Comments on: Dorobanti Tower by Zaha Hadid Architects

By: Nate

Nate — Mon, 07 Mar 2011 21:54:47 +0000

Awful awful awful, this woman must get boatloads of hate mail, she is the WORST contemporary architect! Don’t put this monstrosity in Bucharest!!

By: Vincent

Vincent — Fri, 10 Dec 2010 16:34:38 +0000

SMASHING! It would put Bucharest on the map. Unfortunatly many are scared to think big….

By: Toy

Toy — Sun, 28 Jun 2009 13:08:53 +0000

amazing!..Super tare!!

By: corvin

corvin — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:31:46 +0000

Cameron Sinclair quoted by ICON Magazine: ” Inviting Zaha Hadid to talk about ethics in architecture, he said, was like getting Robert Mugabe to discuss human rights. Her practice’s architecture, he explained, was the worst sort of top-down, starchitect offering imposed by the powerful on the powerless.”
More:
“the soft-spoken Sean Griffiths moved in for the kill. Arrogance, he said, was not necessarily a bad thing; the problem with the Hadid projects was their “banality”, the fact that they were “bad work”. ”

Totally agree.

http://www.iconeye.com/index.php?view=article&catid=1%3Alatest-news&layout=news&id=3716%3Athe-barbican-debate-can-good-design-change-the-world&option=com_content&Itemid=18

By: romanian architect

romanian architect — Sat, 11 Apr 2009 04:44:55 +0000

@ordener
You are partially right in being critic to the Romanian architectural contemporary production. I don’t want to try to explain you what it must be obvious for a more attentive look, which it is not your case your for sure. I say partially because the “visible” architecture, to use Alvaro Siza words, is still too much “economically standard”, as it was in most big citied of the world in post-war period – and we are now in a kind of post-war period; this can be seen in all post-comunist countries with very few exceptions. If you could be in contact with the “non-visible” Romanian architecture you could find out a lot of examples of “best architecture”, this is for sure.
But as the Americans bombed Belgrad and said, after the crime, sorry for not knowing very well the local situation, I understand people who consider Bucharest existing structures as pieces of shit are ready to bomb the Romanian capital with any kind of architecture icons and ready to say after sorry as a formal excuse, only because it is polite.
I invite you to come in our beautiful city and I will show you a lot of things you cannot see anywhere in the world.
If you accept Globalization as a fatal reality we have to accept in the same time the principle of subsidiarity, all of us. This means the respect of local particularities, and if you are an architect who respect yourself and respect what you do, you have to be contextual, as most part of today “stars” are – I am thinking to Renzo Piano in particular. My critic position to Mrs.Zaha Hadid proposal was that: no relation with the context of the city. And in direct relation with that the fact an architect of so “dimension” could do a proposal without taking in consideration this context. Architecture is not something which can be put anywhere. Do you think Corbu’s Chapelle in other place than Ronchamp ? or Louis Kahn House of Parliament in other place than Dacca ? Or do you think Mrs. Zaha Hadid proposal would be well placed near the Piccadilly Circus, not just in the plaza but a little “near” it ?
But you said already “sorry” so I say also “sorry” and keep my invitation.: Come to Bucharest and after a cup of Turkish coffee I will accompany you in a beautiful trip around the city. Friendly arch.Dan Agent

By: corvin

corvin — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 14:18:42 +0000

for further aknowlegements, please visit:
http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_a_century_of_our_past_and_our_european_identity.html

By: Dude from Bucharest

Dude from Bucharest — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 21:47:12 +0000

Just see the location for yourselves:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=rd74wsk57jyn&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=42762378&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&where1=bucuresti&encType=1

“Show me the money” first, architecture after…
Sure, it’s such a great shape, we’ll love it from the other part of the city.
You can’t call yourself an architect and say: “Ok, this is right”.

Sorry

By: Ordener

Ordener — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:39:43 +0000

sorry for the tipo.
to continue:
… in my opinion are not the most succesful approaches. there are some fine examples of mixing old and new (skyscraped included) in europe. my point is that this proposal has potential and could work with some refinements.
i must apologize for my words in previous posts. just recently i have encountered a somewhat similar situation in my work, and the frustration got the better of me.
as for my view on romanian architecture in europe i stand by my opinion: it is completely absent.

