#dutchdfa

[charmantpetitmonstre]

Dutch Profile: Daan Roosegaarde

[vis-com]

Quite interesting guy. I picked him because his name looked simpler. 

[vis-com]

Bart Hess is very well known for pushing the boundaries of fashion and design. You can recognize his work if you have seen Lady Gaga's Born This Way album. His visions are very surreal and deal with a lot of texture and lighting. He works with already existing materials to create innovative works that stretch the imagination.

[cndesignnl-blog]

The Design and Fashion in China mappings present an analysis of the fashion and design fields in China. They provide insight into the ideas, work and dilemmas of Chinese (fashion) designers, as well as the structure of the local creative industry. The mappings also present business opportunities for Dutch professionals aiming to work in China. DutchDFA commissioned MovingCities to research and write the mappings in 2011. After an update, the final edited reports were presented in July 2012.

Download the full report of Design in China Mapping   here (106 pages, 3.3 Mb).

Download the full report of Fashion in China Mapping  here (72 pages, 2.3 Mb).

[allthedaysordained]

The DutchDFA network's video profile of famous graphic designer Irma Boom.

'Boom has made over 250 books, 50 of which are in the permanent collection of the Museum of Modern Art in New York. Her ‘Think Book’ for a giant coal company has become an international icon of Dutch design. She sees her books as objects, that communicate ideas and stories, and speak to all human senses.'

[sergiophd]

A Renovated NAi

postcard announcing NAi’s renovation

  In mid may 2010 the Netherlands Architecture Institute (NAi) in Rotterdam closed its doors to the visiting public for a much needed renovation of the building. The entrance was to experience a complete overhaul, in a renovation work that was initially anticipated to last seven months. Instead of seven, it took thirteen, but on July 1st, 2011, the NAi reopened its galleries to the public, revealing not only a brand new entrance, but also a renewed direction and a reinvigorated strategy for the activities of the institute. The renovation work was commissioned to the original architect of the building, Jo Coenen. Presented with the opportunity to reconsider the connection of the building to its immediate surroundings, Coenen reorganized the entire ground level around a penetrating glass volume. Clad in metallic mesh, the new block, besides announcing the entrance to the institute on both street and park side also accommodates some new spaces. The J.B. Bakema-Serre meeting room occupies the north end, while most of the remaining space is taken by the new Hands-on-Deck (DoeDek in the original Dutch) equipped with construction blocks, legos and webcams, to engage younger visitors with the NAi’s educational programs. Inside the original building, the new block’s metallic mesh cladding is manipulated to form large openings, establishing strong visual connections to the lower floor. Such visual porosity allows for an immediate immersion into the lower floor spaces of the bookstore, café and ticket counter. Despite such proximity, its elevated position ensures a significant distancing from the bustle of those contiguous areas, enabling a panopticon-like survey perspective of these (particularly) public spaces of the institute. 

the new entrance block within the existing building

The renovation not only reorganizes the entrance, but by reinforcing connections to its surroundings, it is also intended to translate in spatial terms the current policy and objectives of the NAi. During the 13 months of construction, and with the exhibitions program on hold, the NAi experienced an unusual sabbatical period. During this interlude, the institute had the opportunity to reconsider its position in the current contemporary cultural landscape and revise its strategies, instruments and objectives. Thus, besides a new entrance, also a new integrated branding strategy was presented on July 1st. Such rebranding included not only a new logo and graphic language, but most remarkably, also the renaming of the institute as “NAi Museum of Architecture” (NAi, museum voor architectuur in the original Dutch form).

with the reopening the NAi has been now renamed "NAi, museum of architecture"

While the genesis of the institution’s title as NAi (or institute rather than museum) can be traced back to both pragmatic and conceptual considerations of the institute’s founders in the 1980s, the current “museum of architecture” title might prove misleading to most. Seemingly the title was devised in order to clarify both the content and the focus of the institution, particularly, in its communication to a lay audience (mostly in the sense that “museum” has a stronger name recognition among the general public, and it is therefore easier to understand what it is supposed to do). However, once inside the actual institute, the definitions of both “architecture” and “museum” are manipulated to a point that is bound to topple any facile expectations.

