What do you think?
Rate this book
Karščiuojantis Niujorkas: retroaktyvus manifestas Manhatanui
Niujorkas kaip metafora. Kaip paskutinė Vakarų civilizacijos stadija. Kaip Rozetos akmuo.
1978 m. pirmą kartą pasirodžiusi knyga Karščiuojantis Niujorkas: retroaktyvus manifestas Manhatanui yra vienas svarbiausių XX a. antros pusės architektūros tekstų. Klasika tapusi ir daugybę kūrėjų įkvėpusi knyga išgarsino ir patį Remą Koolhaasą – olandų architektą, „Office for Metropolitan Architecture“ (OMA) bendraįkūrėjį, šiandien pelnytai vadinamą legenda.
Savo žvilgsnį Remas Koolhaasas kreipia į Manhataną kaip architektūrinės ekstazės šaltinį. Tai – nuo žmonių ir naujų technologijų srauto sproginėjanti erdvė, pagimdžiusi revoliucinį gyvenimo būdą: grūsties kultūrą. Gretindamas iš pažiūros nesugretinamus Niujorko istorijos bei plėtros fragmentus, savo vizionieriškoje, architektūrine logika grįstoje ir intelektualinį iššūkį siūlančioje knygoje Koolhaasas kalba apie miesto konstravimą montažo principu, vis iš naujo permąstydamas metropolio kultūros bei architektūros saitus.
1978 m. pirmą kartą pasirodžiusi knyga Karščiuojantis Niujorkas: retroaktyvus manifestas Manhatanui yra vienas svarbiausių XX a. antros pusės architektūros tekstų. Klasika tapusi ir daugybę kūrėjų įkvėpusi knyga išgarsino ir patį Remą Koolhaasą – olandų architektą, „Office for Metropolitan Architecture“ (OMA) bendraįkūrėjį, šiandien pelnytai vadinamą legenda.
Savo žvilgsnį Remas Koolhaasas kreipia į Manhataną kaip architektūrinės ekstazės šaltinį. Tai – nuo žmonių ir naujų technologijų srauto sproginėjanti erdvė, pagimdžiusi revoliucinį gyvenimo būdą: grūsties kultūrą. Gretindamas iš pažiūros nesugretinamus Niujorko istorijos bei plėtros fragmentus, savo vizionieriškoje, architektūrine logika grįstoje ir intelektualinį iššūkį siūlančioje knygoje Koolhaasas kalba apie miesto konstravimą montažo principu, vis iš naujo permąstydamas metropolio kultūros bei architektūros saitus.
392 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1978
533 people are currently reading
7869 people want to read
About the author
Rem Koolhaas
161 books307 followersRemment Lucas Koolhaas is a Dutch architect, architectural theorist, urbanist and Professor in Practice of Architecture and Urban Design at the Graduate School of Design at Harvard University. He is often cited as a representative of Deconstructivism and is the author of Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan.
He is seen by some as one of the significant architectural thinkers and urbanists of his generation, by others as a self-important iconoclast. In 2000, Rem Koolhaas won the Pritzker Prize. In 2008, Time put him in their top 100 of The World's Most Influential People. He was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2014.
He is seen by some as one of the significant architectural thinkers and urbanists of his generation, by others as a self-important iconoclast. In 2000, Rem Koolhaas won the Pritzker Prize. In 2008, Time put him in their top 100 of The World's Most Influential People. He was elected to the American Philosophical Society in 2014.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 155 reviews
June 2, 2008
pure unadulterated architectural self-aggrandizement. completely pretentious crap. some interesting material, but you have to wade through every other sentence of bullshit metaphysical declarations that this guy just pulls out of his ass.
July 17, 2017
I remember reading 'The Generic City' by Rem Koolhaas (pdf) when I was a masters student and greatly enjoying it. His analysis is entertainingly idiosyncratic and yet curiously illuminating. His selective account of New York’s architectural history is likewise fragmentary yet instructive. It contains a wealth of strange anecdotes, a forest of illustrations, and several underlying theses about the nature of New York City. Inevitably, the most memorable elements are weird details, such as Gaudi’s never-built skyscraper (pictured here), everything about Dreamland on Coney Island (which deserves the many pages Koolhaas devotes to it), the 1931 costume ball at which architects dressed as the skyscrapers they designed, and Dali’s arrival in NYC:
Theoretical points are raised in a similar, vaguely impressionistic fashion. The concept of ‘reality shortage’ was particularly intriguing, as were the culture of congestion and the analogy between hotels and movies. Much like Lefebvre in Writings on Cities, Koolhaas is no great fan of Le Corbusier, although he discusses his views on New York in some detail. This description is both acute and comical:
The most alarming unrealised proposal in the whole book, though, is Harvey Wiley Corbett’s vision of traffic planning. He thought not only that pedestrians should be relegated to first floor walkways to leave the entire street for cars, but that the front of buildings should be cut into for additional parking and traffic lanes, culminating in twenty lane streets. Can you imagine if this dystopian scheme had materialised.
'delirious new york' is by no means a systematic or full history of its architecture and planning, nor is it meant to be. Koolhaas provides detailed insight into the antecedents of iconic buildings such as the Rockefeller Centre and a real sense of the spirit of the city in the first three decades of the twentieth century, in his inimitable style.
For shock effect on arrival, Dali decides to realise - retroactively - a Surrealist project originally intended to upset Paris, the baking of ‘a fifteen metre loaf of bread’.
The baker on board ship offers to bake a version 2.5 metres long (the maximum capacity of the ship’s oven) with ‘a wood armature inside it so that it would not break into two the moment it began to dry…’ But when Dali disembarks an ‘utterly disconcerting thing’ happens: “Not one of the reporters [of a waiting group] asked me a single question about the loaf of bread which I held conspicuously during the whole interview either in my arm or resting on the ground as if it was a large cane…”
The disconcerter disconcerted: Dali’s first discovery is that in Manhattan Surrealism is invisible. His Reinforced Dough is just another false act among the multitudes.
Theoretical points are raised in a similar, vaguely impressionistic fashion. The concept of ‘reality shortage’ was particularly intriguing, as were the culture of congestion and the analogy between hotels and movies. Much like Lefebvre in Writings on Cities, Koolhaas is no great fan of Le Corbusier, although he discusses his views on New York in some detail. This description is both acute and comical:
The Parisian authorities do not take the Radiant proposal seriously. Their rejection forces Le Corbusier to become a Cartesian carpetbagger, peddling his horizontal glass Skyscraper like a furious prince dragging a colossal glass slipper on an Odyssey from Metropolis to Metropolis.
