Final Review Slussen Part One
Slussen today is only a concrete machine comes out from the modernist thoughts of the Twenties parasite by the new spaces that Stockholm needs in the new contemporary times. How can we understand how much Slussen affect Stockholm? And how much Stockholm affect Slussen? I found out my way to analyze Slussen with doing drawings.
To draw something is a really slow process because it became inevitably a interpretation of what surround you and to create an interpretation takes time. But also the process of Drawing over something you know, help you to interpret what surrounds you in a different way. The People today tend to analyze what a space can offer them, what functions and programs a space can allow: a Space became good as more multifunctional, interactive, complex is. My aim was to use the mapping tool to analyze the invisible connection in Slussen and understand probably that there is a really waste of space. We need to use less space in a better way. Starting from the point where NO connection between different function = NO complexity = Boring place, everything should became a Pleasure space, the union between all the other functional spaces. The more functions you have, the more complexity you create and the more enjoyable the space becomes.
Slussen consists of so many different places, which all together create an image of the place. I went for a walk at Slussen and tried to find out more about there immaterial character. Underground Parking. It looks like another world from outside. Like another aggregate state of Slussen. I go inside the dark and at the same time shiny space and immediately there is a permanent and constant noise. But still it is not a busy space. I can‘t see the moving traffic. From time to time a door opens and behind some more cars appear. Almost nobody is here. You get some views to the outside Slussen in the daylight. But the daylight doesn‘t enter the underground parking. The space is filled up with orange light and this constant noise. Staircase. Now there is so different noise than there was in the garage. I can hear lot of people, buses, trains… I have to watch my steps that I don‘t run into somebody or onto some rubbish. I go up the stairs and look around. People are passing the stairs and I have to move. The stairs are wet. Every step is followed by another public transport. Buses, the Tunnelbana, the Saltsjöbanan – everything at the same time. That is the first time there is some negative smell in the air. I go further up and see the buses again. This place is full of dynamic and colour and glaring light.
Berg office. I ring the bell. A nice lady opens and I tell her what I‘m doing. I‘m allowed to have a walk through the office. Silence. There is just silence in hear. And it is comfortable warm in here. I look outside the windows. This room consists of windows it seems. Always a quite and peaceful look outside. I forget about the traffic, because I can‘t here it anymore.
Slussen today has urban qualities in its form, function and especially in the combination to its condition. A completely new Slussen wouldn´t bring as much potential as it has now. The existing Slussen is to me full of potential an especially in its possibility of a change. If Slussen always would change and never be “done” wouldn´t it loose this quality but could be currently updated to the actual use. I would like, that Slussen would be a part of the city and not just a traffic solution in between Gamla Stan and Södermalm. In Zurich, my hometown, I found an example with the same kind of problems and qualities. The Hard Bridge is as Slussen an important connection between North and South in the inner city. The area surround the Hard Bridge is a fast growing part of Zurich close to the city centre. A few years ago it was a waste land of disused industries and now it has live 24 hours a day by different uses during different times in the same area. For Slussen, I would like to make an alternative proposal based on the idea of a transformation during a longer time period. Currently changing requirements needs flexibility in space or changing space. The existing part could be cheap space for creative people and when it needs to be replaced, could be added a new part which fits to the new requirements. The Bridges, Skeppsbron, Munkbron and Saltsjöutfarten have to be replaced. Those can be replaced one after the other and fitted to a new traffic solution.
”My ex drew a heart in the snow for me. The next day he got into hospital and died. I never got the chance to say goodbye”
Letter left at Slussen in october 2009
This made me think about places, memory and about the meaning that are put into places. It seems that we need places in order to in some ways connect our memories and experiences to them. That interests me a lot. How do we connect to places, and how do they become important to us?
When investigating this, the various ways that meaning connects to place, I found that it might be possible to categorize the different ways that they relate. There are places that have their meaning in them selves; something happened on that particular spot and therefore they become meaningful. Other get their meaning when a physical manifestation is made to make them meaningful, though the place in it self has nothing to do with that meaning in the first place.
