This document provides biographical information about Zaha Hadid, including that she was born in Iraq and educated in England and Lebanon. It then discusses some of her major works like the Vitra Fire Station in Germany and the Riverside Museum in Glasgow. The document also discusses her use of parametric design software CATIA. It provides an overview of criticism of iconic architecture by Hadid and other architects, arguing it ignores issues like environmental sustainability and fails to create coherent urban spaces. It analyzes some of Hadid's buildings like the Innovation Tower in Hong Kong as examples of this.

1. Zaha HADID
ARCH 417
December 2, 2015

2. Zaha HADID (1950—)
• born in Baghdad, Iraq to a wealthy and
politically prominent family
• grew up in a modernist house
• Baghdad was a cultural and intellectual center
until the triumph of the Baath party in 1963

3. Zaha HADID (1950—)
• educated at boarding schools in England and
Switzerland
• studied mathematics at the American
University in Beirut beginning in 1968
(another colorful, cosmopolitan center until
civil war began in 1975)

4. • graduate study at A.A. in London
(ArchitecturalAssociation School of
Architecture): faculty at the time including
Leon Krier, BernardTschumi, Rem Koolhaas,
Elia Zenghelis, and Daniel Libeskind

5. WORKS
• Vitra Fire Station,Weil am Rhein, Germany (1994)
• Riverside Museum, Glasgow, Scotland (2011)
• Galaxy Soho, Beijing, China (2012)
• Aquatics Centre, London, England (2012)

6. Vitra Fire Station
Weil am Rhein, Germany (1994)

7. IBA Housing
Berlin, Germany (1993)

8. overview of solution for odd sliver of a site: 3-storey block
with 8-storey tower at the corner

9. corner tower with
wedge-shaped lofts

13. Riverside Museum
Glasgow, Scotland (2011)

21. Galaxy Soho
Beijing, China (2012)
https://vimeo.com/58126495
"Galaxy Soho," by DanielChung

22. Aquatics Centre
London, England (2012)

27. InnovationTower
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
(2013)

44. CATIA
Computer-AidedThree-
Dimensional Interactive
Application

45. CATIA
• launched in 1981 as a
separate division of
Dassault Aviation, to
enable aeronautic
design in 3 dimensions

46. CATIA in the 1980s
• the platform goes
through a rapid series
of iterations as new
clients come on board,
including BMW,
Mercedes, and Boeing
CATIA v. 3, released 1988

47. other significant milestones
• 2003 partnership withGehryTechnologies
• new clients including AirBus,Toyota andVolvo
• acquisition of competitors such as SolidWorks
and ICEM (surface modeling)

48. GehryTechnologies
• builds platform called
Digital Project
• acquired byTrimble in
2014

56. Steven Cohen commissioned the racing
yacht, known as "Foggy."
Argentine naval architect Germán Frers
was brought in to supervise: "Don't let
me get too crazy.The boat has to work."
Frers wanted a light, high-tech material
for speed; Gehry wanted traditional
larch wood.
Steve White, owner of Brooklin Boat
Yard in Maine, specializes in "cold
molding," a modern process that
involves sandwiching wood around a
high-tech core.

59. Gehry at the wheel and owner
Steve Cohen at his right.

62. Gehry in the ship's saloon with German Frers.

70. fashion, beauty, art and architecture:
the LVMH mix

71. Future architects will look back at our times astounded by our confusions,
gullibility and inability to exercise critical judgement.This is especially true in
relation to the current fads for icons and Parametricism, such as the works of
Frank Gehry and Zaha Hadid. But at least some of these have a sort of energy
and sculptural seductiveness; the admiration of non-architects is
understandable.Worse is the Postmodern penchant for deriving design from
preposterous concepts, resulting in clumsy works like Rem Koolhaas's CCTV
in Beijing and Peter Eisenman's City of Culture in Santiago de Compostela.
The flaws in all this stuff, Parametricist and Postmodern alike, and its utter
irrelevance to the urgent problems of our times, are so obvious future
generations will be aghast it was ever taken seriously, let alone mistaken for
heralds of the future.

72. The current emphasis on exaggerated sculptural form -- like architecture derived to
exemplify a theoretical position, accommodate spurious scenarios or generated
aleatorically from sequences of formalist moves (now aka 'scripts') -- dates back to
the 1980s and its elevated acclaim for 'experimental' paper architecture.This era saw
the breakdown of the simple certainties of modern architecture, boredom with the
arid abstraction of its forms, the broadening of critical perspectives (starting with
post-colonial and feminist critiques, but eventually degenerating into turgid
theorising) and the turn to art for inspiration as well as to theory and scenarios.Yet
from this pluralist smorgasbord nothing appeared that was likely to prove truly
satisfying over the long term nor relevant to the increasingly pressing problems we
face. Instead it all deteriorated into a quest not for lasting relevance but rather for
immediate impact and exciting novelty in dynamically gesturing form -- much of it
reminiscent of the artwork of record covers or buildings in sci-fi films of the decades
before -- that was assumed to be expressive of the Zeitgeist.