The most alarming unrealised proposal in the whole book, though, is Harvey Wiley Corbett’s vision of traffic planning. He thought not only that pedestrians should be relegated to first floor walkways to leave the entire street for cars, but that the front of buildings should be cut into for additional parking and traffic lanes, culminating in twenty lane streets. Can you imagine if this dystopian scheme had materialised.
'delirious new york' is by no means a systematic or full history of its architecture and planning, nor is it meant to be. Koolhaas provides detailed insight into the antecedents of iconic buildings such as the Rockefeller Centre and a real sense of the spirit of the city in the first three decades of the twentieth century, in his inimitable style.
June 25, 2019
this bastard wrote some truly perfect sentences and I'll never forgive him for it...he's dutch too!!!
December 30, 2013
This was a wonderful book. Full of great ideas, telling wonderful stories, giving great descriptions. But what was it about? After I read it a dozen more times, I might be able to tell you.
Some clues:
It is about Manhattanism. Manhattanism was defined concisely once within the book, but I can't find it again. Basically it is a culture of congestion, motivated by greed, which occasionally & accidentally produces wonderful architecture.
Two constrictions define Manhattan. The grid map of 1811, which imposed the street/avenue grid, which enabled the greatest concentration of buildings with no thought of how it would look or feel, with no thought of pleasure (the rivers were to provide the recreation - Central Park was an afterthought), with no regard for the existing geography. It was purely man over nature.
The second constriction was the 1916 Zoning Law, which prescribed how high a building could be in relation to its footprint. It was created in response to the realization that buildings produce shadows and that people seek to have access to light and air.
The book describes several architectural responses to these constrictions. The writing is very droll and clever. Even if you don't care about architecture, the writing is a lot of fun. The first response was Coney Island, a testing ground for how to bring nature back to the city. The inhabitants of Manhattan instantly discovered that they missed nature and wanted to recreate it. The contemporary Coney Island is a pale shadow of the previous Coney Island.
The second project described is the first Waldorf-Astoria hotel, its geographic replacement - The Empire State building, and its recreation, the current Waldorf-Astoria hotel. The story of the construction of the Empire State Building justifies reading the entire book.
A third project is the Downtown Athletic Club. This so fantastic I can't believe it is true. I don't know whether it was ever built, if it was occupied, or how long it existed. But even if only a dream, it would be considered too unreal to exist.
A fourth project is the Rockefeller Center. Bigger, bigger, bigger. Unconstrained by budget, designed by committee. How could it be so good? Find out here.
Less entertaining were the visits by Dali and Le Corbusier and their attempts to "save" Manhattan. I must admit this part of the book held less fascination for me. Dali is incomprehensible (is the story of the Macy's display true?). Le Corbusier diagnosed the skyscrapers as being too small and thought the city should have a much bigger scale.
What interested me most though was the story of the evolution of the skyscraper. It was enabled by the elevator. This enabled a theoretically infinite duplication of a footprint. My favorite description in the book is the skyscraper as an extrusion. Every floor exactly as the previous floor.
But soon elevators dominated the building and skyscrapers became pyramids with a core of elevators that decreased in area as they ascended. The offices and apartments simply encased the elevators.
But when air conditioning became a possibility (recreating nature within the building), they no longer needed to be external pyramids. They could again become perfect extrusions. Within the confines of the 1916 Zoning law, they had to expand their footprint to gain more vertical space. Up, up, up. Not tall enough!
Add to this the infinite need for rich white men to display phallic prowess, and you've got Manhattan!
I love Manhattan and I can't wait to get back and see some of these sights. I am just as impressed as anyone.
Some clues:
It is about Manhattanism. Manhattanism was defined concisely once within the book, but I can't find it again. Basically it is a culture of congestion, motivated by greed, which occasionally & accidentally produces wonderful architecture.
Two constrictions define Manhattan. The grid map of 1811, which imposed the street/avenue grid, which enabled the greatest concentration of buildings with no thought of how it would look or feel, with no thought of pleasure (the rivers were to provide the recreation - Central Park was an afterthought), with no regard for the existing geography. It was purely man over nature.
The second constriction was the 1916 Zoning Law, which prescribed how high a building could be in relation to its footprint. It was created in response to the realization that buildings produce shadows and that people seek to have access to light and air.
The book describes several architectural responses to these constrictions. The writing is very droll and clever. Even if you don't care about architecture, the writing is a lot of fun. The first response was Coney Island, a testing ground for how to bring nature back to the city. The inhabitants of Manhattan instantly discovered that they missed nature and wanted to recreate it. The contemporary Coney Island is a pale shadow of the previous Coney Island.
The second project described is the first Waldorf-Astoria hotel, its geographic replacement - The Empire State building, and its recreation, the current Waldorf-Astoria hotel. The story of the construction of the Empire State Building justifies reading the entire book.
A third project is the Downtown Athletic Club. This so fantastic I can't believe it is true. I don't know whether it was ever built, if it was occupied, or how long it existed. But even if only a dream, it would be considered too unreal to exist.
A fourth project is the Rockefeller Center. Bigger, bigger, bigger. Unconstrained by budget, designed by committee. How could it be so good? Find out here.
Less entertaining were the visits by Dali and Le Corbusier and their attempts to "save" Manhattan. I must admit this part of the book held less fascination for me. Dali is incomprehensible (is the story of the Macy's display true?). Le Corbusier diagnosed the skyscrapers as being too small and thought the city should have a much bigger scale.
What interested me most though was the story of the evolution of the skyscraper. It was enabled by the elevator. This enabled a theoretically infinite duplication of a footprint. My favorite description in the book is the skyscraper as an extrusion. Every floor exactly as the previous floor.
But soon elevators dominated the building and skyscrapers became pyramids with a core of elevators that decreased in area as they ascended. The offices and apartments simply encased the elevators.
But when air conditioning became a possibility (recreating nature within the building), they no longer needed to be external pyramids. They could again become perfect extrusions. Within the confines of the 1916 Zoning law, they had to expand their footprint to gain more vertical space. Up, up, up. Not tall enough!
Add to this the infinite need for rich white men to display phallic prowess, and you've got Manhattan!
I love Manhattan and I can't wait to get back and see some of these sights. I am just as impressed as anyone.
