[Session 1] Invisible Landmark
Session 1 "Invisible Landmark" Chris van Duijn (Partner of OMA) |
[Chris van Duijn]
Returning from AI to Human Intelligence
Good afternoon. After artificial intelligence, back to human intelligence. Feeling like going back in time a bit perhaps. It's a bit of a mashup of the last subject that Professor Dr. Zec kind of was talking about: existing and new. It's about the landmark that Craig explained in detail, but also, it's about human connection.
About the Firm – OMA/AMO
I am one of the 7 partners at OMA, and we are mainly known for doing architecture, big projects, commercial projects, but also small and public projects. Apart from architecture, we also do non-architectural projects, research projects, and energy projects under our alter ego, AMO. AMO is, let's say, another part of our company where we can expand on architectural design, which makes it more interesting for us and gives us a bit more context on knowing what is happening in the world.
Invisible Landmark
The title today is "Invisible Landmark", and I will explain that because the overarching title of today's event is "How Can Design Change the City?" There are two main words in this sentence that I find interesting: "design" and "city." This basically implies that it’s a one-directional effort — designing and city — a kind of top-down approach, superimposing something. What I would like to focus on in my presentation is actually turning these two words around: How can the city change design? How should the city inform design?
When we talk in our architectural industry about design, often it is about landmarks, a word that can mean a lot of things. But the simplest interpretation would be visually striking buildings that may provide an identity to the city or be part of the city. And that’s fine because sometimes it works and is useful, but it can also be very superficial. Wouldn't it be interesting to think about how landmarks can emphasize or strengthen the identity of the city rather than imposing something new?
Landmark Critique: Superficial Design
Otherwise, it becomes so superficial — a kind of trick or even pornography of architecture, which is not a real condition. When we talk about landmarks, we also have to talk about the other 99% of the city. If the rest of the city lacks quality in buildings or urban space planning, putting a landmark in front of it would be like a visual band-aid, but it will not make the city better. So, I think that relation in two directions — focusing on the real challenge: the city and not just the landmark — is what we should do.
Case Studies
The first project is in Seoul, or near Seoul, in Gwanggyo. It’s Galeria, a department store project. When we started the project in 2015 or 2016, Gwanggyo, one of the new towns, was still very much under development. The existing buildings were so generic, they looked as if they were built out of cardboard, as if they were temporary buildings. You cannot distill a unique quality from this — that was our conclusion. So, we turned it around and presented a cubic piece of travertine stone as the design concept. The idea was to create something solid that would become the "genesis" of the area — a structure that appears as if it has always been there, while the city grows around it. It became a sort of anchor for the area, redefining the epicenter of Gwanggyo.
The second project is a bridge in Bordeaux, completed in July this year. It’s one of the 8 bridges crossing the Garonne River and connects Bordeaux with two municipalities. Bordeaux is a UNESCO heritage city with a historical core and large public spaces that reflect a strong sense of French openness and repetition. Instead of creating an extravagant design, we proposed a functional public space that can be used for events and festivals. We designed the bridge to be simple yet flexible, with a 44-meter width — 22 meters for vehicles and 22 meters for public events.
The third project is Hongik University’s Cultural Center, located near Hongdae. Our team spent a week in Hongdae, studying the urban identity of the university and its surroundings. We found "urban informalism" — a blend of outdoor and indoor spaces, art and science students collaborating, and blurred boundaries between university and city. We proposed a design that integrates nature, maintains open access, and connects the university to the surrounding city. The "Hongdae Level" acts as a public floor where students, professors, and the public can interact.
Rethinking Landmarks
Let’s make buildings that highlight the quality of the city rather than just making something visually striking. Seoul has a strong urban character, but many new buildings ignore that. I hope this project will prove to be a successful experiment in the coming years.
Thank you,
