and how will it affect the ways in which we deal with the built environment? Perhaps these buildings and structures in the future can find ways of organizing themselves (their confines, spaces, etc.) around different climactic conditions or traffic patterns or usage?

BI

Yes, definitely. I think there are also a couple of ideas for space applications involving swarm robotics, with their inherent specific intelligence. We are also talking about living architecture, so a house which is living in a way which, as you mentioned, also has a certain intelligence in terms of performance, of interaction with the actual inhabitants, the users. I think the only thing which I see, and I’m not sure about this – which I’m hesitant to say because I’m a core believer in everything being possible and that it will all happen very soon – but sometimes I have the feeling it might not develop as fast as we wish it could. It is very complex and complicated.

HR

That was fascinating. It brings me to the question I’ve been dying to ask both you and David, actually. Are there any particular animals or aspects of nature that inspire you? I imagine that cephalopods might have a big influence on your thinking and ideas. I’m thinking specifically of their luminous bodies, which are integral to their skin architecture. Also, the fact that these creatures have many brains throughout their bodies, and with that they can adapt extremely quickly to any environment using remarkable camouflaging capabilities.

BI

Yes, definitely, but I wouldn’t say I have a favorite one. The octopus is quite fascinating in itself, because it’s so big and its jaw is actually the minimum (size) it can shrink to. There are better (examples of marine life) that are interesting for their folding qualities. There are sharks with their skins, and so many other examples. Intelligence within termites building their mounds is very interesting, too. So yes, certain animals or aspects of nature inspire me, definitely.

256

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

HR

Thank you. Let’s now hear from Edward Jung, who amongst us all here has perhaps had the most impact on our lives with his work, ranging from that of being a key figure at Microsoft and the world he occupies today with inventions that play a role in almost all aspects of our lives.

Edward Jung

I am not the architect or an artist in this crew, but once upon a time I tried to be an architect and failed. So I decided to be something easier and go into software and, you know, there I turned out to be Microsoft’s first software architect; so I did become an architect after all. The reason architecture was always interesting to me is because it’s all about integrating lots of different pieces for a purpose, and there are a lot of people who can create the pieces, but fewer who assemble them into something meaningful in terms of art or technology or a solution. Like we’re seeing in there (pointing to the exhibit space). I think if there’s one thing that, as an architect in heart and in spirit, really interests me about the next fifty years, it’s actually not about technology. Technology is moving quicker than ever. In fact, if you just look at what’s in all of your pockets right now, for the first time we’re seeing fundamental changes in everything from wireless communication, telephony, the way cameras work, the way we’re going to see movies, lighting; and all of these things didn’t really change very much for 150 years. They’ve all changed in the last ten years and in the next 20 or 30 years, there’s going to be remarkable changes. Really, the trick is, how do you take all of these remarkable changes and harness them? How do you integrate them into something important and useful? That, I think, is what architecture is about. The topic I spend most of my time, and I really think will be a problem for the next 50 years, is actually again not technology per se. It’s actually business architecture. More of the problems we see, with the dominance of capitalism and corporations on the one hand and also the rise of a lot of developing world countries to having real intellectual capital, is that there’s this divergence. Large companies accumulate a lot of money, but fail to invest it in the long haul. It’s very difficult if you’re a multi-billion-dollar company, and I ran R&D for one, to actually invest in a 40- or 50-year project. So who invests in a 50-year project? It’s a vacuum now. The money is there to do it in corporations, but not the will. Policy-making organizations like governments used to do those kinds of things. NASA is a great example. They would have a very long-range vision and try to execute it, but they no longer have the power or the will to do so over a long period of time. They suffer the same kind of issues of capitalism, getting votes, and so on and so forth. It makes it difficult for them to harness the kind of technology that they themselves invest in over a 50-year period or more. I think the big thing I’ve spent the last 15 years building is new kinds of business structures that allow you to invest over 40-, 50-year timeframes. There are a few examples I will talk about here—one of them is my company for a new kind of nuclear reactor. From beginning to end, it will be a 40-year project. It is so unusual for a commercial project to last 40 years that Francis Collins, the director of the NIH in the United States, asked me how it could be done. Because he has had so many problems where he could not figure out how to get companies to even invest for ten years, 40-year investments sounded quite fantastical; but we’re already 12 years into this investment and we have 30 more years of capital in that project, and we’re going to deploy our first reactors in China. It’s a very big project to build a very new kind of nuclear power reactor, which has previously only been done by government-subsidized companies. Another one is metamaterials, which are a very exotic kind of programmable material. We invested in it 13 years ago, and we just began our first start-ups two years ago. Five start-ups have come out of it, it’s going to be another 15 or 20 years before that cycle has been exhausted and we’ve brought in investors who are in it for a 40-, 50-year haul. I think the thing that is interesting to think about is that once we can figure out how to materialize the will and the capital to invest in a long-term project, there will be many