July 10, 2009
The main thing I learned from this book is that architects have incredible freedom in establishing their own narratives. It helps when it is done masterfully, as is the case here.
Seemingly unrelated and sometimes arbitrary elements intermingle to produce an intense and inimitable environment...the history of urban life in Manhattan becomes spectacle as seen through the critical eye of the author. Fueled by Koolhaas' precise and colorful verbal descriptions, the book makes good use of historical images to produce a grand and absurd vision that, in my opinion, contains a healthy dose of self-criticism.
Seemingly unrelated and sometimes arbitrary elements intermingle to produce an intense and inimitable environment...the history of urban life in Manhattan becomes spectacle as seen through the critical eye of the author. Fueled by Koolhaas' precise and colorful verbal descriptions, the book makes good use of historical images to produce a grand and absurd vision that, in my opinion, contains a healthy dose of self-criticism.
Read
July 5, 2011Koolhaas has great material. New York is WEIRD. And he paints a wonderful picture of it at various historical and spatial stages.
I take issue with his overarching theory. Much like what I refer to as the "things stoners thinking of when watching Wallace and Gromit" school of literary criticism (Baudrillard, Virilio), he prefers wacky style to cogent argument.
A good example of his school can be found in this conclusion I came to while stoned and watching Wallace and Gromit...
"Really, the wrong trousers is just metaphor for Hiroshima. Man is ultimately controlled by his quest for knowledge, and the once-noble project of Enlightenment is turned towards chaos and destruction."
You're stealing my stuff, Frenchmen.
What saves Koolhaas is the fact that he's a working architect and, i'll add, a damn fine one at that. The Seattle Public Library, where I checked out this very volume of Delirious New York, is one of Koolhaas' designs and it's a wonder. If this is the basis for that kind of noble, unearthly, whimsical, and still remarkably practical architecture, I'll take it.
I take issue with his overarching theory. Much like what I refer to as the "things stoners thinking of when watching Wallace and Gromit" school of literary criticism (Baudrillard, Virilio), he prefers wacky style to cogent argument.
A good example of his school can be found in this conclusion I came to while stoned and watching Wallace and Gromit...
"Really, the wrong trousers is just metaphor for Hiroshima. Man is ultimately controlled by his quest for knowledge, and the once-noble project of Enlightenment is turned towards chaos and destruction."
You're stealing my stuff, Frenchmen.
What saves Koolhaas is the fact that he's a working architect and, i'll add, a damn fine one at that. The Seattle Public Library, where I checked out this very volume of Delirious New York, is one of Koolhaas' designs and it's a wonder. If this is the basis for that kind of noble, unearthly, whimsical, and still remarkably practical architecture, I'll take it.
March 3, 2013
Koolhaas, the most influential voice in contemporary architecture, explicated his theory of Manhattanism in "Delirious NY" in 1979. 30 years on, it still stands as a fascinating insight into the culture and architecture that make NY one of the great cities of the world. A very engaging quick read that illuminates NY's signature achievement, the "culture of congestion". Notable chapters include Coney Island: the technology of the fantastic, The Lives of a Block, the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel and the Empire State Building and Radio City Music Hall: the Fun Never Sets. I lived in NY for 8 years and I found Koolhaas to be right on point. Delirious NY is one of those books that will forever change how you experience the city...
October 16, 2020
The brilliance and imposture of this book are about as healthily sprinkled as that of New York City itself. Beyond the mountains of fascinating details and images he unearths, Koolhaas' gift as a theorist is his unpredictability (please believe that a section about a random, undistinguished 1930s skyscraper built for an athletic club is one of the most thought-provoking). But while critical reflection over what a "retroactive manifesto" even means in postmodern 1978 would probably be too much to ask for, fewer italicized catchphrases would not.
October 25, 2018
I will have to give this another read. I truly tried my best to get through most of it, but I found the rhetoric and syntax to be obnoxiously tedious while lacking in cogency and force.
March 23, 2023
Необъяснимо, но факт: это книга про Манхэттен! Почему-то я всю жизнь думала о ней как об архитектурной Библии, которая откроет мне глаза на архитектуру. А это книга про Нью-Йорк, как и было заявлено в названии.
May 13, 2025
You know what? It's actually an interesting book.
🧐 Quotes and thoughts:
Manhattan is a blueprint for a culture of congestion.
Manhattan's grid is a collection of blocks whose proximity and juxtaposition reinforce their separate meanings.
Talking about Jollain's bird's eye view of New Amsterdam - 1672
All the components of the map are European; but, kidnapped from their contacts and transplanted to a mythical island, they are reassembled into an unrecognisable - yet ultimately accurate - new whole: a utopian Europe, the product of compression and density.
In 1626 Peter Minuit buys the island of Manhattan for $24 from the Indians.
In 1811 Simeon deWitt, Gouverneur Morris and John Rutherford create the Manhattan grid. 13x156=2028 blocks.
The increase of population started to fill all the blocks of Manhattan in the 1850s. This led to urgent plans to reserve sites for parks. Thus, the birth of Central Park, a synthetic Arcadian Carpet.
The Latting Observatory, built in 1853, was an iron-braced timber observation tower constructed for the Exhibition of the Industry of All Nations (America's London international exhibition counterpart). Its purpose was to provide panoramic views of the city for tourists. It had shops at its base and viewing platforms at different heights with telescopes connected via steam elevator by Otis.
Was described as "New York's first skyscraper," but the actual "first skyscraper" is the Home Insurance Building in Chicago, completed in 1885, first to use a steel frame to support its entire weight.
Coney Island is the incubator for Manhattans incipient themes and infant mythology. Coney Island is a fetal Manhattan. The provision of Nature to the citizens of the Artificial.
A resort implies the presence, not too far away, of a reservoir of people existing under conditions that requires them to escape occasionally to recover their equilibrium.
During the last part of the 19th century around the 1870/1890, the introduction of electricity made it possible to create a second daytime. Electric bathing (swimming at night with a beacon of light); the Coney Island Park lit at night; the new Luna Park (which intended to be the representation of the Moon on earth an ever-changing, always lit place of amazement).
Luna Park is the first manifestation of a curse that is to haunt the architectural profession for the rest of its life, the formula: technology + cardboard (or any other flimsy material) = reality
Friedrich Thompson, the designer behind the Luna Park, casually introduced into Manhattan's bloodstream the 'roof garden' theme, growing 160,000 plants on the roof of his enclave.