By: Ordener

Ordener — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:29:02 +0000

to be honest, i’m not a big fan of mrs. hadid’s architecture (with a few exceptions). however, compared to the gaudy and akwardly proportioned recent buildings in bucharest, this is a very interesting proposal.
i’m also not familiar with the exact location of this building and must accept mr. udrescu’s analysis of the traffic situation. however, this problem is too complex to solve just by moving the tower in a less crowded part of the city. you are probably thinking la defense in paris or the city in london, which in my oppinion

By: corvin

corvin — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:28:46 +0000

These days some architects achieve similar status to rock stars and it is not for the best of Architecture. In the age of marketing, Fame and True Value don’t go together necessarily anymore and the simple fact that one architect is in his field as famous as Paris Hilton or Britney are, makes me fear it is the same kind of striking aggressive self promoting skills that brought him(or her) there and not the skills required to create beautiful livable cities… Sounds a little harsh but the “Dorobanti Tower” only deepens my worries. To my taste it is so far to timeless architecture as Britney is to true music. A glitzy carcase.
What’s the meaning of the arabian-like screen on the facade? A left-over from an unbuilt project in the Emirates? Let’s just fly it over to Bucharest!
It is true that the city hall in the first place shouldn’t have let the developer even think of such a possibility but, as it is obvious, in Bucharest, greed, corruption and lack of culture are the job description of city planners and authorities… still, this doesn’t mean a big name in architecture has to be greedy and build whatever on historical sites just because the lack of authority transformed poor old Bucharest into a no man’s land. There are plenty of other places in Bucharest to build even higher, not in a charming neighborhood.

Really sorry for the non academic sound of my reply but I also happens to live here and I love and hate Bucharest but the parts I love are exactly the ones that projects like Mrs. Hadid’s are taking away. I used to come from far just to walk in that neighborhood. It would be quite sad not to have where to come to.

Highest regards to all, including the ones who enjoy a different point of view.

By: Bogdan Udrescu

Bogdan Udrescu — Sat, 14 Feb 2009 20:51:56 +0000

Ordener – you are out of topic for sure!

You realy can’t get the little idea that WE DO LIKE THE BIG D@#$. Even us, the retarded romanians like a nice falus, wraped in a great material. We are too sick of cubes and stupid shapes.

But the big one it’s missplaced. I’ve made a little analisys there and pinpointed some major flaws in the utilisation of the great building in that specifical spot.

It is an old and protected area where u don’t build as u are on a great plain with nothing around. The buildings there have history and can and will be not affected, both functional and visual by such a falic image. The nice d#$@ should be built in some other area of Bucharest. There are some that can and will allow it to grow and flourish with no affect on the vecinity. And where streets have more then 1 band per direction. Where parkings can be built without any problem – like demolishing buildings 100-150 years old.

Understant that: we like our old building and we do not agree all the time with the idea of demolishing for the new and clean things. Past is important and we embrasse it. History is made of bricks too.

By: Ordener

Ordener — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 18:57:27 +0000

so, if zaha’s project is not good enough why don’t you come up with a better one? in our part of the world architecture is judged mainly by the products, rather than the words of the architects. i suppose that is not the case in bucharest, where there are, as it seems, lots of architects who talk too much and build nothing.
also, mr romanian (a)rchitect and arch, i would like you to point me to a major architectural practice in romania, one that has a portofolio outside of bucharest.
best regards

By: arch

arch — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 08:39:32 +0000

When I think that once I really appreciated the the way Zaha Hadid aproaches a project… When I think that I considered that the romanian architects “prostitute” themselves for the money of the investors… hmmm, it seems they are not the only ones, it also happens where you wouldn’t expect… the only difference would be the nicer skin (and still, Zaha Hadid wasn’t famous for the special skin of her buildings)…

nice architectural object to enrich the portfolio… not nice the impact of this Gulliver building in the land of the midgets of a charming and well defined urban tissue.
I wonder if the investors would pay for some new trains for the subway sistem, trains to bring to work and than back home the huge amount of people who would come to work.

action generates reaction. let’s make an exercise and imagine the reaction generated by this diamond without a ring…

PS:I totally disagree Ordener.

By: romanian rchitect

romanian rchitect — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 22:27:34 +0000

Perfectly agree with you dear colleague Bogdan Udrescu. The problem is in fact the fit of this architectural object with the place it was presented to be put in. It’s like putting the Koh-I-Noor diamond on a wedding ring. Koh-I-Noor is beautifull, agree, but it is not auitable for a wedding ring. And this is not because the ring is a peace of sheet, like some kind Bucharest visitors wrote above, but because it is a obvious misfit of scale. Polish architects are trying to cover the Culture Palace in the center of Warsaw by tall buildings. Maybe it will be a good idea to put around the Parliament House of Ceausescu some very tall buildings, I don’t know … But the diamond-like building of Mrs.Zaha Hadid wants itself to be THE ONE, to become eventually the icon of Bucharest. Russians gave to Bucharest as a gift, in the fifties, as an ultimate expression of their new revolutionary spirit, the “Casa Scanteii” building. Does Bucharest need a new expression of the ultimate architecture of the moment, through the Dorobantzi Tower of Mrs Hadid, as a gift of the new masters ? I really think that Bucharest can receive without problem tall buildings, but not anywhere, anyhow. There exists an altimetry survey which establish very clear where and how much it is good to built high buildings in Bucharest. Why obscure investors try to built without observing Bucharest urban rules, why architects as Zaha Hadid now and few months ago Helmuth Jahn propose structres without any links wth the existing Bucharest structures ? Why still the adminisration of Bucharest didn’t found the way to offer to investors ways to make money observing in the same time the public interest of Bucharest ? No answers for the moment. What is sure: Bucharest is a beautiful city, with a dramatic history and which needs a very attentive treatment from the architects from anywhere.