How do we relate to place? How do we change the meaning of a place, be it temporary or permanent? How can places change us? How can we charge places with new meaning by making interventions or actions?
My task has been to try to change Slussen in whatever small way I could by making small interventions. The question I have asked myself is with how little means I can change a space into something new, or how to change the way one looks at a place and thereby produce architecture.
Interaction City and the People.
World of travel, world of people and the interaction between those. In my opinion Slussen is two rings which hold one globe in its place. The two rings together are “The world of traffic”, the static factors; the streets, squares, traffic, concrete… The globe between these is “The world of people”, the dynamic factors; the atmosphere, feelings, activities, psychology, sociology…
It is about the interaction between the city and the people. How they work together, the psychology behind them, how they can influence each other and the possibility to change both and the reaction on this. My idea was to understand Slussen and the interaction between the place with the people, to go from abstract to reality and from simple to complex. I did research to the people and their activities in Slussen and made graphics of the simplification of people who… travel, meet, work, have a plan, wait or enjoy their time. I observed the people in Slussen and tried to get their activities on camera. To use symbols of the patterns of the people, I wanted to zoom in on the process of the activities.
I read articles and books to know more about (environment) psychology, sociology, memory and their relation with architecture. The thoughts and stories behind the designs in the book ‘Generator’ (Oslo School of Architecture and Design) I found very interesting and used some of their topics for other graphics about: Speed of the city, streets, travel, to walk, energy field, twin(ed) peaks, memory and communication. To use those graphics in different ways, I tried to make the topics more interesting and complex. I ranked my graphics from abstract to reality, from simple to complex. I categorised them in “World of traffic”, “World of people” and “Interaction Between people and the city”.
I choose four specific people who use Slussen from every day to once or twice (traveller, worker, people who meet and the tourist) and linked them with their most important graphic.
I used three very important key words to group the graphics.
(Experience, connection and movement).
I put the graphics in Slussen.
I want to show the opportunities Slussen has as a public space. The area is very special and there are a lot of possibilities to make this more interesting for a lot of people. There are still some years which we can use to givepeople another experience about this place and create more memories of the‘old Slussen’. Maybe some objects, tools or experiments can be use in the Foster proposal.
In an increasingly globalized world, cities are becoming ever more connected. Greater connectivity has led to city brands – the image or set of perceptions and associations people have with places. Cities are now incorporating techniques and approaches that companies across the globe have used for more than half a century. And, as cities themselves grow, and the reliance on public transport becomes greater, parts of these cities will also need to adopt similar approaches.
Similar to how aeroplanes have brought the world closer together, city public transport networks have also and continue to produce higher connectivity between city regions. Slussen, today, represents a central node in the Stockholm public transport network that brings together various modes of transportation. Despite containing other functions, an analysis into the programmatic connectivity of the site clearly identified that public transport, especially the Stockholm Tunnelbana, as the backbone of Slussen. Targeting this potential market by creating reasons for commuters to alight at Slussen – through products, places or events – will transform how people relate with the site, and ultimately how they perceive it.
An investigation into the relationship between public and private spaces provided a greater understanding of how places like shopping centres and casinos worked, and allowed comparisons with commonly identified public spaces such as high streets and public urban squares. Although these areas are usually perceived as vastly different places, the research presented little differences could be distinguished in how these areas actually operated, and led to the conclusion that the shopping centre is a city, and the city is a shopping centre.
Private areas have attempted to mimic public space for decades, whilst public spaces are only now beginning to adopt approaches commonly used by companies. These techniques that could be borrowed from the commercial sector and incorporated into new public spaces could lead to new and exciting urban and recreational areas. With its integration of Stockholm’s public transport network, Slussen presents itself as an ideal candidate to test these ideas and perhaps help create an evolving Stockholm identity.