Maxim Gorky (Russian/Soviet socialist writer 1870-1940) POV
Dozens of white buildings, monstrously diverse, not one with even the suggestion of beauty. They are built of wood, and smeared over with peeling white paint which gives them the appearance of suffering from the same skin disease..
Otis's elevator boomed in Manhattan in the 1880s thanks to the newly discovered uses of the steel frame, giving life to skyscrapers.
The elevator also created a new social sensation: the farther it goes up, the more undesirable the circumstances it lives behind.
1909 theorem: the skyscraper as utopian device for the production of unlimited numbers of virgin siters on a single metropolitan location.
" In this branch of utopian real estate, architecture is no longer the art of designing building so much as the brutal skyward extrusion of whatever the site developer has managed to assemble."
Singer Building, 1908, by Ernest Flagg = Suicide Pinnacle
1916 Zoning Law defines the outlines of the maximum allowable construction in Manhattan. The lord takes the Woolworth as norm: the process of sheer multiplication is allowed to proceed up to a certain height; then the building must step back from the plot line at a certain angle to admit light to the streets. A Tower may then carry 25% of the plot area to unlimited heights.
Hugh Ferriss is tge "automatic pilot" he painted what the law allowed, making architect useless.
1929 great depression
Regional plan of New York
The appropriateness of the skyscraper was never questioned; it only became taller or shorter to respond to local pressure or lack of pressure.
Harvey Willey Corbett envision a "very modernised Venice" with 20 lanes streets below the pedestrian walking from Island to Island in a system of 2028 solitudes.
1929 - William Van Alen is the Chrysler building architect
1922 - Raymond Hood won the Chicago Tribune competition.
1928 - Daily News building
1931 - McGraw-Hill Building
Raymond hood's vision of the future Manhattan is a city of towers. A subtly modified version of what already exists instead of the ruthless extrusion of arbitrary individual plots, largest sites within a block will be assembled in new building operation. The space around the towers within the blocks will be left unbuilt so that each Tower can regain its integrity and a measure of isolation.
Raymond Hood, "A city of towers", first published in 1927; diagram of suggested transformations presented as "Proposal for the solution of New York's problem of overcrowding". Against the 1916 zoning law, which can never control the ultimate bulk of Manhattan's buildings, only their shape - and is therefore incapable of defining the upward limit of Manhattan's density - Hood wanted to "establish a constant ratio between the volume of building and the street area... for each foot of street frontage a definitive volume is allowed by law. A property owner can only exceed this volume allowance provided he sets back," so that " each building as it imposes additional load on street traffic provides the additional street area to carry it..." in this way, Hood enlisted the natural greed of the developer - who invariably wanted to build the largest possible volume, which under the terms of Hood's proposal would coincide with the highest possible Tower on the smallest possible site - in the service of an aesthetic vision, a city of sheer freestanding needles.
1931 "the city under a single roof" has been founded on the principal that concentration in a metropolitan area is a desirable condition.
A quote from the city under a single roof by Raymond Hood - every businessman in the city must have realised what an advantage it would be to live in the building where his office is located.
- put the worker in a unified scheme and he need hardly put his feet on the sidewalk during the entire day.
Manhattan 1950 another theory
Piet Mondrian's "victory boogie woogie" is the painting representation of the grid within a grid which was happening in Manhattan in that period.
The Rockefeller centre is the first architecture that can be broadcast. This part of the centre is an anti-dream factory; radio and TV, the new instrument of pervasive culture will simply broadcast life, "realism" as it is organised at the NBC studios. By absorbing radio and TV, Rockefeller centre adds to its level of congestion electronics - the very medium that denies the need for congestion as condition for desirable human interaction.
Hood convinced Todd to credit the 1801 botanist Dr.Davis Hosack, who established the Elgin Botanic Garden (experimental greenhouse) by installing "hanging gardens of a contemporary Babylon".
Also he theorised about the higher rent that can be charged for the privileged windows that would look down on one of the wonders of the world : the hanging gardens of contemporary Babylon
Mussolini donated some ruins for the Japanese garden on top of the Rockefeller centre Babylon hanging gardens.
Architecture is the imposition on the world of structure it never asked for and that existed previously only in clouds of conjectures in the minds of their creators
The part of corbusier and Dali was really interesting.
It was a witty exploration of the tension between utopian planning and the messy reality of urban life, with Dalí serving as the mischievous imp who pokes holes in Le Corbusier's pristine vision. A clash of ideologies, where the cool logic of modernism meets the hot, irrational desires of the surreal. Rem Koolhaas was asking: can any rational plan truly contain the delirious energy of a city like New York, or will the subconscious, the bizarre, and the utterly illogical always find a way to bubble to the surface?
Also the final chapter with "The City of the Captive Globe" 1972 was particularly stimulating.
" If the essence of Metropolitan culture is change - a state of perpetual animation - and the essence of the concept "city" is a legible sequence of various permanences, then only the three fundamental axioms on which the City of the Captive globe is based - grid, lobotomy and schism - can regain the terrain of the Metropolis for architecture.
The grid - or any other subdivision of the Metropolitan Territory into the maximum increments of control - describes an archipelago of "Cities within Cities". The more each "island" celebrates different values the more the unity of the archipelago as system is reinforced. Because "change" is contained on the component "islands" such a system will never have to be revised.
In the metropolitan archipelago each skyscraper - in the absence of Real history - develops its own instantaneous folklore. Through the Double disconnection of lobotomy and schism - by separating exterior and interior architecture and developing the latter in small autonomous instalments - such structures can devote their exteriors only to formalism and their interiors only to functionalism.
In this way they not only resolve forever the conflict between form and function, but create a city where permanent monoliths celebrate Metropolitan instability.
🧐 Quotes and thoughts:
Manhattan is a blueprint for a culture of congestion.
Manhattan's grid is a collection of blocks whose proximity and juxtaposition reinforce their separate meanings.
Talking about Jollain's bird's eye view of New Amsterdam - 1672
All the components of the map are European; but, kidnapped from their contacts and transplanted to a mythical island, they are reassembled into an unrecognisable - yet ultimately accurate - new whole: a utopian Europe, the product of compression and density.
In 1626 Peter Minuit buys the island of Manhattan for $24 from the Indians.
In 1811 Simeon deWitt, Gouverneur Morris and John Rutherford create the Manhattan grid. 13x156=2028 blocks.
The increase of population started to fill all the blocks of Manhattan in the 1850s. This led to urgent plans to reserve sites for parks. Thus, the birth of Central Park, a synthetic Arcadian Carpet.