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

257

exciting projects like this to do. We work with places like China or Singapore, and we just started working on some within the EU on figuring out how to solve problems with agriculture. We have looked at geoengineering projects to actually make sure this doesn’t happen (pointing to Antarctica’s melting ice caps) so we can cool the earth and so it doesn’t get too warm. All of these are multi-decade projects involving thousands of different technologies pulled together. It involves not just science and not just policy, which are also important, but also invention. It does take a lot of capital and patience, so you have to find the right people to do that. If you look inside of this room here, one of the things you’ll see is the magic of the last 20 years. I was talking to someone about this earlier, about how 20 years ago the tools that were available to me (at Microsoft) – someone who was underwriting four-billiondollars of R&D projects – were not as good as the tools available to students in a university now. They’re able to research and create some amazing things that even professionals could not do ten or 20 years ago. Now what are we going to do with that? We’ve got to give them some kind of infrastructure, some kind of capability to harness that kind of creativity and those kinds of tools and the magic of new kinds of technology to solve problems that are 50 years into our future. If we can just unlock that, we’ve got a really great future to look forward to. It’s an amazing one that’s all about imagination and harnessing the knowledge of the world in a way that’s never been done before, ever. That’s the kind of future I’m looking forward to, that I’m working towards, and hopefully this is a first example of ways of harnessing all that different talent to answer these really important questions.

HR

Edward, a quick question. If you were to conceptualize or rethink the structure of education and business as a new entity unto itself, do you imagine that the systems we have in play now at universities as we know them, schools as we know them, where sometimes disciplines are too segregated and divided, is an old model that needs to be seriously redefined?

EJ

Here we are in Italy, which is in a sense the birthplace of the university. It’s a thousand-year-old system, so it’s amazing it has lasted this long. But it is changing; even the program you’re in is an example of this. I believe you do have to restructure. You have to get these students, young talents, and also their mentors and teachers, exposed to problems much more. Having an ivory tower effect is not necessarily a bad thing, but all of this capability, you’ve exposed a set of students to a very synthetic problem of Antarctica. This problem may or may not ever happen, but just focusing them on that has allowed an incredible amount of creativity and new ideas to be unleashed. If you can expose them to more problems like that, it’s an amazing thing. I have a lab in Bellevue, and we expose these mostly pretty young scientists and engineers to problems of the developing world, and we’re sponsored by the Gates Foundation for that. The amount of activity we’ve been able to do, I mean the products we’ve put out there, the solutions we’ve put out to the developing world are just remarkable. To show an example of one of the really unusual ones, we’re developing a new kind of currency that diminishes the amount of corruption you can have. That’s because 30 to 40 percent of the money put into the developing world economy disappears. They’re not saying it should go to zero, but they should at least know how much it is. That’s not the only unusual thing we work on; lasers that shoot down mosquitoes, all these weird exotic things – it’s only by exposing people to the problem that you start getting those kinds of solutions that can be actually meaningful and deployed. I think academic institutions or institutions of all kinds should expose their pupils to these problems because it’s amazing what comes out.

258

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

259

Alexander Ponomarev, Edward Jung

HR

Edward, in the worlds of innovation and invention, I assume collaboration is key to that process. Is this correct? I imagine there is no single pilot-driven situation anymore, or much less the instance of that sort of lone-wolf inventor. Rather, it seems that networking and sharing knowledge is key to the situation and is becoming more and more important as we move forward into the future from here.

EJ

I just came here from the UK where I was talking about a partnership with a company that works with Oxford (University). They move a lot of ideas out of Oxford. I was talking about what we’ve done over the last ten years, how we’ve developed a community of 450 organizations and 100 universities. That makes all the difference: it’s very hard to make it work with one university, even with one as brilliant as Oxford. The thing is we bring 100 universities together. We did this one thing to improve the production of milk, which is the primary protein source for the developing world. That was 11 inventors from eight different countries. There’s no way you can get them all from one place. And it would be very hard, even for an organization as forward-looking as the Foundation or NASA, to be able to assemble the right 11 people together to solve the problem. I think just collaboration is really super important.

