
Zaha Hadid: Maker of the 21st Century - pseudolus
https://www.archdaily.com/907124/zaha-hadid-maker-of-the-21st-century?ad_content=907124&ad_medium=widget&ad_name=editors-choice
======
chicob
Without questioning her skill and professionalism, I don't really like any of
her buildings, because I don't like unnecessary, uncalled-for shape. Today,
architecture has a whole new range of possibilities thanks to new materials
and technologies, but just because one can doesn't mean one should.

And when I say this, I also have in mind other kinds of design, from cars,
furniture, shampoo plastic bottles, fonts and GUIs. If any shape is possible,
aesthetics usually goes down the drain.

In the particular case of buildings, these are made to last and have an
imposing quality of their own, given their size and location. And famous
architects have an visionary aura that only adds to the disappointment and
dismay of the common citizens that will have to live in the shadow of those
behemoths, whether they like it or not.

~~~
lambdadmitry
I think it boils down to the lack of grand vision. "Celebrity architects"
nowadays mostly focus on the looks, slapping a fancy sculpture of a building
into an environment they don't care about (like that one [1], the block might
just as well "fit" literally anywhere else) and splitting it into the same old
office/apartment boxes on the inside. Surely it looks good on renders, but
there is no _idea_ , it's just pure _ornament_. Compare and contrast with
Barbican Estate [2] [3], which is a social experiment and an embodiment of a
vision first and housing project second. None of those generic house-
sculptures will be revered and studied in 40 years. It's a shame the current
crop of star architects is so obsessed with _bling_.

[1]: [https://www.archdaily.com/907124/zaha-hadid-maker-of-
the-21s...](https://www.archdaily.com/907124/zaha-hadid-maker-of-the-21st-
century/5c06607408a5e5c711000669-zaha-hadid-maker-of-the-21st-century-photo)

[2]: [https://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/the-barbican-
estate-b...](https://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/the-barbican-estate-book-
stefi-orazi)

[3]: [https://robots.thoughtbot.com/barbican-estate-walking-
throug...](https://robots.thoughtbot.com/barbican-estate-walking-through-
lessons-learnt)

~~~
chicob
> there is no _idea_ , it's just pure _ornament_

Exactly. It feels like a complete void.

I was trying to find examples of a kind or architecture that is the complete
opposite, thought of F. L. Wright, and found this:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_architecture](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_architecture)

------
twelvechairs
If theres one reason for Zaha Hadids exceptionalism its wealth. Her career was
subsidised for decades and wealthy connections brought the work in when it
first came.

Now of course its not the same and the practice can support itself at least to
some extent, but whether it can do this over the long run is still a question.

Her treatment of young staff which varies from exploitative to abusive to
helpful depending who you ask, is not very different to other Starchitects.

~~~
triggercut
"If theres one reason for Zaha Hadids exceptionalism its wealth."

She was by all accounts from the time, and in retrospect, a star student
during her time at Architectural Association. Not just a top student but an
exceptional student. She was also fierce in her determination to succeed,
something still difficult for a woman at that time in a male dominated
industry full of egos. She persevered, and like a lot of women of that time
who did, were punished for it.

As well, I've heard plenty of stories about her treatment of staff which is
inexcusable behavior, however that's immaterial to her artistic vision and
capability.

Her connections certainly helped her career, yes, they always do in business.
She wasn't exceptional because of her wealth.

~~~
kobrad
This is a bit strange. There are a lot of exceptional people who will not get
anywhere because they are poor. So it's nice and all, but don't just say her
exceptional wealth has nothing to do with anything.

------
doombolt
This is architecture for car drivers who zoom past while burning carbon. Spend
more than 10 seconds, it stops looking cool and becomes boring. Yet another
example how car destroys our cities.

It is not walkable, it is not human-scale, it does not integrate with
surroundings. I love how they do advertisement renders where their buildings
stand in an empty field. As if the rest of the city never existed and should
not be cared for!

You can't walk past these buildings every day and enjoy it. First of all, they
are too large and far apart. It will be boring and long not to mention wind,
rain and snow to which it offers no protection.

