Rem Koolhaas: Work, Theory, and Aesthetic Philosophy

Introduction: Koolhaas as Architect and Urban Thinker

The radical Dutch architect and architectural theorist Rem Koolhaas is often called one of the world's best — and one of the world's most controversial — architects. Koolhaas is as much known for his aesthetic philosophy as he is for his built work. "Koolhaas' most provocative — and in many ways least understood — contribution to the cultural landscape is as an urban thinker… he has written half a dozen books on the evolution of the contemporary metropolis and designed master plans for, among other places, suburban Paris, the Libyan desert, and Hong Kong" (Ouroussoff 1). Koolhaas does not merely wish to create buildings; he also seeks to change the way the world conceptualizes buildings and aesthetic space.

The Congrexpo and Postmodern Design Principles

One of Koolhaas's most famous buildings is the French convention hall the Congrexpo, located in Euralille, a shopping and entertainment complex in Lille, France. It is described as an "elliptical shell… sliced into three parts, with a 6,000-seat concert hall at one end, a conference hall with three auditoriums in the middle, and a 215,000-square-foot exhibition space at the other… clad in plywood and synthetic leather" (Ouroussoff 1). The shopping complex itself has been described as relatively pedestrian and ordinary, but Koolhaas's contribution is unique. As one critic observed: "Koolhaas sometimes seems to be a reluctant architect — someone who is unconcerned with conventional ideas of beauty — but he is a master of the craft, and I can't help marveling at the intimacy of the space. The room is perfectly proportioned, so that even sitting at the back of the upper balcony you feel as though you were pressing up against the stage" (Ouroussoff 1). Koolhaas's designs unite functionality and form — the auditorium's design enhances its functionality while remaining striking and arresting in the way it arranges space in an idiosyncratic fashion.

The intention of the structure was to generate a "perfectly self-contained system, yet inside is a cacophony of competing zones" with different purposes (Ouroussoff 1). Koolhaas's aesthetic in this building is resolutely postmodern, fusing Roman columns and mirrors that contrast with the airy openness of the exhibition space. "The tension created between them seems to capture one of Koolhaas' principal preoccupations: How do you allow the maximum degree of individual freedom without contributing to the erosion of civic culture?" (Ouroussoff 1). Koolhaas was attracted to designing for Euralille because of its unfettered populism: it is a popular site for working-class shoppers, not the elite, and Koolhaas is determined to bring architecture "to the people."

Koolhaas's spirit is the antithesis of the idea that architects should elevate the populace. He is known for the cheeky, irreverent view he takes of Modernism specifically. He once made a sketch of London that was a deliberate satire of architectural Modernism's stated aim to elevate the population. "In his work, Koolhaas' tongue-in-cheek proposal for London carved a wide swath through the center to create a hedonistic zone that could 'fully accommodate individual desires.' As the city's inhabitants rushed to it, the rest of London would become a ruin" (Ouroussoff 2). This design, along with other city proposals, was catalogued in his book Delirious New York.

Philosophy, Modernism, and the Metabolist Influence

Koolhaas has openly acknowledged the influence of the Japanese Metabolism movement on his work, which views architecture as something that must have an organic quality, in contrast to the evidently planned and manmade texture of Modernism. "Metabolist architects and designers believed that cities and buildings are not static entities, but are ever-changing — organic with a 'metabolism.' Postwar structures of the future are thought to have a limited lifespan and should be designed and built to be replaced" (Craven 1). Koolhaas's philosophy holds that architecture is meant to be an impermanent medium.

Koolhaas has extremely rigorous notions of what constitutes truly radical architecture. In one interview he stated: "the vast majority of so-called modern architecture now is really a kind of gimmicky Modernism, and this creates space for traditionalism to be gimmicky too. It's like a set of communicating vases, where movement in one translates directly to movement in the other. I see this less from an architectural perspective than from a social or anthropological one. Recent years have seen an extraordinary growth in what I would call quasi-vernacular, particularly across Europe" (Mackenzie 1). Koolhaas has been particularly critical of what he sees as the increasingly dominant and dangerous influence of the United States on architecture, which he believes has eroded Europe's ability to develop an architectural language of its own. "It [Europe] should become less U.S.-oriented. I am not saying we should turn against the Americans, but I think we should also look towards building relationships with Russia, Turkey, the Arab world, and China and India, and on an equal basis. China built the Bird's Nest stadium for the Olympics and they chose European architects to design it — an unbelievably wonderful gesture" ("Interview," Spiegel Online).

Rather than seeking out elite and rarefied locales to design for, Koolhaas deliberately looks for accessible venues. Today, "architecture looks more and more like a form of corporate branding," dominated by "real estate developers and corporate boards whose interests were not always so noble-minded," and Koolhaas strives to resist this trend (Ouroussoff 1). Although he works as a professional architect, he is equally comfortable in academia and shares an academic's willingness to criticize corporate culture in a manner that many other architects shun. Despite this attitude, he has had no shortage of clients.

Conclusion

Koolhaas is something of a rarity in the history of design: he is a brilliant theorist who is also a brilliant architect. Even those who disagree with his politics and some of his design philosophies find his work challenging, provocative, and compelling. His influence in the profession seems likely to endure well into the future.