We approached Slussen as a group, spending time at the site for several days trying to understand the complexity and layers of Slussen. As we were the video and editing group we closed up the investigation towards this media. We found videos on Slussen and made our own take on Slussen by collecting different movements on the site, and making a short film.
The overall aim:
The aim of this project is to find a possible solution for the site of Slussen.
Continuing this program by thinking in ways of architecture and film is now the starting point for this concept. To think of Slussen as a result of a film. Dividing Slussens history in a filmography. Until today the ”films” of Slussen has been directed within the same format
(Birger Jarl and the foundations for Slussen)
Slussen I , Queen Kristinas sluss
Slussen II, Christopher Polhems sluss
Slussen III, Nils Ericssons sluss
Slussen IIII, Carl Johans sluss
For the last twenty years the same directors have tried to make Slussen V. This project is aiming toward a film which is not a follow up within the same format as before. Even though Slussen V will be made, this film shall serve as a complement to tell the story of Slussen. To make this film the set will be changed in order to be able to say something about this site that hasn’t yet been told.
Try four different approaches, four different scenarios to generate ideas for “the film of Slussen.”
This projects purpose is to think of Slussen as a project without boundaries, at least in the more conceptual phase. The scale of the project can be larger than the site. This may open possibilities in creating strategies for Slussen. The aim is to find the missing piece through thinking large rather than small.
IMAGINARY REALITY: activate imagination
When you deal with somebody, you erase things of your opposite; you make a selection, maybe an idealisation, in order to communicate. You don’t deal with every single aspect of the thing or person your confronting yourself with. You deal with a virtual image of your opposite that is the reality. One may say, you live in your own virtuality that is the actual. You imagine your own reality, which is not the actual for somebody different.
A threat can be a lot more powerful than the actual act of violence. The virtual act plays on another level with emotions or simply brain activity than real execution. You hear, think, remember, fear, imagine, reflect and get scared. If you get hit in the end anyway, you maybe just feel pain and anger. The tension of not knowing or guessing can create energy.
There are virtual identities that you don’t want to disappoint, like the parents don’t tell their children that here is no Santa clause, and the children don’t tell their parents that they already know. Nobody really believes, but it is enough to make somebody other believe that you believe. The believe is so actual it structures, it functions. One may think, many believes have to stay virtual, in order to function. If we believe to immediately, it’s self destructive, you become something what is regarded as strange or even ridiculous. Direct identification with a believe, is it in religion or politic or whatever field, can generate something contra productive monstrous, intolerant.
Pictures and moving pictures that are too strong to categorise them as virtual, have a interesting address in our minds. What to do with them, how to deal with it? Is it actual? Is it real? It doesn’t matter what you decide in the end, but the imagination unleashed is essential. It is highly virtual, since it’s your proper mind making up thoughts about something that is not real.
Can this stage of virtuality be taken down to the actual?
I use my imagination as a first tool.
What can I trigger by producing imagery of big interventions at a spot, well known to everyone.
Remix the actual Slussen and a virtual new built environment in a image.
There is no strict meaning behind the interventions, they are highly intuitive. They are about imagination and underline what I sometimes see when I walk past Slussen.
Do you label something immediately with authenticity when you see a representation of it that is in this or in that way? For example you see a shaky movie of a building flying around, filmed by hand camera in an amateur way, do you believe it? At least for one second and for the next second you still wish it was true and then you fall?