HR

Thank you so much for all of your remarkable contributions today. The panel was fascinating and I think this was a terrific opportunity to see differing facets of a single problem: that of forging our way into the future of making cities, buildings, universities, interstellar communities, and how technology from biomimicry to data mining to artificial intelligence are all affecting the ways in which we live and inhabit architecture well into the future. The exhibition next door is now open for viewing and there you will find seven holographic models of city proposals, each based on a mission-critical phenomenon and situation we are facing going forward into the 22nd century and beyond.

260

Panel Discussion at the Antarctic Pavilion

Venice, Italy / May 26, 2016

261

Antarctica: Re-Cyclical Exhibition SS2016 at Antarctic Pavilion, Venice, Project by Mary Denman, Fady Haddad, Mathias Juul Frost

Antarctica: Re-Cyclical Exhibition SS2016 at Antarctic Pavilion, Venice

SUMMER SEMESTER 2016

Antarctica Re-Cyclical

Excerpt from studio brief:

Mankind’s continuous and relentless territorialization of and insatiable need for resources and space should be taken into account when considering the future of Antarctica, especially where there is an inevitability of irreversible damage being brought about unless these things are held in check. The already-present effects and outcomes of global warming that we are beginning to witness today will by some estimates and projections cause large territories of Antarctica to reach temperatures and climates not unlike those we see today in Alaska or the northern reaches of Scandinavia, most likely by the beginning of the 22nd century. The notion that large areas of West Antarctica will probably become habitable through the ability to grow crops, especially in the northernmost areas of the continent, is the premise on which the development of the studio’s research and designs was based. This semester’s studio will take on the necessary and critical task of researching what the future might hold for us on this planet; and more specifically, the question of dwelling and settling on this powerful and unforgiving edge of the earth at the base of the southern hemisphere. Antarctica is a location where, this time around, we have the opportunity to build intelligently, with an eye to the future of the planet as a whole. Following topics the studio will focus on: Today Antarctica has neither borders nor a single nation holding any jurisdiction, therefore the future of this continent might take on a utopian ideal of belonging to all nations, thereby acting as a “global community”.

The probable future of construction will undoubtedly utilise the computational “printing” of buildings, as is now being witnessed in deep-space habitation scenarios. Additionally, robotic labor, kinetics, modularity, and selforganizing, computationally-driven systems will be part of the architect’s palette for developing ideas for the future of this region and its buildings and infrastructure. Building materials must be considered as completely biodegradable, recyclable, and sustainable. Anything brought to the region needs to be considered as reusable or removable, thereby offsetting any detrimental impact to the region. The studio will develop future communities divided into seven “sectors.” Each sector will focus on one of the following program drivers, coupled with housing and other related programs according to the sectors’ needs: •

Tourism and Intercontinental Transportation Hub

•

Fishing and Oceanic Research Center

•

Food Production, Sustainable Resource and Waste Management

•

Solar and Wind Energy Production and Cosmological Research Center

•

Bioprospecting, Mining and Resource Management

•

Sport, Recreation, Retail and Entertainment

•

Education and Culture

The various projects will be linked and will share infrastructural aspects that will contribute to the entire cities’ functionality, sustainability, and mutational aspects.

Today any building in this region must be predicated on prefabrication and flat-packed building materials and technologies, as utilizing local materials and resources might destroy the region’s fragile ecosystem and environment.