Moreover, it's a legitimization of awful 70s architecture with slightly more
effort. Even her New York building looks like something people from 70s would
build when they dismantle some beautiful neoclassical or moderne building.

~~~
nogridbag
Isn't her New York building a complete counterexample to your argument? It's
built along Manhattan's elevated _walking_ trail, the Highline and enjoyed by
thousands of people [0]. Until the Vessel is completed, it's likely the main
attraction on the walking path.

[0] [https://goo.gl/images/e1XZ4v](https://goo.gl/images/e1XZ4v)

~~~
doombolt
It looks passable, but as I have said any Art Noveau building would give more
eye candy, and there's a huge number of such building around the world, it's
not we praise each and every of their architects.

It also looks like a side of any cruise ship. Last time I have checked cruise
ships were not considered masterpieces of architecture, and they also float.

~~~
pseudolus
Arguably the Flatiron building looks like the prow of a ship and it certainly
is an architectural work worthy of admiration.

[https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x89c259a3f71c1f6...](https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x89c259a3f71c1f67%3A0xde2a6125ed704926!2m22!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i20!16m16!1b1!2m2!1m1!1e1!2m2!1m1!1e3!2m2!1m1!1e5!2m2!1m1!1e4!2m2!1m1!1e6!3m1!7e115!4shttps%3A%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipNE12SNgvZqzFNL20tpgjgNt7CvrSpz2ii58H0F%3Dw481-h320-k-no!5sflatiron%20building%20-%20Google%20Search!15sCAQ&imagekey=!1e10!2sAF1QipNE12SNgvZqzFNL20tpgjgNt7CvrSpz2ii58H0F&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiBtfe7tovfAhUNvFkKHTwlBbAQoiowG3oECAIQBg)

~~~
doombolt
Yes it does look nice-ish, but this is stage when human-scale disappears. It
would look much less bland if it was ten story high and not twenty.

Having that coffin to the left does not help. It wants to dominate the
landscape but it's dwarfed by a messy box.

------
rmason
She changed East Lansing with the design of the Broad Art Museum. I smile
everytime that I drive by it on Grand River Avenue. Who wouldn't want a touch
of the Guggenheim in Bilbao in their town? It has the best light for the
display of art of any museum I've ever visited. There were visitors from over
forty countries in the first thirty days after it opened.

[https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x8822e82a4f7ed4d...](https://www.google.com/maps/uv?hl=en&pb=!1s0x8822e82a4f7ed4dd%3A0x388e3637c9c2088e!2m22!2m2!1i80!2i80!3m1!2i20!16m16!1b1!2m2!1m1!1e1!2m2!1m1!1e3!2m2!1m1!1e5!2m2!1m1!1e4!2m2!1m1!1e6!3m1!7e115!4shttps%3A%2F%2Flh5.googleusercontent.com%2Fp%2FAF1QipOEnydzXt33VSllG2UuKv0fpl_CeB9LN7uim8Uz%3Dw283-h160-k-no!5sbroad%20art%20museum%20east%20lansing%20michigan%20-%20Google%20Search&imagekey=!1e10!2sAF1QipOEnydzXt33VSllG2UuKv0fpl_CeB9LN7uim8Uz&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjfueeZi4rfAhVxtIMKHaaxCdYQoiowEHoECAQQBg)

------
Traubenfuchs
I am resentful for the crime she committed against the city I live in, Vienna.

Google: zaha hadid haus wien

Such an atrocity!

~~~
acqq
It‘s a result of the compromise: building the flats where old, legally
protected structures should remain. Giving the constrains, it‘s quite a
success.

~~~
Traubenfuchs
The house is literally empty since 2015.

------
bitL
Not sure why so many negative comments here; I found her architectural style a
breath of a fresh air comparing to prevailing trends favoring shapes that
looked like being sculpted with a software from the 80s. So many non-
distinctive boxes everywhere around, her work was actually inspiring and in
some ways resembled trends outlined by Gaudi. I consider her one of the best.

~~~
doombolt
Yes, her works may be nice when compared to 80s.

But if you compare them to the turn of XX century, they don't look so nice.
People may smile when zipping along her creations, but you can walk along some
of Art Nouveau buildings every day for years and never stop smiling. E.g.
[https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CBF84WbZ8D](https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CBF84WbZ8D)

------
doctorpangloss
> Hadid entrusted young architects with important roles on major commissions.

It's true, and the most important takeaway of why she was such a good leader.

But the fact that her savvy treatment of young people is newsworthy does not
bode well for the architecture profession.