A few years ago, no, more than a few years ago in 1516 thomas morus was thinking about the future and he wrote his first book „utopia“. Is tells about people who lives on an island in a perfect community. An other bookwriter was herbert george wells. He wrote that book the time machine, maybe you know that movie from the 60ies. It‘s a story about a scientist who could fly with his time machine in the future and back. Movies like the metropolis written by fritz lang in 1927 or The escape from New York by John Carpenter or the movie of mike judge in 2006 idiocracy thay all want to tell us something about the future. Some in an dystopian way and some in an utopian way. Dystopie means that the community is getting bad in future and utopie is the positiv way or thinking about the future. But not only moviemaker or bookwriter think about the future…
Also artists. The first picture was made in 1897 / 98 and what they think 2000 would have happen. Today we have the year 2009 but the police can not fly, our hotels cannot move like a train but we can sleep in a train and eat there something and our streets today…we have trains but not above our trains are under or on the street…and we have much more cars than in thas picture. What a pitty that we could not tell him what happend today where we are in the year 2000. The second picture is from 1953 and made by Helmuth Ellgaard. He wants to have a landing place in the air. It is an idea 50 years ago and we don‘t have that today. A picture made by Nils Seifert. He thinks that our future maybe look like that in 2208 . We will see.
People think about the future, how it will look. some ideas about the future are pessimistic and some are optimistic. But to think about our „near“ future, how it will looks like, we have to think about the environment, because this is one of many reasons how our future would looks like. There are a lot of scientists who works on projects for a better future to protect our world.
There are a lot of wind turbines who produce electricity and between them are standing faked trees. They are carrying the co2 emissions of 75 cars. But that is not all. On the top of the roofs on our buildings should be mirrors or white colored roofs. That is to reflects the insulation or the shafts of sunlight. Another project is to protect our world with sulfur fog over the globe. Or maybe with this big ships in the oceans. They produce faked clouds and the reason therefore is also to protect us of the shafts of sunlight.
The hanging gardens of Barcelona (project made by the Why Factory). Food is typically is grown in rural areas and consumed in cities. If the planet is to survive we must cease transporting foodstuffs on highways or freight trains or we must grow the food (corn and beans) in our cities, for example on a skyscraper as you can see here on that picture. The food industry is one of needless transportation and waste. We transport food from every corner of the world and while we produce more than we can consume, we‘re still hungry. The food industry is one of the largest industries. Land use and transportation is minimized in the self-sustaining cities of the totalitarian vegan order. Vegan thinking is because of the co2 reduction. Did you know that if we produce 1 kg of meat the co2 emission is 6,5 gramm but if we produce 1 kg of vegetable the co2 emission is 0,15 grams. That means for the future, we should‘nt eat so much meat.
For a better transporting system we should connect our world better or closer. The average annual distance travelled by each of earth‘s inhabitants was in 1950 1,334 passenger kilometres. This is equivalent to a daily commute of 3,6 kilometres per person. Today the mobility of the world‘s population has surpassed 4,781 kilometres per year, or over 13 km per person per day. The future demand is even higher. That means, we need a global shortcut. we should bring the world closer by connecting cities from different parts of the world to be reachable in less than half an hour and not with the plane. The shortcut system should connect our world under the earth and with no fuel because of magnetic levitation.
Or for the future after the future…we need robot cities.
Everything would be automatic and optimized. Robots will manufacture all consumer products, they will transport anything from anywhere and move us to any place in time. There is nothing permanent except change. Architecture should be able to follow the stream of change because of the global climate and economic crisis, big changes are needed.
How can we show that people? Maybe also with pictures…
The project is an exploration into the potential of our greatest information sharing system so far – the web. How can architects best tap into this ”global resource”, which continually records and sorts vast amounts of information? What opportunities does it really provide, when working on a project? The internet has already brought about some collaborative projects that match the professional alternative, at a lower cost. If the architect’s future role will be diminishing because of this increased participation, then the architect’s demands for keeping in control stand in conflict with free-flow of information. How does one work with this trend, rather than against it? What implications could this development have on design? Will the architectural aesthetics and technical highground of today sink like a war-torn battleship?
It could be argued that the web needs more representation in physical form. Our social networks seem to be functioning increasingly in the virtual. But people are also arranging meetings with others that they have met solely on the web. Does this suggest we should design physical space in a way which acts as a web-counterweight, in order to promote these real world meetings? Is this something the city could do collaboratively? Surely they(we) know what they(we) need, if anyone.