262

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

263

Antarctic Contigiuous City

Mary Denman, Fady Haddad, Mathias Juul Frost

Terrestrial and Marine Habitats

264

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

Olympic Winter Games Antarctica

Jonghoon Kim, Mihai Potra, Barbara Schickermüller

Kinetic Tournament Venue

266

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

SS2016

267

Food Production Precinct

Johanna Jelinek, Andrej Strieženec, Angel Yonchev

Self-Sustaining Nutrition and Energy Production Facility

268

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

269

Bioprospecting Station Antarctica

Lenka Petráková

Adaptive Research Facility and Collection Unit for Biomaterial

270

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

SS2016

271

Server City

Noemi Polo

Temple of the Digital

272

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

SS2016

273

Nomad City

Jalal Matraji, Adam Sebestyen, Colby Suter

Temporary Broadcasting and Research Facility for Whistle-Blowers

274

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

SS2016

275

Antarctica Energy Production

Angelica Lorenzi, Alexander Nanu, Dennis Schiaroli

Inhabitable Katabatic Wind Channel

276

DEEP FUTURES: Antarctica Re-Cyclical

SS2016

277

SUMMER SEMESTER 2016

Diploma Projects

278

Re: Futures

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

279

A0 Factory Fully Automated Car Production Facility, Ingolstadt, Germany

280

Diploma Project

SS2016

281

Moritz Hanshans

Tripoint

Lea Dietiker

Theatre, Laboratory and Landscape, Basel, Switzerland

282

Diploma Project

SS2016

283

Alpha-Beta Headquarters Tallinn, Estonia

284

Diploma Project

SS2016

285

Artur Staškevitš

Alpha-Beta Headquarters

Artur Staškevitš

Incubator for high-tech artificial- and computerintelligence startups as a network of physical and virtual labs, showrooms and offices in Tallinn

286

Diploma Project

SS2016

287

ēdūcō - rise

Arpapan Chantanakajornfung

Alternative Education Hub, Bangkok, Thailand

288

Diploma Project

SS2016

289

Arpapan Chantanakajornfung

ēdūcō - rise

290

Diploma Project

SS2016

291

Biographies HANI RASHID

GERALD BAST

Hani Rashid, with Lise Anne Couture, is the co-founder of Asymptote Architecture, the highly acclaimed New York City-based practice. Through its award-winning designs of buildings, interiors, installations and master plans, Asymptote has gained an international reputation for design excellence. Current and recent projects include a commission for the new Hermitage Museum of Contemporary Art, residential towersin the cities of Moscow and Miami, the Yas Viceroy Marina Hotel in Abu Dhabi, UAE, an ING bank headquarters in Ghent, Belgium, and the ARC, a multimedia exhibition building in Daegu, South Korea. Hani Rashid also has an ongoing, distinguished academic career that includes visiting professorships at the Royal Academy of Fine Arts School of Architecture in Copenhagen, SCI-Arc in Los Angeles and the ETH in Zurich. He has held the Kenzo Tange Chair for Architecture at Harvard’s GSD as well as a multi-year-long appointment at Princeton. For over 10 years, he was an associate professor of architecture at Columbia’s GSAPP where he co-developed the school’s Advanced Digital Design program. He is currently the head of a graduate design studio at the University of Applied Arts in Vienna. The work of Asymptote is included in several important museum collections including the Museum of Modern Art in New York, the Netherlands Institute of Architecture (NAI), the Pinakothek der Moderne in Munich, the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Centre Pompidou in Paris, the Frac Centre in Orléans, France and the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum in New York. The practice’s work has been the subject of three monographs and has frequently featured internationally in professional journals as well as the general press. Hani Rashid has co-represented the United States at the 7th Venice Architecture Biennale, has been a New York Foundation of the Arts Fellow, served on the steering committee for the international Aga Khan Award for Architecture and has been awarded the Luis Barragán Chair in Mexico. Hani Rashid and his partner Lise Anne Couture were awarded the prestigious Frederick Kiesler Prize for Architecture and the Arts in recognition of exceptional contributions to the merging of art and architecture. Asymptote was named by TIME magazine as a Leader in Innovation for the 21st Century. Since 2013 he has been president of the Austrian Frederick and Lillian Kiesler Private Foundation.

has been the dean of the University of Applied Arts Vienna, Austria since 2000. After his studies in law and economics at Johannes Kepler University Linz where he earned a doctorate in law, he worked at the Federal Ministry of Higher Education and at the Ludwig Boltzmann Research Society. He is member of the European Academy of Arts and Sciences, board member of the European League of Institutes of the Arts (ELIA) and editor of the Universitiy of Applied Arts book series Edition Angewandte. As university president, Gerald Bast has initiated various new programs focusing on transdisciplinarity and the interrelation between the arts and society. He founded the “Angewandte Innovation Lab,” accentuating the role of the arts in innovation processes by facilitating intercommunication between art, science & technology, economics, and politics. Gerald Bast has published in the fields of university law and university management, as well as educational and cultural policy, and has held various lectures on the role of art, creativity, innovation, and higher education at Johns Hopkins University in Washington D.C., Tsing Hua University in Beijing, Tong Ji University in Shanghai, the University of Auckland, City University Hong Kong, Lakit Kala Akademi New Delhi (IN) and the European Culture Forum among others.