Architecture, as it seems, is not confined to the practice of construction or the discourse of ideas (a vision of the discipline that current director Ole Bouman has championed for almost two decades); nor is a museum confined to the enquiry of a cultural dimension. From the outward projected reductive title, expectations are subverted as definitions and boundaries within the NAi are invariably pliable. Such underlying perspective on both “architecture” and “museum” permeates both temporary and permanent exhibitions, as in these, not only social implications explicitly displace most cultural assertions, but also the traditional distance between visitor and artifact is fundamentally challenged. 

temporary exhibition “Testify! The Consequences of Architecture”

Installed on the top floor gallery “Testify! The Consequences of Architecture” not only converges on (global) social issues, but also expands upon “Architecture of Consequence,” one of the last exhibitions presented at the NAi before the renovation (February 20 to May 16, 2010). Specifically, “Testify!” complements the previously Dutch-only response to the role of architecture (in its widest possible sense) to social innovation by presenting 25 projects from around the world that attempt to meaningfully impact local social conditions with global implications.  From a skate club in Kabul to a collection of flashcards exploring the “drivers of change” for the upcoming century, the range of projects at “Testify!” is quite eclectic. However, the argument of the exhibition is clear from the start, as all of the projects favor a social engagement (primarily by procuring some form of inclusiveness of the local community) over an architectural or even spatial one. The reliance of these projects on social engagement is inevitably reflected on the material presented, as social processes are not always easily represented in images. Despite such difficulty, the argument of the installation is both sharp and challenging, appealing for a reconsideration of what constitutes architecture, and its intrinsic agency.    

models behind walls in the permanent exhibition “Dutchville / Stad van Nederland” 

A similar strategy of displacement is found in the permanent exhibition on the Balkonzaal. In Dutchville (or Stad van Nederland in Dutch) it is not our expectations of architecture that are challenged, but instead, it is the conventional museum presentation and processes and that are destabilized. The installation is divided into two main areas dividing the stable past/present and the fluid future of Dutch architecture, landscape and urban planning. Transition sections are used as sorbet between courses, that is, to cleanse the palate for a fresh dose of architectural visualizations and speculations. A cleansing that is required in order to fully appreciate the theatricality of the array of devices used for the defamiliarization of architectural presentations and knowledge. There are light effects continuously looping; doors that open automatically and mysteriously; concealed architectural models only visible through slender apertures; circling lights in mirror constructed infinite space; amorphous blobs and volumes intimating an unknown future.

audio guide device for the permanent exhibition “Dutchville / Stad van Nederland”  

But what really sets “Dutchville” apart from other conventional exhibitions of architectural models is undoubtedly the audio guide system, namely the format it uses to deliver information on the works exhibited. Instead of a dry read-through by an expert (with impeccable accent) of facts and figures regarding the different objects, information is codified as a conversation between six different “regular” people openly discussing their opinions on these projects. By using an accessible language unhindered by architectural jargon, this unusual delivery method attempts to captivate a wider audience and express an architectural debate that is inclusive and open-ended. Moreover, by listening to the different conversations, at the end of the installation, the architectural preferences of the six (fictional) characters have become apparent. The success of this permanent exhibition is still unclear, but if in “Testify!” architecture was looking into society, in “Dutchville” it is society that is found looking back at architecture.

temporary exhibition “Daring Design / Dwarsdesign”

Unfortunately the underlying criticality of “Testify!” and “Dutchville” is largely absent in the third and largest exhibition installed for the NAi’s re-opening. Occupying the prestigious main gallery, “Daring Design” (Dwarsdesign in Dutch) presents the work of eight Dutch and Chinese designers. Rem Koolhaas/OMA, Hella Jongerius, Irma Boom, Alexander van Slobbe, Ma Ke, MEET YOU, Urbanus and Ai Weiwei are “designers with guts” as the NAi brochure rightly extols, that “do not evade commercially or politically sensitive issues,” but whose critical fangs have been manicured to a point of dullness in this exhibition.