The Latting Observatory, built in 1853, was an iron-braced timber observation tower constructed for the Exhibition of the Industry of All Nations (America's London international exhibition counterpart). Its purpose was to provide panoramic views of the city for tourists. It had shops at its base and viewing platforms at different heights with telescopes connected via steam elevator by Otis.
Was described as "New York's first skyscraper," but the actual "first skyscraper" is the Home Insurance Building in Chicago, completed in 1885, first to use a steel frame to support its entire weight.
Coney Island is the incubator for Manhattans incipient themes and infant mythology. Coney Island is a fetal Manhattan. The provision of Nature to the citizens of the Artificial.
A resort implies the presence, not too far away, of a reservoir of people existing under conditions that requires them to escape occasionally to recover their equilibrium.
During the last part of the 19th century around the 1870/1890, the introduction of electricity made it possible to create a second daytime. Electric bathing (swimming at night with a beacon of light); the Coney Island Park lit at night; the new Luna Park (which intended to be the representation of the Moon on earth an ever-changing, always lit place of amazement).
Luna Park is the first manifestation of a curse that is to haunt the architectural profession for the rest of its life, the formula: technology + cardboard (or any other flimsy material) = reality
Friedrich Thompson, the designer behind the Luna Park, casually introduced into Manhattan's bloodstream the 'roof garden' theme, growing 160,000 plants on the roof of his enclave.
Maxim Gorky (Russian/Soviet socialist writer 1870-1940) POV
Dozens of white buildings, monstrously diverse, not one with even the suggestion of beauty. They are built of wood, and smeared over with peeling white paint which gives them the appearance of suffering from the same skin disease..
Otis's elevator boomed in Manhattan in the 1880s thanks to the newly discovered uses of the steel frame, giving life to skyscrapers.
The elevator also created a new social sensation: the farther it goes up, the more undesirable the circumstances it lives behind.
1909 theorem: the skyscraper as utopian device for the production of unlimited numbers of virgin siters on a single metropolitan location.
" In this branch of utopian real estate, architecture is no longer the art of designing building so much as the brutal skyward extrusion of whatever the site developer has managed to assemble."
Singer Building, 1908, by Ernest Flagg = Suicide Pinnacle
1916 Zoning Law defines the outlines of the maximum allowable construction in Manhattan. The lord takes the Woolworth as norm: the process of sheer multiplication is allowed to proceed up to a certain height; then the building must step back from the plot line at a certain angle to admit light to the streets. A Tower may then carry 25% of the plot area to unlimited heights.
Hugh Ferriss is tge "automatic pilot" he painted what the law allowed, making architect useless.
1929 great depression
Regional plan of New York
The appropriateness of the skyscraper was never questioned; it only became taller or shorter to respond to local pressure or lack of pressure.
Harvey Willey Corbett envision a "very modernised Venice" with 20 lanes streets below the pedestrian walking from Island to Island in a system of 2028 solitudes.
1929 - William Van Alen is the Chrysler building architect
1922 - Raymond Hood won the Chicago Tribune competition.
1928 - Daily News building
1931 - McGraw-Hill Building
Raymond hood's vision of the future Manhattan is a city of towers. A subtly modified version of what already exists instead of the ruthless extrusion of arbitrary individual plots, largest sites within a block will be assembled in new building operation. The space around the towers within the blocks will be left unbuilt so that each Tower can regain its integrity and a measure of isolation.
Raymond Hood, "A city of towers", first published in 1927; diagram of suggested transformations presented as "Proposal for the solution of New York's problem of overcrowding". Against the 1916 zoning law, which can never control the ultimate bulk of Manhattan's buildings, only their shape - and is therefore incapable of defining the upward limit of Manhattan's density - Hood wanted to "establish a constant ratio between the volume of building and the street area... for each foot of street frontage a definitive volume is allowed by law. A property owner can only exceed this volume allowance provided he sets back," so that " each building as it imposes additional load on street traffic provides the additional street area to carry it..." in this way, Hood enlisted the natural greed of the developer - who invariably wanted to build the largest possible volume, which under the terms of Hood's proposal would coincide with the highest possible Tower on the smallest possible site - in the service of an aesthetic vision, a city of sheer freestanding needles.
1931 "the city under a single roof" has been founded on the principal that concentration in a metropolitan area is a desirable condition.
A quote from the city under a single roof by Raymond Hood - every businessman in the city must have realised what an advantage it would be to live in the building where his office is located.
- put the worker in a unified scheme and he need hardly put his feet on the sidewalk during the entire day.
Manhattan 1950 another theory
Piet Mondrian's "victory boogie woogie" is the painting representation of the grid within a grid which was happening in Manhattan in that period.
The Rockefeller centre is the first architecture that can be broadcast. This part of the centre is an anti-dream factory; radio and TV, the new instrument of pervasive culture will simply broadcast life, "realism" as it is organised at the NBC studios. By absorbing radio and TV, Rockefeller centre adds to its level of congestion electronics - the very medium that denies the need for congestion as condition for desirable human interaction.
Hood convinced Todd to credit the 1801 botanist Dr.Davis Hosack, who established the Elgin Botanic Garden (experimental greenhouse) by installing "hanging gardens of a contemporary Babylon".
Also he theorised about the higher rent that can be charged for the privileged windows that would look down on one of the wonders of the world : the hanging gardens of contemporary Babylon
Mussolini donated some ruins for the Japanese garden on top of the Rockefeller centre Babylon hanging gardens.
Architecture is the imposition on the world of structure it never asked for and that existed previously only in clouds of conjectures in the minds of their creators
The part of corbusier and Dali was really interesting.
It was a witty exploration of the tension between utopian planning and the messy reality of urban life, with Dalí serving as the mischievous imp who pokes holes in Le Corbusier's pristine vision. A clash of ideologies, where the cool logic of modernism meets the hot, irrational desires of the surreal. Rem Koolhaas was asking: can any rational plan truly contain the delirious energy of a city like New York, or will the subconscious, the bizarre, and the utterly illogical always find a way to bubble to the surface?
Also the final chapter with "The City of the Captive Globe" 1972 was particularly stimulating.
" If the essence of Metropolitan culture is change - a state of perpetual animation - and the essence of the concept "city" is a legible sequence of various permanences, then only the three fundamental axioms on which the City of the Captive globe is based - grid, lobotomy and schism - can regain the terrain of the Metropolis for architecture.