Perhaps there is an alternative economic model that is yet to emerge. Could the notion of client, in the classic sense, be challenged increasingly? Is there a more time-efficient way to arrange an architectural competition than the capitalist, competitive version? Can a collaborative method exist, where, through goodwill, the best information from ”everyone” is extracted and merged with the help of the internet? (and all their money too)
If architecture essentially represents a frozen state of culture and information, how do we know when to halt a project which is internet-based? In real world cases, by the time construction works finish, the building is already dated. Maybe the science-fiction-like nano-robot-morphing-city-of-the-future will remove the gap in time between a state of information and its physical representation.
Slussen is a complex enmeshed spatial structure, which cannot be regarded as an ordinary traditional architecture building. I am using film/video as a tool to analyse and presenting Slussen from different perspectives. Zoom in to a specific activity for example skateboarding shows Slussen as a continuous space with permanent changing space dimensions, surface textures and ambient noises. I want to complement the existing Slussen with new concepts of space creating new activities and experience for pedestrians.
We need to understand our past if we want to change our future and we need to study society mechanism to understand our present. Using as a starting point Vico’s ideal conception of history, I tried to examine how history change during time and why, focusing on the role of images and the way we think about the future. Analysing different key figures I understood the connection between the ideal city and the way they are represented – their relationship between space and time and the way their images and meanings are interpreted. Investigating various philosophers and architects, as well as artists and politicians, a point emerged from this analysis: we need to live in an eternal temporality condition.
This is what I’m trying to do in Slussen, breaking the idea of the border, thinking about an architectural machine that is able to upgrade itself over time.
Answering to society’s issues, working as an human heart able to expand and at the same time to contract. It cannot be a static structure because we are not living in a static society, even the program has to change when society requires it to. From this comes the idea of a generic structure, that is going to born on Slussen remains and it will be able to fill up with different events, a sort of eternal temporarily art exhibition. Agree with Foucault heterotopia definition as a kind of neutral zone beyond the domination of conventional social structures of power and power relations, we are living the “generic space” and rather than design external surface I believe in what we are going to hang on the wall.
We are in a period of a lack of meaning, where machine and technology are governing us rather than us using them for our purpose, what we need is trying to rediscover the role of architecture in relation to human being, starting from the idea that more is interesting.
Representation and Presentation: Implications in Architecture
My work has consisted of analysing how architecture as a discipline is represented, how this has changed over time, and essentially the affect this has had on the architectural output and form of a project. From conception to Realization: Technique as a Determinant of Form Naturally our main aid as architects is via the medium of drawings. We should address and take careful note of the fact that design technique, be it elevation/plan, or axo, or 3d, has certain implications and restrictions that tend to be translated in the architecture. Our buildings are as much results of the tools we use as our own input. What I have tried to explore is this relationship between image and space. As one example, lets take the Villa Savoye as a reference. Here the architecture and image are one, owing to the process of design, they have a strong correlation. We see a very different occurrence when we compare it to, say Ronchamp (this image was drawn post-design, axo was not used as a design tool). There seems to be some sort of disagreement between the medium, and the building.
The traditional representations we use translate poorly to Slussen, be they plan, perspective, axo. In trying to understand and represent the place I made some short videos experimenting with how to describe space both a physical and abstract way, by using multi-perspective and more traditional 2d viewing angles.
My project is based on studying about public space in China. I have studied three cities in China which are Beijing, Shenyang and Dalian. I try to understand the city plans and find out some points that I can use in Slussen. During the study of Dalian, a city where my university is located, I got some spark about my concept. Dalian is a city that uses squares to organize space of the whole city. To some degree it has the same situation as Stockholm. There are lots of seaside roads, pedestrians, romantic parks and so on. So I came up with my starting point —joints connection.
I collected every squares of the whole area including Gamlastan and Sodermalm and walked through them. Then I chose one route to begin my study work. I want to connect these three squares— Kungsträdgården, Slussen, Medborgarplatsen and two paths between them. I have studied these five elements and try to find out what Slussen should be.