Each designer’s work is represented by one single project, presented on an installation design by TomDavid Architecten. The layout is basic, yet provocative. A large deck covers the most of the main gallery, creating two separate levels: an upper floor for individual work, and a lower floor for exhibition material and video profiles. While the lower floor is structured along a central axis, the upper deck defines an oversized table divided by three accessible secondary cross axes. The result is an open landscape in which not only the conventional gallery wall space is replaced by table space, but the play between break and continuity is also constantly instrumentalized.

the open landscape of “Daring Design / Dwarsdesign” designed by TomDavid Architecten 

But despite the original arrangement of material, there is no real dialogue between the different work, as the (restrained) ideas investigated by (any)one designer do not resonate in the work of the others, even when they operate in the same field. The critical depth for which each designer is recognized in their individual practice is oddly absent, as the overlap between the work presented seems to be merely the tenuous idea of being either Dutch or Chinese.

The lack of critical punch and unquestioned promotion of Dutch and Chinese designers is odd for an exhibition in an architecture museum. Thus, it is revealing that “Daring Design” is actually a homecoming for a promotional exhibition that toured China (Shanghai, Beijing and Shenzhen) in 2010, but was then titled “Taking a Stance: 8 Critical Attitudes in Chinese and Dutch Architecture and Design.” In China, the original exhibition was produced by the NAi in collaboration with the DutchDFA, an organization created with the sole mandate of promoting “Dutch Design Fashion and Architecture” in emerging economies like India, Brazil, and yes, China. Despite only being listed in Rotterdam for its “financial contribution,” the DutchDFA is (still) the driving force of this exhibition. From the selection of the design fields presented that neatly fit the DutchDFA’s realm; to its tacit dual purpose of reinforcing the branding of Dutch designers as “critical pragmatics” and appealing to the enormous Chinese market by strategic flattery of its domestic design (despite of its own merits). It was not the DutchDFA that collaborated with the NAi, it was the NAi that collaborated with the DutchDFA by validating its promotional efforts.

credits for Rem Koolhaas' video profile in “Daring Design / Dwarsdesign” 

Just as “Testify! or “Dutchville” articulate the repositioning of the NAi as increasingly engaged with the social rather than the cultural, “Daring Design” articulates how architectural cultural institutions are increasingly pressured to serve the prevalent economic systems and interests. It is disingenuous to believe that this is a recent development, as the NAi has always engaged in the tacit promotion of Dutch architecture. However, the biggest distinction from then to now, -besides the obvious increase of scope from architecture to other fields of design- would be the transfer of control from the NAi to others (in this case the DDFA) in the definition of its message. Not only does it tarnish the “NAi brand,” it also risks turning the NAi into an idea-empty megaphone, used to disseminate other organizations’ agendas. 

Moreover, the NAi’s dual purpose of criticality and economic reality is already resulting in an increased tension on the institute as contradictions begin to emerge. Just as it was welcoming other disciplines in “Daring Design,” it was also fiercely opposing the inclusion of architecture into the “creative industries” category in the reorganization of the cultural sector (and allocated funding) by the current neo-liberal State Secretary Halbe Zijlstra. Nevertheless, and since almost 20% of its operating budget was at stake, the NAi still attempted to sustain an argument for architecture’s autonomy and uniqueness despite being undermined by its an exhibition in its own gallery.

Ole Bouman, director of the NAI, signs a cooperation on low cost housing agreement with Mao Daqing, vice-president of VANKE, in the presence of the Dutch State Secretary Halbe Zijlstra. photo: Xun Huang

But as the realpolitik of “Daring Design” begins to produce results, forceful arguments and combative positions are quickly forgotten, and photo ops are properly staged. Under the watchful eye of Secretary Zijstra, Ole Bouman has signed a cooperation agreement between the NAi and VANKE, the “largest real estate developer in China,” validating the view of Secretary Zijlstra and the DutchDFA on the role of cultural institutions: the facilitators of business. Now it is up to the NAi to maintain the uneasy combination between criticality and promotion by validating its own social-cultural ambitions and meaningfully impact Dutch architectural culture.

Regardless of condemnation or praise for the current positioning of the NAi, in the end the institute (or Museum of Architecture?) only reflects what Rem Koolhaas bluntly states in his DutchDFA produced video profile: “Architecture can never be [truly] critical as it always has to support someone else’s interests.”

 “They are critical, raise questions, extend boundaries and do not evade commercially or politically sensitive issues. At the same time they are realistic.” Excerpt from "Daring Design" promotional material