The grid - or any other subdivision of the Metropolitan Territory into the maximum increments of control - describes an archipelago of "Cities within Cities". The more each "island" celebrates different values the more the unity of the archipelago as system is reinforced. Because "change" is contained on the component "islands" such a system will never have to be revised.
In the metropolitan archipelago each skyscraper - in the absence of Real history - develops its own instantaneous folklore. Through the Double disconnection of lobotomy and schism - by separating exterior and interior architecture and developing the latter in small autonomous instalments - such structures can devote their exteriors only to formalism and their interiors only to functionalism.
In this way they not only resolve forever the conflict between form and function, but create a city where permanent monoliths celebrate Metropolitan instability.
May 29, 2016
Rem Koolhaas patří mezi nejuznávanější architekty a je považován za současného Picassa architektury. Ale svou kariéru začal jako teoretik, kdy napsal tuto knihu, která je dodnes jednou ze základních příruček oboru. Je v ní krásné vyznání z obdivu k nekontrolovanému rozrůstání Manhattanu. A to přitom nesnáší mrakodrapy. Každopádně disharmonie protichůdných elementů se stala později jedním z poznávacích znamení jeho staveb. Já město New York miluji a díky této knize jsem mohl město poznat mnohem důkladněji. Hned bych ho chtěl znovu navštívit a projít si všechna místa, o kterých Rem píše ve svém manifestu.
June 12, 2018
An excellent read not only for readers interested in architecture. The book greatly conveys the feel of unrealistic, almost derilic process of development of "the greatest city on earth". Surprisingly light to read and engaging through many expamles, execellent graphics and interesitng facts.
February 23, 2022
When a theory is limited, that certainly means that there is a need to develop one: … Manhattan as the product of an unformulated theory … (Koolhaas 1994, 10).
Historical background explaining the foundation of a settlement has been echoed in all the readings: Holland families colonizing Manhattan in 1623 bringing engravings of European identity to Manhattan until it becomes a city of 13x156 blocks; and Spanish and Mexican founding of Los Angeles. These backgrounds initially defined what these settlements were: Manhattan’s superiority of mental construction over reality because its blocks negated topography while Las Vegas as a low rise expanded development along the highway and Los Angeles’s ecologies in accordance with topography and climate
Set in 1811, the Grid of Manhattan set a new form of urban fabric that was irrelevant to any in the past: known grid patterns of Haussmann’s Paris (1850s) were also after this project. While reading through this part of the essay, I kept thinking if Grid form was ever evident in any city of the past. I searched through internet to find that there were European town planned on Grid Iron previously but the author in this article never mentioned those inspirations.
Manhattan – as a mental construction – is a product of the machine era and the aspirations to surpass natural barriers through technological toolkit. Hence elevator at the 1853 Exhibition (though steam operated at that time) was an invention above all others. Moreover, the contrast of sphere and the tower at the exhibition exhibited two extreme aspiration for Manhattan: maximum interior volume with least external skin (sphere), and maximum physical impact with least ground consumption (tower).
Hence, the meet-up of these technical tools and aspirations gave birth to the skyscraper under the theorem: create aerial plots to give a new world at each level without any impact from others with varying activities unprecedented by past predictable buildings and uses. This theorem could not take up physical translation at start and was, therefore, pragmatic camouflaged by businesses on all floors as temporary phase. This pragmatic alibi, however, made the skyscraper possible which continued its replication until the aim now was 100 floors.
Another salient feature in Manhattan’s manifesto, though retrospective, was the use as big as the block alone – block was the limit on the physical imagination. Aspiration to build block scale vast events oriented structures gave birth to large indoor theatres which continued to struggle for the financial viability and the continued attraction for the incoming visitors. Yet block being the maximum limit for a single owner/planner for a vision, Manhattan became an archipelago of blocks. Analogous to lobotomy, structures in Manhattan continued to experiment the interventions in the conventions of architecture, thus giving birth to a dynamic theory. This schism is inherent in Manhattan’s architecture which, by law, sought future regulation while simultaneously a legibility for the past.
Historical background explaining the foundation of a settlement has been echoed in all the readings: Holland families colonizing Manhattan in 1623 bringing engravings of European identity to Manhattan until it becomes a city of 13x156 blocks; and Spanish and Mexican founding of Los Angeles. These backgrounds initially defined what these settlements were: Manhattan’s superiority of mental construction over reality because its blocks negated topography while Las Vegas as a low rise expanded development along the highway and Los Angeles’s ecologies in accordance with topography and climate
Set in 1811, the Grid of Manhattan set a new form of urban fabric that was irrelevant to any in the past: known grid patterns of Haussmann’s Paris (1850s) were also after this project. While reading through this part of the essay, I kept thinking if Grid form was ever evident in any city of the past. I searched through internet to find that there were European town planned on Grid Iron previously but the author in this article never mentioned those inspirations.
Manhattan – as a mental construction – is a product of the machine era and the aspirations to surpass natural barriers through technological toolkit. Hence elevator at the 1853 Exhibition (though steam operated at that time) was an invention above all others. Moreover, the contrast of sphere and the tower at the exhibition exhibited two extreme aspiration for Manhattan: maximum interior volume with least external skin (sphere), and maximum physical impact with least ground consumption (tower).
Hence, the meet-up of these technical tools and aspirations gave birth to the skyscraper under the theorem: create aerial plots to give a new world at each level without any impact from others with varying activities unprecedented by past predictable buildings and uses. This theorem could not take up physical translation at start and was, therefore, pragmatic camouflaged by businesses on all floors as temporary phase. This pragmatic alibi, however, made the skyscraper possible which continued its replication until the aim now was 100 floors.
Another salient feature in Manhattan’s manifesto, though retrospective, was the use as big as the block alone – block was the limit on the physical imagination. Aspiration to build block scale vast events oriented structures gave birth to large indoor theatres which continued to struggle for the financial viability and the continued attraction for the incoming visitors. Yet block being the maximum limit for a single owner/planner for a vision, Manhattan became an archipelago of blocks. Analogous to lobotomy, structures in Manhattan continued to experiment the interventions in the conventions of architecture, thus giving birth to a dynamic theory. This schism is inherent in Manhattan’s architecture which, by law, sought future regulation while simultaneously a legibility for the past.
