this year, the laureates for the prestigious architecture award “pritzker prize” is the japanese duo sanaa.
i love the visual aspect or their work, but it seems interesting that they receive the price at the same time that their new york flagship work, the new museum, is at its critically non-acclaiming height.
not that they have anything to do with the poor programming and curating of the museum (which is another debate) but is this building is not as bad as it’s content, really?
is there anybody that set a foot in there that can say it’s convenient? what about those stairs so small they would not even accommodate a 2 story residential place? what about those windows looking at walls? is that good design?
my point is that as designers, we all had great designs that were fucked up by a client at some point in order to fit whatever and i wouldn’t like to be judged based on those. but since i never been to any sanaa building except the new museum, i’m wondering if this is a “client fucked up” case or if architecture is now judged on a theoretical aspect more than a convenient one? by pp’