292

STUDIO HANI RASHID TEAM FROM 2011 – 2016 BRIAN DELUNA Brian DeLuna currently works in New York City and has taught as a professor of architecture at the New Jersey Institute of Technology. He is the principal of Parabol, an interdisciplinary design firm based in New York and Los Angeles. Prior work experience includes teaching at Princeton University, as assistant to Hani Rashid, and conducting several workshops focusing on digital design and visualization throughout the United States. Brian has gained professional experience from collaborating with international architecture firms including Xefirotarch and Asymptote Architecture, where he supervised a wide range of high-profile projects as a senior designer. Brian was part of Studio Hani Rashid from 2012 until 2015.

SOPHIE C. GRELL Sophie works as a senior design architect for COOP HIMMELB(L)AU, and teaches at Studio Hani Rashid. She studied art history at the University of Vienna and architecture at the University for Applied Arts Vienna (Studio Wolf D. Prix), and at UCLA in Los Angeles, graduating with distinction in 2006. Sophie is a member of the Institute of Architecture at the University of Applied Arts Vienna, teaching in the Studio Wolf D. Prix (2006–2011) and Studio Hani Rashid (since 2011). She was co-founder and chief editor of prinz eisenbeton magazine.

ELDINE HEEP Eldine Heep studied architecture at the Academy of Fine Arts (Studio Farshid Moussavi) and the University of Applied Arts (Studio Zaha Hadid), where she received her degree (Mag.arch.) with distinction in 2007. After graduating, she was awarded the MAK-Schindler Scholarship in Los Angeles and her work was shown in numerous group exhibitions. Prior to her teaching appointment, she gained professional experience working for the design office Labvert in Vienna (2008–2009) and as a project architect and associate at Spark Architects in Beijing (2009–2014), working on the design and execution of schemes in Asia. Since obtaining her architecture license in Austria in 2015,

Biographies

she has been working independently on architecture and design projects. Since fall 2015, she has been a member of the Institute of Architecture of the University of Applied Arts Vienna, teaching at Studio Hani Rashid.

ARMIN HESS Armin Hess studied at the University of Technology in Graz, where he graduated from the Department of Urban Planning under Prof. Joost Meuwissen in 1997. From 1997 to 1998, he worked in Amsterdam at the office of Ben van Berkel’s UNStudio. Back in Austria, he cofounded urban-filter.com in Vienna in 1999, working on architectural competitions and realizing projects in the fields of urban design, housing, office and interior design. From 2000 onwards, Armin Hess has been teaching at the University of Applied Arts in Studio Wolf D. Prix for almost 11 years. From 2011 to 2013, he was member of Studio Hani Rashid, and from 2008 to 2010 he taught design strategies at the Urban Strategies Postgraduate Program in Vienna. Armin Hess set up the new department for digital design and production (DDPLab) at the University of Applied Arts Vienna in 2014. Aside from his teaching engagement, Armin Hess has been head of his archviz-related CG company ISOCHROM since 2000. In 2012, he co-founded lectricEye to provide visual services for luxury brands.

ANJA JONKHANS is working and teaching in Vienna. She received her Diploma and master’s degree in architecture from the Bartlett School of Architecture (UCL), London, where she was awarded several scholarships. Having worked for - amongst others - Alsop Architects and Grimshaw Architects in London, she was founding partner of Spacelab/UK with Peter Cook, Colin Fournier and Niels Jonkhans for the Kunsthaus Graz museum. Before teaching at the Angewandte she held a position as an assistant professor at the TU Graz. Currently she is coordinator of the Angewandte within the shared researchtraining network Innochain. Anja was a member of Studio Hani Rashid in 2011.

