Modernism Reinterpreted Through Manhattanism
A history thesis on the relation between the early work of OMA and the principles of Modernism
J. Hoepman (TU Delft - Architecture and the Built Environment)
M.M. Teunissen – Mentor (TU Delft - Teachers of Practice / A)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
This thesis examines the extent to which the early work of Rem Koolhaas and the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) draws upon the architectural and urbanistic principles of Modernism. Building on Jeffrey Kipnis’s (1996) assertion that “Koolhaas is the Le Corbusier of our times,” the research extends beyond biographical comparison to investigate formal, theoretical, and strategic parallels. Koolhaas’s ambiguous relationship to Modernism — particularly to Le Corbusier — is positioned as both critical and referential. His provocative statement in Delirious New York (1978) that Le Corbusier “solves the Problem, but kills the Culture of Congestion” frames the central inquiry of this study.
The thesis begins by outlining Modernism’s emergence as a response to three crises brought on by industrialization: overcrowded urban conditions, the fragmentation of architectural authority, and the collapse of established aesthetic frameworks. It then contrasts Modernism’s rational, hygienic, and functionally segregated urban vision with Koolhaas’s embrace of congestion, contradiction, and density — what he terms the “Culture of Congestion.”
Three comparative case studies — De Kunsthal, Jussieu Libraries, and Villa dall’Ava — reveal how Koolhaas reinterprets canonical Modernist typologies. Rather than replicating Modernism’s emphasis on order and isolation, Koolhaas deploys its formal logic in service of ambiguity, multiplicity, and spatial narrative.
Ultimately, the thesis finds that Koolhaas’s early work, in terms of both architecture and urbanism, does not reject Modernism, but reformulates it. Through a critical yet generative appropriation of its principles, Koolhaas constructs a design language that responds to the complexities of the contemporary metropolis while maintaining a dialogue with Modernism’s legacy.