Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

Architecture: Buildings that will be and might have been

by Paul Wells on Monday, May 24, 2010 11:11pm - 16 Comments

I was distracted last month when the Musée National des beaux-arts du Québec (MNBAQ), which gives visitors to Quebec City a well-assembled but very limited selection of prominent Quebec paintings through the ages, announced Dutch star-chitect Rem Koolhaas as the winner of an international competition to choose the architect who will dramatically expand and reboot the museum. It’s a big project. The international character of the competition was unusual for Quebec. In reading up on the selection of Koolhaas, I stumbled across a resource all architecture geeks will want to know about.

That’s the L.E.A.P at the Université de Montréal, the Laboratoire d’Etude de l’architecture potentielle, or Laboratory for the Study of Potential Architecture. It’s based on a simple, elegant idea: architecture competitions can be a powerful analytical tool for studying trends in building design, because of course they tell you what got built but also what got considered and rejected. With enough cases in the database, researchers can start to measure, not just guess, which esthetic, economic and political considerations go into the choice of a given design in a given era.

It’s L.E.A.P. that allows us to see, not only Koolhaas’s design, but those of the architects he beat. The MNBAQ competition page (in English; sometimes I cut you guys some slack) is here; it shows, not only dozens of plans and drawings for Koolhaas’s design, but similar amounts of detail on the other 14 designs in the competition. The project criteria seem designed to drive any architect crazy: the 1933 museum was already expanded in 1991 to bridge to an 1861 prison a few dozen metres away. These three elements, built decades apart, are set well back from the Grande Allée. The new building isn’t next to the other two. It’ll be right out on the Grande Allée, connected by underground tunnels to the rest, serving as a face and front gate for the whole jumble. Koolhaas’s design is luminous and boxy:

Elsewhere on the L.E.A.P. page you can see, not only the four other short-listers Koolhaas beat, but the full field of 15 entrants. Koolhaas and his Quebec team partner beat, for instance, the British architect David Chipperfield, whose design is perhaps a bit too self-consciously classical in inspiration:

and Brad Cloepfil of Portland’s Allied Works Architecture, whose design is typically bright, fascinated with the possibilities of materials and surfaces, and (to me) a bit ’60s Kennedy Centre retro in its appeal:

To me, (and always understanding that much of a competition like this has to do with the interior use of space, not just with the splash the exterior makes), there’s room to wonder whether Koolhaas would have won if his name was Smith and nobody had ever heard of him. I’m fond of the Cloepfil design (as I was, grudgingly at first, of his design for the Cantos Foundation’s promised National Music Centre in Calgary); I think one other short-list entry was more attractive than Koolhaas’s; and I think the MNBAQ jury dodged a bullet by rejecting one truly hideous finalist. But you don’t need to take my word for it; you can rummage around the L.E.A.P. site and decide for yourself.

Bookmark and Share
  • hosertohoosier

    As long as there are no stupid crystals it will at least beat the ROM.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/Gaunilon Gaunilon

      They could just leave a hole in the ground and it would still beat the ROM in terms of aesthetics.

  • pdpd

    To be fair, if the ROM had been all glass it could have been awesome. The lame gray siding breaks apart the effect of the glass, and there is something still amazing about walking by on bloor at night. If the light's right, from certain angles you can look up and see dinosaurs peering down on you. It's pretty cool.

    Anyways, not even really disagreeing – just a quibble. Maybe with crystals you just have to go all in?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/sea_n_mountains sea_n_mountains

    Paul, whatever happened to your mini-contest re (re)designs of 24 Sussex? Did I miss some postings that addressed it? or did you ever receive designs/plans?

  • Boogard

    I see the Museum of Nature has completed $211 million in renovations. That's a lot of cheddar for such a small building. Heck, if you just filled it with $20 bills I'm not sure there would be enough room for all that money. No doubt the Quebec city gallery will meet or exceed that level of profligacy, finance it with the $8 billion in transfer payments that Quebec extorts, and, upon completion, they will criticize broke assed Anglo Canada for being uncultured.

    • http://twitter.com/bobledrew @bobledrew

      Have you seen the new museum? Are you aware of the significant issues that needed to be faced to ensure the old and new buildings were stable? Yes, it's a lot of "cheddar". And from what I've seen, it's worth it. The Smithsonian in the US spends nearly that much on capital PER YEAR.

      • Boogard

        That's a pretty good Liberal style rebuttal; you've got the ALL CAPS, the bulk blurting of seemingly random questions, the sneering scarequotes, the lack of regard for taxpayer money…but you didn't reference either Sarah Palin or Texas, nor did you use exclamation marks.

        Do you still get paid your nickel from the Canadian Labour Congress for posting this?

    • Dave

      I'm surprised rescuing the MoN from leda clay came that cheaply.

  • LaxAtlDfwYow

    Quite the Renaissance Man, Mr. Wells.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/s_c_f s_c_f

    I'm not a fan of boxy. Otherwise, I like the design.

    The Chipperfield design is ugly to me.

  • http://tctg.ca Peter

    The design rendering is gorgeous. Can't wait to see the building completed.

  • Bill Simpson

    I find these building ideas to be the same monstrous vanity projects as usual. None of them have any connection with the location, the existing buildings, or express anything about the purpose of the building. I am endlessly baffled as to what architects think they are doing when they design a building.

    Given the outcome, they might as well throw up a prefabricated warehouse ala Walmart, put up a neon sign and save the money for the inside.

  • Bob

    As an architect I'm always pleased when the subject comes up for public discussion. And it's natural to focus on the aesthetics of the design because that's all the public usually sees. But the competitors are guided by a program which outlines the uses contained within the building, their relationship to each other and to the site, a budget, etc. all this must be considered along with the design to finally determine a winner.

  • rgmcc

    I thought the main criterea in these types of competitions was to spend as much of the public's money as possible –

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Mike514 Mike514

    to wonder whether Koolhaas would have won if his name was Smith and nobody had ever heard of him

    Paul, I don't think you should suggest bias, simply because the judges don't normally know who designed what.

    To avoid impressions of bias, the architects are kept secret. Each submittal has an 8-digit number (usually – at least the ones that we've participated in) that each architecture firm invents and pastes on the front of their submittal boards (the theory being that no 2 firms would choose the same 8 digit number). The administrators would know which number relates to which firm, but this is kept from the judges.

    The possible exception is when the finalists are selected. The names might be revealed at that stage, at which point the judges might say "gee, that's a Koolhaas proposal? We had no idea until now."

    But unless you know, Paul, that the above is not the case, I suggest refraining from such statements. Why taint what is probably a perfectly legitimate competition?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Mike514 Mike514

    Never mind. I took a closer look at the presentation panels, and they discretely list the names of each firm, rather than the infamous 8-digit number.

    This is unusual. No design competition should be conducted this way, due to the potential accusation of bias.

From Macleans