JOSE CARLOS LOPEZ CERVANTES Jose is currently working and teaching in Vienna and Innsbruck. He earned his master’s degree in architecture at the University of Granada, Spain. He holds a Master of Science MSc from the Urban Strategies Postgraduate Program “Excessive” at the University of Applied Arts Vienna and he is currently a PhD candidate and teaching and research associate at the Institute of Urban Design, University of Innsbruck. He has taught at the Postgraduate Program of the University of Applied Arts Vienna (2010-2015), Institute for Advanced

Architecture of Catalonia (IAAC) (Spain), School of Architecture at the Lund University Faculty of Engineering (LTH) (Sweden), University of Granada (Spain) and Städelschule Architecture Class (SAC) (Frankfurt). He was a project architect at COOP HIMMELB(L)AU and is a co-founder of studio Soqotra. Since fall 2016, he has been a member of the Institute of Architecture at the University of Applied Arts, Studio Hani Rashid.

JÖRG HUGO (born in 1976) studied architecture at the RWTH Aachen (Department of Architecture) and the University for Applied Arts Vienna (Masterclass Zaha Hadid), graduating in 2004 with distinction. Prior to the formation of moh architects, Jörg Hugo worked as a design architect at COOP HIMMELB(L)AU and has been a member of the Institute of Architecture at the University of Applied Arts Vienna, teaching in the Postgraduate Program Urban Strategies, and has been part of Studio Hani Rashid from 2011 to 2016.

SOPHIE LUGER Sophie is a licensed architect (Austrian Federal Chamber of Architects), currently working and teaching in Vienna. She studied at the UCL Bartlett School of Architecture London and the University of Applied Arts Vienna, where she received her master’s degree (Mag. arch) in architecture (Studio Zaha Hadid and Wolf D. Prix) in 2006. She obtained a grant from the Austrian Federal Ministry for Education, Arts and Culture and worked as a design architect at Asymptote Architecture New York, Wolfgang Tschapeller ZT GmbH and CAP Vienna, among others. Her work ranges from large-scale interventions to exhibition design and projects with a special focus on material performance. She has been a member of the architecture department at the University of Applied Arts, Studio Hani Rashid since fall 2011.

DAMJAN MINOVSKI Damjan Minovski studied architecture at the Studio Wolf D. Prix at the University of Applied Arts Vienna. Following his graduation in 2011, he has worked as a freelance visual artist, producing architectural visualizations for renowned architecture offices. Since 2012, he has been part of the architecture collaborative SeMF, focusing on mapping and fabrication in the context of architecture. In 2013, he was part of the GrAB research project at the Institute of Architecture, University of Applied Arts Vienna, and taught at Studio Hani Rashid from 2013 to 2015. Currently he is teaching at the University of Innsbruck and the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna.

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

PETER STRASSER (1952–2016) was a carpenter and furniture designer. From 1997 to 1990 he was adjunct professor in the Master Class (Interior Design) of Prof. Johannes Spalt, University of Applied Arts Vienna. From 1990 to 2011 adjunct professor, Studio Wolf D. Prix, Architekturentwurf 3, University of Applied Arts Vienna and from 2011–2016 head of Digital Design and Digital Production Departments, IoA, University of Applied Arts Vienna.

ANDREA TENPENNY has over 20 years of national and international work experience in the fashion industry. She has worked as a booking agent for some of the world’s leading modeling agencies in Vienna, New York City and Miami, having lived in the US for 11 years before returning to Austria in 2009. Currently, she is the studio manager at Studio_Hani Rashid, responsible for organizational matters.

ANGELIKA ZELISKO Angelika Zelisko works in the Support Art and Research department at the University of Applied Arts Vienna. Her main focus lies in the supervision and support of different projects and of the alumni association ARTist. She studied German philology in Graz and Vienna, where she graduated in 2008. In 2008, she also started to work at the Institute of Architecture of the University of Applied Arts Vienna, where she was mainly responsible for the organization and realization of projects. Angelika was part of Studio Hani Rashid from 2011 to 2013.

REINER ZETTL (1953–2016) was an art historian who taught at the Institute of Architecture of the University of Applied Arts Vienna and the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna, co-directed the Urban Strategies Postgraduate Program, and was head of Urban Technique. He was a member of Studio Wolf D. Prix from 1990 until 2011 and Studio Hani Rashid from 2011 until 2016. He was invited as a guest critic and lecturer to numerous educational institutions worldwide. He co-curated and curated exhibitions such as Design Now: Austria, Rock over Barock, Young and Beautiful, 7+2, and Stadt = Form Raum Netz at the Austrian Pavilion at the 2006 Venice Biennale.