73. In due course this formal posturing was both spurred on and rendered realisable by
the power of the computer and its various new software packages bringing the
capacity to execute more or less any shape, budget permitting. But nobody thought
to ask the obvious question as to which of these forms might be relevant to
architecture, and not only in terms of functionality, which tolerantly accommodates
itself to almost anything. Particularly apt would have been to question which forms
elicit relationships -- with us humans, both perceptually and psychologically, as well
as with other buildings and external space -- and so can aggregate into satisfactory
urban fabric in which we can feel at home. (There are, of course, perverse
Postmodernists who claim this need not be a concern of architecture and, almost
unbelievably, still get away with it.)

74. Various very unconvincing justifications are offered for pursuing icons and
Parametricism, beyond the whizzy encapsulation of the Zeitgeist. Still commonly
voiced in parts of academe is what used to be called, particularly in relation to High-
Tech architecture, the technological imperative: an obligation to explore and exploit
what technology makes possible. But, quite apart from the destruction of the planet
wrought by such lack of discrimination, the buildings they endorse are not
technologically advanced, particularly in terms of such things as resource efficiency
and environmental performance, both of which they are particularly bad at.1 Others
argue that these complex forms, particularly in the spatial fluidity they afford, are
required by new social programmes.
A simple comparison of two buildings for the London 2012 Olympics makes this clear.
Zaha Hadid Architects'Aquatics Centre and HopkinsArchitects'Velodrome have roofs of
similar area, yet the former required (3,000 tonnes of structural steel to support it and
the latter only 1,000 tonnes. And the shape of the latter channelled air movements so
that the mechanical ventilation is very efficient (AR September 2012).

75. But, besides the period of new social programmes necessitating new functional types
being in the past, spatially and functionally these buildings achieve nothing that Aalto
and Niemeyer, for instance, didn't do with much greater precision and economy.Yet
others justify these biomorphic forms in terms of biophilia or biomimicry,
preposterous claims because neither laudable approach involves merely mimicking
nature's forms. Instead biophilia implies revering planetary life in preserving and
highlighting the presence of nature itself, and seeking a regenerative symbiosis with
its species and processes -- not just to benefit the planet but human physical and
mental health too. And biomimicry involves learning from the myriad ways nature
works and the strategies and devices it has evolved to adapt itself to diverse and
challenging conditions. No equivalent of either approach is found in icons and
Parametricism.

76. Before cutting short what could be a long litany of such criticisms, let's refute the
outrageous claim that these represent the future of architecture. Such is the thesis of,
for instance, Patrik Schumacher in his epic two-volume tomeThe Autopoeisis of
Architecture that seeks to become the bible for Parametricism, the term he
popularised. Parametricism cannot become the long-term successor to Modernism
because, like nearly all starchitecture, it ignores and exacerbates the urgent
challenges of our time, such as the environmental crisis and the need to reintegrate
ruptured urban fabric. Instead it is a perfect example of what Marshall McLuhan aptly
termed a sunset effect, an exaggerated caricature of now obsolete characteristics of
a waning era. Parametricism and icons exacerbate rather than solve the main failings
of modern architecture, and not only because they are energy-profligate, anti-urban,
stand-alone buildings that fail to define urban space and defy relationship with other
buildings and humans.

77. For instance, Functionalism (a central tenet of modern architecture) focused on
human action as objectively observed, so ignoring (even denying) the subjective
dimensions of the psyche and thus denigrating a key part of our fundamental
humanity.This marginalisation of our humanity is now taken to an extreme by
Parametricism, icons and so on. Another failing of modern architecture also now
pushed to an extreme, is the over-emphasis on sculptural form, so neglecting such
things as the pattern and rhythm of facade articulation.Yet these are essential to
creating a sense of place and investing buildings with a liveliness that helps us relate
to them.2 Parametricism and icons thus in reality climax and say goodbye to certain
pathologies of modern architecture -- and so have absolutely nothing to do with the
future.This point cannot be over-stressed.

78. Yet it must also be emphasised strongly that none of the above comment should be
mistaken for a rejection of the parametric software and modelling used to generate
the forms of these buildings and then execute them.These are powerfully useful tools
crucial to the future of architecture when in the hands of the discriminating and when
put to good purpose, such as to explore new formal topologies that bring new
efficiencies and economies and achieve seemingly organic levels of synthesis of all
the factors shaping a design. Similarly no criticism is implied of biophilia and
biomimicry, both of which are vitally pertinent, in ethos and strategy, to a sustainable
future.

79. That starchitecture is a sunset effect exaggeration of Modernist pathologies is clearly
demonstrated by the work of Zaha Hadid and Frank Gehry, particularly the
InnovationTower in Kowloon and the Pondation LouisVuitton in Paris (AK, November
2014). Both arrogantly flaunt their refusal to defer to local context and its codes
(implicit as well as explicit), announcing instead that the supposed right to ego-
expression of a starchitect trounces all such decencies. At the end of (terminating
would be too purposive a term) a sequence of open spaces framed by reticent brick
buildings that forms the spine of the Kowloon campus, the gleaming white
InnovationTower resembles an icy and fissured asteroid that has smashed down from
outer space -- but sadly this brutally intrusive object will not be melting away. Besides
there being no relationship between the building and its setting, there is none
between its outside and inside, nor between the internal movement sequence and
interior spaces.