September 29, 2023
Delirious New York is a delirious book. It’s not like an AIA guidebook; it probably won’t inspire a reader who lives in New York City, or a visitor, to go forth and see particular buildings, sites, or structures, largely because much of what it describes either no longer exists or never did. But it’s likely to affect how you see the city and how you think about it. The whole place begins to seem like the creation of dreamers of a certain kind, men who were intoxicated by the power of technology to banish the natural and to establish realms of unreality. Among the examples are a mechanical racetrack with mechanical but rideable horses at Coney Island, a trip to Mars in the company of a traveling circus in the Hippodrome, and the notion of turning Manhattan into another Venice, with each island-block surrounded not by water but by motor traffic as much as 20 lanes wide.
One of Rem Koolhaas’s accomplishments here is making skyscrapers seem strange and fantastic again. Another is in making clear that density, which he always refers to as “congestion”—the incredible packing together of people and things—was not an accident (in case you were inclined to think so) but has for a long time been one of the aims of the “visioneers” who have shaped the city. The Manhattan street grid was proposed and imposed early in the 19th century, before much of the land was occupied, before many of the businesses were established, before most of the people whose lives it would order and control existed.
Koolhaas is an architect himself, and at the end he can’t resist pitching a few of his own visions into the mix; he even adds a fable, about a floating swimming pool that crosses the Atlantic. This section feels less compelling than the rest of the book, but it’s appropriate; the book draws to a close, but the impulse to reimagine the city continues. What Koolhaas calls the Irresistible Synthetic still sings its siren song.
One of Rem Koolhaas’s accomplishments here is making skyscrapers seem strange and fantastic again. Another is in making clear that density, which he always refers to as “congestion”—the incredible packing together of people and things—was not an accident (in case you were inclined to think so) but has for a long time been one of the aims of the “visioneers” who have shaped the city. The Manhattan street grid was proposed and imposed early in the 19th century, before much of the land was occupied, before many of the businesses were established, before most of the people whose lives it would order and control existed.
Koolhaas is an architect himself, and at the end he can’t resist pitching a few of his own visions into the mix; he even adds a fable, about a floating swimming pool that crosses the Atlantic. This section feels less compelling than the rest of the book, but it’s appropriate; the book draws to a close, but the impulse to reimagine the city continues. What Koolhaas calls the Irresistible Synthetic still sings its siren song.
April 23, 2025
Delirious New York was recommended to me by a friend who is an architect, after I spoke to her about my first visit to New York. The part I liked best was the chapter on Coney Island that really revealed some little known and unusual facts about New York (to a European at least). Everything after it felt needlessly abstruse, especially the endless philosophy surrounding the skyscraper. Let’s also not forget that most of this book is a conjecture, a theory made up by Koolhaas himself. Like he keeps reminding the readers, Manhattan’s actual architects never put forward a unified theory.
As such, the moment he started venturing further into the land of speculation and further away from the facts, was when I started losing interest in the book. There were also episodes, like Dali’s visit to New York, that I didn’t really see the point of in an architectural narrative.
The language is in line with the way many artists and critics talk about art, often in an attempt to add layers of meaning where it’s not easily perceived or, in some cases, wholly absent. Because of this, I have little fate in such writing as it deliberately attempts to manipulate perception and I actually believe a lot of contemporary art is considered to have value because it’s shrouded in this obfuscating language rather than any artistic merit of its own. In the end, I feel like I would have probably preferred reading a more straightforward book on the architectural history of New York rather than Koolhaas’ ramblings.
As such, the moment he started venturing further into the land of speculation and further away from the facts, was when I started losing interest in the book. There were also episodes, like Dali’s visit to New York, that I didn’t really see the point of in an architectural narrative.
The language is in line with the way many artists and critics talk about art, often in an attempt to add layers of meaning where it’s not easily perceived or, in some cases, wholly absent. Because of this, I have little fate in such writing as it deliberately attempts to manipulate perception and I actually believe a lot of contemporary art is considered to have value because it’s shrouded in this obfuscating language rather than any artistic merit of its own. In the end, I feel like I would have probably preferred reading a more straightforward book on the architectural history of New York rather than Koolhaas’ ramblings.
July 27, 2021
"Retroactive manifesto" supposedly just means history.
I love Manhattan. Before I lived in Mexico City, I had not even considered the possibility of settling down anywhere else. Koolhaas does a wonderful job of historicizing some of Manhattan's greatest skyscrapers and their builders. In the process, he also theorizes about "Manhattanism", which, as far as I could gather, is the peculiar kind of creativity/ chaos that arises when millions of human beings are confined to 2028 blocks in an island, with no possibility for expansion except upwards. Though places like Hong Kong (which I love) and Singapore (which I detest) have attempted to recreate Manhattanism, it's clear that there's still nowhere else quite like Manhattan.
Some sections of the book seemed to me superfluous - like the part on Dali and Surrealism which, though interesting (and though a case could be made for why it was included, since it was placed side by side with Le Corbusier's push into Manhattan as well) I simply found not of use. I also hated the writing. Koolhaas' manifesto like ramblings, which i found a bit endearing in Junkspace and Bigness here just left me annoyed.
I love Manhattan. Before I lived in Mexico City, I had not even considered the possibility of settling down anywhere else. Koolhaas does a wonderful job of historicizing some of Manhattan's greatest skyscrapers and their builders. In the process, he also theorizes about "Manhattanism", which, as far as I could gather, is the peculiar kind of creativity/ chaos that arises when millions of human beings are confined to 2028 blocks in an island, with no possibility for expansion except upwards. Though places like Hong Kong (which I love) and Singapore (which I detest) have attempted to recreate Manhattanism, it's clear that there's still nowhere else quite like Manhattan.
Some sections of the book seemed to me superfluous - like the part on Dali and Surrealism which, though interesting (and though a case could be made for why it was included, since it was placed side by side with Le Corbusier's push into Manhattan as well) I simply found not of use. I also hated the writing. Koolhaas' manifesto like ramblings, which i found a bit endearing in Junkspace and Bigness here just left me annoyed.
May 19, 2021
Definitely changed how I look at New York's architecture. Koolhaus places every building in the city in a phallic, "Promethean," surrealist context. Someone should make a 5-6 minute documentary film about this!
March 23, 2025
Fantastyczna opowieść o niezwykłym mieście
Read
September 12, 2025Really wrestled with the prose but the fun tidbits about nyc are worth it
Read
September 15, 2025Manhattan seems cool! would love to visit one day.
