MoMA's exhibition, "The Many Lives of the Nakagin Capsule Tower," explores the complex legacy of Kisho Kurokawa's iconic metabolist structure. While intended as a model for adaptable, sustainable architecture with replaceable capsules, the tower ultimately faced demolition due to asbestos, outdated technology, and disagreements among owners. The exhibition showcases the tower's history through archival materials, photographs, and a full-scale capsule, examining its initial utopian vision, its eventual decline, and its enduring influence on architectural discourse surrounding modularity, prefabrication, and the future of urban living.
Ukraine has an opportunity to redefine its architectural identity after the war, moving away from the imposing, standardized Soviet-era structures that dominate its landscape. The article argues that rebuilding should prioritize human-scale design, incorporating sustainable practices and reflecting Ukrainian culture and heritage. This approach would create more livable and aesthetically pleasing spaces, foster a stronger sense of national identity, and symbolize a decisive break from the country's Soviet past. The author emphasizes the importance of urban planning that prioritizes pedestrians and green spaces, suggesting a shift towards decentralized, community-focused development.
Hacker News users discuss the feasibility and desirability of Ukraine rebuilding with a focus on traditional architecture, as suggested in the linked article. Some commenters are skeptical, citing the cost and practicality of such an undertaking, particularly given the ongoing war and the existing housing shortage. Others express concern that focusing on aesthetics during wartime is misplaced. However, several support the idea, arguing that rebuilding with traditional styles could foster a stronger sense of national identity and create more beautiful, human-scaled cities. A few point out that pre-Soviet Ukrainian architecture was diverse and regional, making a single "traditional" style difficult to define. The discussion also touches on the role of Soviet-era buildings in Ukrainian history and the challenges of preserving architectural heritage while modernizing.
Boston City Hall's Brutalist design emerged from a complex interplay of factors in the 1960s. Facing pressure to revitalize Scollay Square and embrace modernism, the city held an architectural competition. The winning design by Kallmann, McKinnell & Knowles, though initially controversial for its stark departure from traditional styles, aimed to embody democratic ideals with its open plaza and accessible interior. The project, part of a larger urban renewal effort, reflected the era's optimism about government's ability to solve social problems through architecture and urban planning. Despite its initial unpopularity, City Hall stands as a significant example of Brutalist architecture and a testament to the city's ambition for a modern future.
HN commenters discuss Boston City Hall's Brutalist architecture, mostly negatively. Several lament its ugliness and unfriendliness, comparing it to a parking garage or fortress. Some criticize its impracticality and lack of human scale, citing confusing navigation and wind tunnels. A few offer counterpoints, arguing that it's a significant example of Brutalist architecture, reflecting the era's optimism about government's role. One suggests its imposing design might have been intentional, meant to convey authority. The concrete's weathering and the surrounding plaza's design are also criticized. A couple of commenters express appreciation for the building's unique character, suggesting that its starkness has a certain appeal.
Summary of Comments ( 16 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44080820
HN commenters largely lament the demolition of the Nakagin Capsule Tower, viewing it as a missed opportunity for architectural preservation and a symbol of the challenges in realizing utopian visions. Several express disappointment that a practical solution for renovating and updating the capsules wasn't found, citing the inherent modularity as a key advantage that should have allowed for such adaptation. Some point out the inherent conflict between the building's original utopian ideal and the realities of individual ownership, fluctuating property values, and the difficulty of collective decision-making. The impracticalities of the original design, such as limited space and outdated technology, are also acknowledged, but framed as solvable problems given sufficient will and resources. The MoMA exhibition is welcomed as a way to remember and learn from the building's history. A few commenters express a more pragmatic view, accepting the demolition as inevitable due to the building's deteriorated state and the complexities of renovation.
The Hacker News post titled "The legacy of the iconic Nakagin capsule tower" generated several comments discussing various aspects of the building and its demolition.
Several commenters focused on the practicality and livability of the capsules. One questioned the long-term viability of such small living spaces, highlighting the lack of adequate storage and the challenges of raising a family in such confined quarters. Another commenter, who had toured the building before its demolition, noted the cramped conditions and the presence of asbestos, contributing to the impracticality of renovation. This commenter also mentioned the surprisingly spacious feeling once inside a capsule despite its small size.
The discussion also touched upon the building's historical and architectural significance. One commenter lamented the loss of the Nakagin Capsule Tower as an architectural experiment, representing a unique vision of the future that ultimately proved unsustainable. Another expressed disappointment that a single capsule wasn't preserved as a historical artifact in a museum, though acknowledged the challenges of doing so given their interconnected nature within the original structure.
The topic of modularity and prefabrication also arose. A commenter pointed out that the building was a real-world example of the modular construction concept, although it ultimately faced limitations due to the difficulties in replacing and updating individual modules. This led to another discussion point about the impracticality of the original design, which envisioned capsules being easily replaced. The reality of cost and complexity meant this never happened, contributing to the building's eventual decline.
One commenter drew parallels between the Nakagin Capsule Tower and other architectural movements, suggesting its modular design was a precursor to today's container homes and tiny houses, highlighting the cyclical nature of architectural trends.
Finally, a couple of comments focused on the preserved capsules, with one user mentioning having seen one on display in Japan and another sharing information about the possibility of purchasing individual capsules.
Overall, the comments reflect a mix of nostalgia for a lost architectural icon, pragmatic assessments of its limitations, and reflections on the broader themes of modularity, prefabrication, and the challenges of realizing utopian architectural visions.