According to my analysis, this route can be separated into two parts. One is from Kungsträdgården to Slussen, and the other is from Medborgarplatsen to Slussen. I think the first one is full of tourists and the other is more about business and entertainment. So from either way, when coming to Slussen, I think there should be a place for people to stay. After travelling or shopping or something, people will need some place to rest, to relax, to calm down. I think Slussen should play this role.
I will keep working on my idea about connecting these five joints and know much more information about these places. I will try to study these five things as an entirety and find out the answer to Slussen.
The Scale of Public Spaces
Slussen is mostly regarded as a traffic junction. Different traffic layers are merging and the highest significance is given to the organization of traffic. Observing the diversity of Slussen from the view of a pedestrian, the complexity of Slussen´s public space is revealed. In fact the amount of public spaces and traffic areas is nearly the same. Moving through Slussen as a pedestrian, the area offers a big variety of different scales. Big scales are represented on public places and squares and small scales are disclosed in the narrow underground passages and openings.
As space is related to scale and size, public space Slussen offers a variety in this context. From this point of departure multiple opportunities of transforming the area are created. Using an index of actions [reduce, open, link] connected with different scales [ large, medium, small, xsmall ] possible changes of public space are shown by a range of examples.
Production of architecture at Slussen
In the first part of Production of architecture at Slussen I tried to understand the site and all the complexity around it. It was an attempt to analyse the architectural spaces and also at the same time figure out the ongoing debate and political situation that has been Slussens dilemma for a long period of time. I created an overview of these dimensions of Slussen starting with the physical aspects trying to define the site on different levels. In text and with diagrams I want to create my own definition of the physical and also the mental idea of what Slussen is. I started the work with cataloguing the different spaces into different typologies and this will be a continuous work which is just started.
The conclusion of my analysis of Slussen is that it is a unique space full of potential in a central spot in the city, but it’s not really used for anything. (Except being a point for transition, a space where commuters change from metro to bus or train to metro etc.) Here we go on complaining about that Stockholm doesn’t have spaces in the cities that remain unprogrammed, we spend miles of paper and ink on writing debate articles in the newspapers and columns in architecture magazines, while Slussen is just out there, full of possibilities. Instead of making plans for the future, speculating in what kind of city we want to live in, I want to focus on what kind of city we live in right here right now and the possibilities that it provides in spaces such as Slussen.
Since Slussen has always been partly under construction, I was interested to explore this theme in my project. I decided to do a proposal during the time when the „new Slussen“ will be built up. In this time (approximately 6-10 years) people will have to pass by the building site and will be disrupted in their daily life. I wanted to take advantage of this and propose another function for Slussen. As often in building sites there will be abandoned places which can be used for a certain time. There is a big potential for temporary construction, which would not be allowed in Slussen as it is today.
I proposed four different activities: a playground, a hotel (camping place), a garden and a cinema. The infrastructure to create these activites is mostly made by reusing materials coming from the building site itself. The idea is that these scenarios will be placed according to the real building site and its construction schedule.
Most people are looking at Slussen as a place to be or visit. For me it is rather about a place for citizens to connect between one spot to another. I find it hard to see how you can deliberately produce a setting for just being. For me that could already be found in Slussens current state. Slussen today consist of a composition of various transit areas. And what do you do in these kinds of situations? You “are” or in other words you wait. For me this kind of everyday architecture has been neglected by the architectural sector. There is no winning within these spaces as the durations of time people spend here are so limited. But in the long run this might be the most frequent visited part in the city structure and also the most interesting situation to communicate architecture to the public. Which has been acknowledged by the endless amount of advertisement that is on showcase in these areas? So the question around Slussen for me will consider the possibilities of how you can generate architecture that makes you intentionally elongate your waiting duration.