80. Without evident logic to its external form, nothing suggests it was designed for this
site: around it is useless amorphous space, some of it concrete ramps, and the
transition between the concrete base and the enamelled steel-clad superstructure is
excruciatingly ill-considered.Then on entering the building, you are confronted by
grand long escalators that climb to not the tall volume revealing the whole interior
that you'd expect; instead you are confronted by a blank wall across a cramped space.
What an anti-climax. Navigating past this leads eventually to some cramped tall
volumes arbitrarily positioned within the movement sequence (and in one of which
the fenestration is quite unrelated to the interior volume) and a central stair and
circulation hall.This is of dynamically fluid form, but the stair is much too narrow to
permit people moving up and down to comfortably pass. Exploring further reveals
that the external form does not relate to the rooms inside; these are clumsily sliced
up in the residual space between external skin and corridors.

81. So it goes on: besides exaggerating the flaws of Modernism, the InnovationTower
also ignores its key virtues, such as in devising designs that are not only tailored to
function but that also unfold and reveal themselves along a processional sequence
that entices you ever forward.Visiting the building a week after completion, its
internal glazed partitions were already plastered with paper as students sought to
gain some privacy and render them functional. But at least the white painted
concrete, unprotected by copings or rails even when forming balustrades, were not
yet grubby, as they must soon become. But to be fair, the InnovationTower seems an
exceptionally weak example of Hadid's newer works.The recent opera houses in
Guangzhou, China, and Baku, Azerbaijan, appear seductively fluid and sleek in
photographs. On the other hand, the Sky SOHO project for Shanghai seems just
another set of conventional slabs styled up with rounded ends, curving Unking
bridges and what looks like the arbitrarily applied chrome trim found on a cheap
toaster. Styled is the key word, these arbitrary and scaleless streamlined forms and
trim are a far cry from the disciplined synthesis associated with quality design of any
sort, including architecture.

82. A similar arrogant disregard for setting is displayed by Gehry's Fondation Louis
Vuitton in Paris's Bois de Boulogne. Here the stipulation that construction be limited
to two storeys to preserve the sense of uninterrupted woodland when overlooking
the area might be technically honoured but is flagrantly disregarded in spirit,
exemplifying a starchitect's sense of an egotistical right to conspicuous self-
expression that should trounce the desires and decorum of the collective.The result is
an explicit monument to the anti-democratic, neoliberal ethos of our increasingly
unequal times when rich individuals and corporations feel entitled to trample us with
architectural bring.

83. Here though, there is a major element that is technically accomplished, if also
essentially gratuitous -- the huge, gossamer and geometrically disciplined, fritted
glass sails that float above and obscure the solidly enclosed part of the building. In
their minimalist detail and refined elegance these are clearly the work of the French
engineering and architectural firm RFR; it has long been exploring bent glass, a much
more difficult material to handle than malleable sheet metal claddings, and has the
mathematical skills to refine the geometry. It is not clear though where the role of
RFR begins and ends as the chaos of struts leaning out at various angles to support
these sails looks less like RFR and more typical of Gehry -- whose randomly collagist
approach to design is clearly evident in the interiors planned without any evident
discipline and logic.The contrast between the diaphanous sails and the lumpy
building proper is almost suggestive of butterflies hovering over a turd --You're right
Mr Gehry, much contemporary architecture is shit.

84. Comparing the Fondation LouisVuitton with the Biomuseum in Panama reveals the
constraints of a more normal budget and emphasises the spectacular extravagance of
the Paris building. In the light of current circumstances and the many deserved
criticisms already offered, are such buildings really worthy of adulation and
declarations of architectural genius? Is some such realisation behind the insecurity
that makes Gehry so touchy.Yet in time, and especially with the benefit of an inspired
curatorial agenda, the Fondation promises to become a treasured part of Paris -- like
the EiffelTower. But like the latter, is it really architecture or, like the Bilbao
Guggenheim, a species of usable sculpture?Architecture, once the encompassing
mother of the arts, completed by sculpture and painting, and carrier of cultural
significance and meaning, has become reduced to superfluous spectacle.

85. More than that, the attention attracted by works like those of Gehry and Hadid
impedes the rethinking of architecture that is so desperately overdue. We need to
move on from the adolescent search for momentary excitement and spectacle to a
more mature architecture of synthesis and subtlety that reveals its understated riches
over time. But that would entail architectural academe and media developing a much
more searchingly critical attitude to architecture and how it is assessed so as to help
us move forward to an architecture relevant and adequate to the manifold challenges
of our time.To do this it also would help if we ignored, and starved of the oxygen of
publicity, the architectural nonsense too long applauded in our times.