293

GUEST AUTHORS AND PANEL PARTICIPANTS

DAVID BENJAMIN is Founding Principal of The Living and Assistant Professor at Columbia GSAPP. Benjamin’s work combines research and practice, and involves exploring new ideas through prototyping. Focusing on the intersection of biology, computation and design, Benjamin has articulated three frameworks for harnessing living organisms for architecture: bio-computing, biosensing and bio-manufacturing. He and the firm have won many design prizes, including the Emerging Voices Award from the Architectural League, the New Practices Award from the AIA New York, the Young Architects Program Award from the Museum of Modern Art and MoMA PS1, and a Holcim Sustainability Award. Clients include the City of New York, the Seoul municipal government, Google, Nike, 3M, Airbus, BMW, Miami Science Museum and Björk. Recent projects include the Princeton Embodied Computation Lab (a new building for research on next-generation design and construction technologies), Pier 35 EcoPark (a 200-foot-long floating pier in the East River that changes color according to water quality) and Hy-Fi (a branching tower for MoMA PS1 made of a new type of biodegradable brick).

BARBARA IMHOF Barbara Imhof is an internationally active space architect, design researcher and educator. Barbara Imhof is the co-founder and CEO of LIQUIFER Systems Group, an interdisciplinary team comprised of engineers, architects, designers and scientists. Her projects deal with spaceflight parameters such as living with limited resources, minimal and transformable spaces, resource-conserving systems – all aspects imperative to sustainability. LIQUIFER’s partners and clients belong to internationally renowned institutions and space agencies. Since 2015, she has been serving on the board of directors for Women in Aerospace; in 2016, she became an executive board member. Barbara Imhof was nominated for Austrian of the Year 2016 in the category research, awarded as Fem Tech Expert for the month of March 2012 by the Austrian Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, and received the Polarstern Award from the Austrian Space Forum for her space outreach activities in 2011. For nearly 20 years, Barbara Imhof has been teaching at various prestigious universities such as the ETH Zurich, Chalmers University, Gothenburg, and the University of Applied Arts Vienna. She received her education in architecture at the Bartlett School,

294

London and at SCI-Arc, Los Angeles, and she graduated from the University of Applied Arts at the Studio Wolf D. Prix. Barbara Imhof has a Master of Science from the International Space University, Strasbourg and received her doctorate from the Vienna University of Technology.

EDWARD JUNG Edward Jung founded Intellectual Ventures after leaving Microsoft Corporation, where he was chief architect and advisor to executive staff. At Intellectual Ventures he also now serves as the chief technology officer, setting strategic technology and new business models for the company. At Microsoft, Mr. Jung managed projects relating to web platforms, semantic web technology, intelligent operating systems, adaptive user interfaces and artificial intelligence. He co-founded many Microsoft teams including Windows NT, Microsoft Research, mobile and consumer products and web services. Before joining Microsoft in February 1990, Mr. Jung founded the Deep Thought Group, working on neural network chips for learning and parallel computation. His biomedical research work in the 1980s in protein structure and function was published in several journals including Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and The Journal of Biochemistry. An avid inventor, Mr. Jung holds more than 750 patents worldwide and has over 1,000 patents pending. His inventions are in the areas of biomedicine, computing, networking, energy and material sciences. Mr. Jung has served as an advisor to Harvard Medical School, the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, the Institute for Systems Biology and as a consultant to the Asia Pacific Federation, the Aspen Institute, the China Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Sciences and the World Health Organization.

HANS ULRICH OBRIST is artistic director of the Serpentine Galleries, London. Prior to this, he was the curator of the Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris. Since his first show World Soup (The Kitchen Show) in 1991, he has curated more than 300 exhibitions. In 2011, Obrist received the CCS Bard Award for Curatorial Excellence, and in 2015 he was awarded the International Folkwang Prize for his commitment to the arts. Obrist has lectured internationally at academic and art institutions and is contributing editor to several magazines and journals. His recent publications include Conversations in Mexico, Ways of Curating, The Age of Earthquakes with Douglas Coupland and Shumon Basar, and Lives of the Artists, Lives of the Architects.