July 1, 2020
i like this storytelling style shrug
we gotta decolonize the shit out of the world
we gotta decolonize the shit out of the world
February 21, 2025
Rem beunhaas
October 3, 2025
Pure Manhattanism, a culture of congestion. The city in a self-imposed consciousness
October 14, 2025
Vždy jsem považoval NY za změť masturbace architektonického ega. Výkladní skříň H&M. Pop song s miliardou zhlédnutí na YT. Jednotlivé stavby tomu i odpovídají, ale Koolhaas mi pomohl najít vzrušující rovinu této změti. Rovinu, která změnila mé chápání a nazírání na New York, na Manhattan. Manhattan jakožto mřížka. Manhattan jakožto laboratoř.
Ze zelené oázy pro rekreaci, přes první zásahy v podobě zábavních parků (Luna park), postupné zahušťování, komerční vykořisťování, kontrast věže a koule, neustálá snaha šokovat, multiplikace pozemku, stvoření výškové regulace, moderní vesnice v podobě jehel nabodaných v těsné blízkosti, budování nového parteru věže na střeše nižších budov v okolí ... a nad tím vším nosný systém mřížky ulic.
Mřížka, jakožto nadmnožina veškerého života města. Mřížka, jakožto rodina architektury. S kamarády se můžete pohádat a už se nikdy nedat dohromady, stejně jako struktura města se může rozpadnout díky jedné budově. Ale mřížka je rodina. Rodina je i po hádce stále rodina a nic to nezmění. V jednotlivých blocích se může odehrávat jakýkoli svět, ale vždy bude patřit do jasně definovaného vesmíru Manhattanu. A to je jeho krása. Laboratoř, která dává smysl.
Ze zelené oázy pro rekreaci, přes první zásahy v podobě zábavních parků (Luna park), postupné zahušťování, komerční vykořisťování, kontrast věže a koule, neustálá snaha šokovat, multiplikace pozemku, stvoření výškové regulace, moderní vesnice v podobě jehel nabodaných v těsné blízkosti, budování nového parteru věže na střeše nižších budov v okolí ... a nad tím vším nosný systém mřížky ulic.
Mřížka, jakožto nadmnožina veškerého života města. Mřížka, jakožto rodina architektury. S kamarády se můžete pohádat a už se nikdy nedat dohromady, stejně jako struktura města se může rozpadnout díky jedné budově. Ale mřížka je rodina. Rodina je i po hádce stále rodina a nic to nezmění. V jednotlivých blocích se může odehrávat jakýkoli svět, ale vždy bude patřit do jasně definovaného vesmíru Manhattanu. A to je jeho krása. Laboratoř, která dává smysl.
May 21, 2019
Okay, I didn't read the whole entire book, but I came pretty close. This was a pretty long and dense book, but ultimately it is a fascinating approach to looking at architecture. Retroactively looking at the manifestation of the city as a product of ideals and technological advance is a rather fascinating viewpoint. The biggest critique I have about this approach is that it is very subjective. While Manhattan has the whole "culture of congestion" thing going on, there's nothing stopping someone from saying that maybe it has a "culture of capitalism" or something instead. Since we cannot create a completely comprehensive history of the city (especially something as expansive as Manhattan), we would inherently have to leave out details. It then becomes a question of what we should necessarily value or not value looking back in history.
Writing wise though, this was a fun read, even though the methodological approach taken is imperfect. I believe Koolhaas has written an entire book about why he has written this book, which I will have to read someday.
Writing wise though, this was a fun read, even though the methodological approach taken is imperfect. I believe Koolhaas has written an entire book about why he has written this book, which I will have to read someday.
October 13, 2017
A history lesson, dissertion in urbanism and thought experiment soaked in pretentious intellectualoid blabber. Should be called New York Delusion. Truly brilliant at times, it did make me marvel, but you really have to indulge the writer and power through the text to get to them.
It is, I guess, the point of the book, to sell this idea of congestion and manhattanism as an urbanism concept (and I am CERTAINLY not even close to being an expert on the matter), but for me, it mostly felt flat on its face. Felt like he was imposing his view and his narrative on the architects that were his subject of writing, views and ideas I felt like the author is making up completely. But what would I know.
Some really beautiful ideas in there though, especially in the first and last chapters of the book.
It is, I guess, the point of the book, to sell this idea of congestion and manhattanism as an urbanism concept (and I am CERTAINLY not even close to being an expert on the matter), but for me, it mostly felt flat on its face. Felt like he was imposing his view and his narrative on the architects that were his subject of writing, views and ideas I felt like the author is making up completely. But what would I know.
Some really beautiful ideas in there though, especially in the first and last chapters of the book.
September 29, 2021
Wow. I was prepared to hate this book. Not because I wanted to or thought I'd get some enjoyment out of hating it, but because I've become accustomed to architectural nonsense (re: http://www.ruderal.com/bullshit/bulls...). But I loved it. Yes, it's heavy on theory, but damn is it entertaining. The history of Coney Island is fascinating and his descriptions of Manhattan architecture at the turn of the 20th century capture the ambitions, hopes, and dreams of a city at peak technological optimism. He even brings Dalí into the discussion. You may not agree with him, or even find his arguments useful, but that's not the point. It's a fun ride. After reading this, I see New York, and architecture, differently.
December 28, 2015
Delirious New York is a book that gives shape and vision to the endless collisions, accidents, and collaborations that produced the signature architecture of Manhattan. As much a history of schemes and illusions as a lucid extrapolation of the pragmatism that bore out the aesthetics of the skyscraper within the limits of the grid, the zoning law of 1916 and the city's ever present culture of congestion, Koolhaas is dazzling as he reads the formal code of the city's past through its buildings and balances their history, biography and sociology.
September 12, 2021
Difficult, but interesting read.
The writing is delirious. Koolhaas revels in creating a dreamy, hazy scene for each chapter, which I found quite compelling - in a way, it added character to all the stories and designs. However, in true fashion of a dream state, the writing was also extremely obscure, slightly pretentious and moderately incoherent.
Worth reading for the bits on history and designs of former and shelved structures of New York - recommend skimming through to avoid the convoluted writing style.
The writing is delirious. Koolhaas revels in creating a dreamy, hazy scene for each chapter, which I found quite compelling - in a way, it added character to all the stories and designs. However, in true fashion of a dream state, the writing was also extremely obscure, slightly pretentious and moderately incoherent.
Worth reading for the bits on history and designs of former and shelved structures of New York - recommend skimming through to avoid the convoluted writing style.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 155 reviews