“What if Slussen was…?”
story by James Williams
“What if Slussen was…?” is a story. It is a demonstration of a concept I have for a future Slussen. It uses the ideas of memory to rethink Slussen in a different way. A way which can ultimately open up many possibilities of design for its future. I also, metaphorially describe the situation of Slussen in my story aswell.
The story is not a proposal. It is merely a medium for me to express my way of thinking. At the end I hope to change the way you think of Slussen, drastically or only slightly, either way the goal for my story will be complete and potential for future Slussen will follow.
Memory is a system we all carry with us, consciously or unconsciously. Its is the mental ability to store, retain and recall information. The perception of space is related to what we have experienced before, how we recall this information and perceive it in the present. My memories make me perceive and use space differently to other people.
Our memories are efficient yet also unreliable. We tend to think what we want to think therefore remember things which fit well with the story. Problem then arises, when peope view something with a preconceived concept, they tend to take these concepts and see them whether or not they are there.
How can we change peoples preconceived view of Slussen, or think of Slussen in a completely different way?
Graphics, as visual presentation, is an efficient method to highlight essential features of certain object. And Slussen is a vertically compound urban space with many layers integrating different functions and kinds of forms of space. I try to understand the complex compound space in Slussen in a more direct way by transforming the information of currant Slussen into simple two-dimensional graphics from public surfaces, entrances, edges, stairs and zebra crossings, five points of Slussen and to analyze the graphics to know the inner relation between each other of five points. Based on the former understanding of the space of Slussen I try to find out how Slussen will change with these three possibilities: compression, increase and mix in the vertical space. The possible changes could be analyzed from two angles: Slussen itself and the whole urban space. With these three possibilities, for Slussen itself the function, the form of space, human experience inside it, the appearance of it and so on will change differently, while for the whole city the composition of the urban space and the density of this area will change at the same time.
Analyzing the possible results and comparing three possibilities with each other I will try to pick several points suitable for the development of new Slussen from each possibility to activate Slussen and in the meantime taking the whole picture of the city into consideration try to find a better look of Slussen according to the principle of composition and the graphics.
I entered this assignment investigating monuments. What are the mechanisms behind monuments and what can be defined as a monument today? How can something not meant to be a monument become a monument. Slussen is a monument of both the successes and failures of modernising urban life and infrastructure. Yet Slussen is turning into a ruin of early modernism and people tend to be more nostalgic about this place because of its derelict appearance. For instance, there is a Flickr group called Slussen- Stockholm who state their goals as being: to bring together a great collection of images, and document this area before it is gone forever. In my opinion this is a rare area in the centre of Stockholm that can provide a “slum like” mood or can be considered a left over space, as a background for photographers. I imagined a future Slussen which would be in an even more ruin-like state, and made a Certificate, like the ones for the Berlin wall. Imagine future souvenirs in Stockholm, pieces of Slussen with a certificate!
Looking at the latest winning entry from the Slussen Architectural competition, there is very little to resemble the mood that is present today, but the architectural images are nostalgic, in a way. The water seems to be the contemporary answer to what will activate Slussen, with the lock as a main attraction. But it is the picture making that pin points to my conclusion that pictures are actual architectural proposals but say very little about the architecture proposed. This may seem a bit unfair but I will attempt to explain as follows. Architecture is produced by picture making, that is a fact. The illustrations or rendered pictures produced by Foster + Partners tell us a story I was interested in investigating I wanted to know, what story has been produced? In attempting a picture analysis, my first step was to have a closer look at the people in them. My observation was that they tend to do very strange things: wearing winter clothes in a summer, performing odd activities like walking on stilts on a boardwalk(with dangerous looking gaps between each board), as well as occupying only various areas of the image, in a way which would be very uncharacteristic of reality. But the thing that strikes me most is that the pictures (made to only have a very quick glance at) are actually not saying anything, in terms of architecture. Stripping he pictures of all the activities going on, there is not much architecture left.
These pictures are a fantastic way of saying very little about architecture. This could mean that anything can happen. It is a very un-monumental way of thinking.