Biographies

MATTHEW RITCHIE Matthew Ritchie’s installations are investigations of the idea of information, explored through science, architecture, history, and the dynamics of culture. His work has been shown in numerous exhibitions worldwide including the Whitney Biennial, the Sydney Biennial, the São Paulo Biennial, the Venice Architecture Biennale, the Seville Biennale and the Havana Biennale. He is currently a mentor-professor in the graduate Visual Arts Program at Columbia University, New York.

Students Haitham AL BUSAFI Lea ARTNER Ioana BINICA Kyle BRANCHESI Peregrine BUCKLER Jarrod CARANTO Arpapan CHANTANAKAJORNFUNG Cristina CORTUTA Johannes CZIEGLER Ivo DE NOOIJER Mary DENMAN Lea DIETIKER Vojislav DZUKIC Hessamedin FANA Florian FEND Abraham FUNG Hulda GUDJONSDOT TIR Fady HADDAD Alexander HAID Roman HAJTMANEK Moritz HANSHANS Kojiro HONDA Johanna JELINEK Olivia JOIKITS Mathias JUUL FROST Nikola KÁRNÍKOVÁ Joonghoon KIM Jinhee KOH Melanie KOTZ Magdalena KRASKA Paul KRIST Lena KRIWANEK Jon KRIZAN Ewa LENART Angelica LORENZI Dan LU Yi-Chen LU Guillaume MACÉ Jalal MATRAJI Steven MAT TI Peter MEARS Anais MÉON Ondřej MICHÁLEK Kaveh NAJAFIAN Alexander NANU

Sonali PATEL Christoph PEHNELT Lenka PETRÁKOVÁ Sille PIHLAK Noemi POLO Anutorn POLPHONG Andjela POPOVIC Mihai POTRA Luis Daniel POZO Piotr Konstanty PROKOPOWICZ Daniel PROST Jean-Philipp REINSBERG Daniel RHOMBERG Maximin RIEDER Stephan RITZER Jeroen Hendrik S. ROOSEN Kristína RYPÁKOVÁ Andrea SACHSE Dena SAFFARIAN Viktoria SÁNDOR Herwig SCHERABON Dennis SCHIAROLI Barbara SCHICKERMÜLLER Lewis SCOT T Adam SEBESTYEN Gisle SIMONSEN Klemens SITZMANN Artur STAŠKEVITŠ Ralph S. STEENBLIK Andrej STRIEŽENEC Colby SUTER Johan TALI Matthew TAM Stefan THANEI Stefanie THEURETZBACHER Ursula TROST Nora VARGA Robert VIERLINGER Jelena VUKMIROVIC Anna WAWRZYNIAK Markus WILLEKE Ryan WYNN Angel YONCHEV Helena YUN Minerva ZHANG

Studio Hani Rashid – University of Applied Arts Vienna

295

Imprint Studio Hani Rashid University of Applied Arts Vienna 2011– 2016 EDITORS

Hani Rashid, Sophie Luger Institute of Architecture, University of Applied Arts Vienna EDITING TEAM

Sophie C. Grell, Eldine Heep, Jörg Hugo EDITORIAL ASSISTANCE

Andrea Tenpenny

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Roswitha Janowski-Fritsch TRANSLATION, COPY-EDITING

Alun Brown, Janima Nam GRAPHIC DESIGN

www.bleed.com Astrid Feldner, Marc Damm PHOTO CREDITS

Lea Dietiker, Sophie C. Grell, Leonhard Hilzensauer, Hani Rashid, Bruno Stubenrauch, Reiner Zettl PROJECT MANAGEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE UNIVERSITY OF APPLIED ARTS VIENNA

Roswitha Janowski-Fritsch

PROJECT MANAGEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE PUBLISHER

Angela Fössl PRINTING

Holzhausen Druck Printed on acid-free and chlorine-free bleached paper, FSC certified LIBRARY OF CONGRESS CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION DATA

A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. BIBLIOGRAPHIC INFORMATION PUBLISHED BY THE GERMAN NATIONAL LIBRARY

The German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de.

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation,reprinting, re-use of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage in databases. For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner must be obtained. Every reasonable attempt has been made to identify owners of copyright. Errors or omissions will be corrected in subsequent editions. This publication is also available as an e-book (ISBN PDF 978-3-0356-1468-8) © 2017 Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH, Basel P.O. Box 44, 4009 Basel, Switzerland Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printed in Austria ISSN 1866-248X ISBN 978-3-0356-1466-4 987654321 www.birkhauser.com

296

Re: Futures