By: Bogdan Udrescu

Bogdan Udrescu — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 12:04:51 +0000

I think the comments from outside romania are indeed in lack of information.

It’s a very nice project. VERY NICE INDEED. BUT!!!!!! You CAN NOT put something this huge in a place where you can’t dissipate the amount of cars that the funtion will atract. U can’t and it’s unwise to place it there.

First of all u must understant that the roads of Bucharest are already full of cars that make around 1.30 hours for a simple trip from a part of Bucharest in diagonal… At least! U must understant that the explosion of owned cars on the roads of this city is the biggest problem u have to deal with in the first place. Then the amount of people that will work in there. And the amount of people that will visit the place.

I appreciate that the flux of humans/day will be around 10.000. In this small intersection… IT’S TOO MUCH. How many cars u’ll have because of this? around 1000? Coming and going. At least. Where are u gonna park them? Bucharest has almost no parking buildings in the downtown. And anywhere else. The romanians have discovered the automobile and the accesibility to it in the last 5 years. Since the banks have loosened the loans.

If someone wants to build something this representative, he/she must see also the downsides that are coming with it.

I love the image, since i’m a person with some education. Yeah, i’m an architect. Romanian. And i’m thrilled that Zaha Hadid & comp has a project for this town / country. Thou i think she/them must think more the placement of this. Ask the local people. Ask us, the architects from here what we think it’s better for this town. And WHERE. Ask the local authorities. They have some people that know their job. Ask the Architecture University too. They surely know better then anyone else.

Many thanks! We love your work. And we gladly welcome you here! We want to learn from you and the other important architects around the globe.

Have fun!

By: iolanda costide (stranescu)

iolanda costide (stranescu) — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:34:13 +0000

Pity this city, defaced by Ceausescu, wild development, approved by corrupt officials, in the past 15 years, and lack of funding to refurbish the historic architecture, spanning from medieval times to wonderful modern movement examples (the latter the object of an exhibition at the RIBA!) Please design a building with reference to the context, as I know you can. From a former colleague at the AA

By: Ordener

Ordener — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 21:09:06 +0000

Amazingly retarded commments from Romanian architects. After having lived in Bucharest for several years I was wondering why there’s no effort to improve such a drab city. I see that one of the causes is this attitude of misplaced respect for a built environment that clearly doesn’t deserve it. It’s pretty obvious why modern Romanian architecture is nonexistent.
Get another job, guys and gals, and leave architecture to people who know their trade.

By: no

no — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 20:18:58 +0000

What does a diamond mean in a field of shit?Whould you bend and pick it up?A question for anybody who does think a little above the contextual reality of Bucharest…or to rephrase-it, why don’t we allow a landmark in a town with no rules?Anybody builds any way they want, stupid architecture everywhere, nobody said anything, only silent and poor voices lost in the mist, and now…one of the best architects in the world wants to build something remarcable…and the only mistake made here is that she did request a public opinion.

By: romanian rchitect

romanian rchitect — Sun, 01 Feb 2009 06:34:44 +0000

Dear Elle. My comment seems to be wrongly interpreted by you. I didn’t intended to say anything wrong about Dubai. I only said two things with no relation of each other: 1. Bucharest is not Abu Dabi (if Abu Dabi is a place for such buildings and I think they are good there and I like how Abu Dabi looks like, being a very new sructure with practically no past, Bucharest is an European capital, very powefully structured by its traditions and such a building will destroy it for sure) and 2. We Romanians we are not living in trees wich wanted to be a metaphor for people without power to decide themselves their future and what is good for them. I want also to thank you for the words about marvelous Bucharest: sometimes people coming from other countries, like you, are able to “see” better the beauties of Bucharest. Thank you.

By: se_cris

se_cris — Sat, 31 Jan 2009 22:46:45 +0000

wow…first time when ppl doesnt confuse Bucharest with Budapest. Or they did???
l wonder what would be usefull for another extra-large 5 stars hotel in same city, except to flater how much money some developers can spend while the others scratch the cheese???
Deffintely the architect is less responsable for an asked service than a sick system that could induce such a stupid client-request.
It’s said that “time heals”, so let’s see what will happen and “what the doctor will say” This “spectacle” is no more hillarious but became quite funny.