Stepping away from the function of the Oblique (so that I can zoom out from the re-con), I was looking for a HTS book in the library today and saw a book just on FOA’s Yokohama terminal. Skimming through it one of the things that I know I am taking with me to formulate the brief is how the utopian theory was lost when the means of representation changed. This to me is when the drawing shifted to the diagram. Below are a few extracts from the book which illustrates what happens when the form is dictated by the diagram an how the cultural resonances (which they seem to say there was none) are lost.
What is most interesting about the development of the competition is precisely how factual and “meaning-less” the sequence of decisions that led into the project was, despite the many associations that have been made between the project and certain philosophical, cultural or formal trends.
We now see the meaninglessness as the order that builds multiple cultural resonances.
Once we decided that the building would be a warped surface, we needed to produce an argument of consistency between the no-return diagram (provided the building with a particular spatial performance) and the surface as a geometrical argument.
In many respects we actually feel closer to Mies than to the architects that we are often compared to in virtue of formal similarities; it is his attitude of uncompromising commitment to the organisation and matter, his exploitation of contemporary construction technologies without formal prejudices, combined with his capacity to obtain buildings of piercing beauty that interest us, more than the analogy of formal results.