Comments on: MODERN PREFAB: Nakagin Capsule Towers

By: rexdale

rexdale — Thu, 26 Mar 2009 05:01:17 +0000

“I can understand why they want to demolish this 1972 pile of washing machines. Take a look at some of the attractive new architectures in Dubai for example.”

I think William misses the point that this building is very forward thinking and contains a lot more thought than most typical Dubai and modern buildings. I personally like the way it looks, but I value it more for the ideas it demonstrates. The fact that he mentions “awe”, “admiration” and “beauty” as prerequisites for “truly inspired” architecture shows he flat out really doesnt know what hes talking about. I honestly think any of my architecture professors would strangle me if i used the word “beauty” in an essay or in a design presentation. Any commercial developer can pump out modern buildings with “natural beauty” by throwing up some glass and making it have a smooth facade.. I think this building should be torn down just as much as i think a Mondrian painting should be chucked into the trash. Its just a bunch of cubes right?

By: Silvereagle07

Silvereagle07 — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 22:26:01 +0000

Iam visiting Japan and would like the address of this building so that I can visit the area. Thank you.

By: Kwiz

Kwiz — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:45:30 +0000

If the design is so modular and replaceable… why don’t they just recast a central core in a new location. They could keep some of the boxes for nostalgic purposes, and make new ones more fitting to our time. I should think that a building of capsules would stand the test of time…. pun intended.

~Kwiz wins

By: GASNAULT

GASNAULT — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:48:32 +0000

Bonjour , je soutiens cette intéressante architecture de K. Kurokawa qui montrent une inventivité très intéressante … Cela serait dommage de détruire un symbole d’architecture contemporraine .

By: Elle

Elle — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:01:33 +0000

I’m from the camp that destroying this icon would be a shame – not to mention a complete waste of resources. Having looked at the photos of the interior this building is truly a beautiful example of efficiency. The modules could easily be revamped given the shrinking size of new technologies (iPod Nanos, Cell Phones, MacBook Air…even microwaves that you can bake in!) — I know I’d love to be given the chance to try my hand at it. What young, single professional (who isn’t all about the super-size me attitude of soaker tubs and king-size water beds) wouldn’t consider living this way? Less to clean, lots of storage…

I’d live here. I think the bathroom is particularly charming :). It’s like a fantastic puzzle.

By: a

Sat, 20 Oct 2007 21:57:58 +0000

i think i could safely say, on behalf of all architecture students around the world, that the day the towers are demolished will be a sad day indeed. The capsule towers are an icon of modern, urban architecture that has played a major part in recent ideas such as the M-CH microhouse. The capsule building is architecture at its best and for it to be replaced by irreverent glass monstrocity such as those in Dubai will be a sad day indeed. I only hope that the developers would ‘detach’ the individual capsules (the cores, sadly, DO have to be demolished) and resell them as iconic mementos…better yet, i hope that someone would have the decency to buy all the individual capsules and refurbish them and recreate kurokawa’s brilliance….

By: Brendan

Brendan — Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:50:45 +0000

d o,
I resent the photojournalist comment, as I am an aspiring photographer myself who has grown up with art and architecture all of his life (my father is an architect), but I completely agree with your viewpoint.
Nakagin Tower is something special…looking at it in pictures and viewing the somewhat obvious problems the building has are NOT enough justification to tear down the building. It is one of the most well known symbols of Metabolism, and is a historical property that I’m very surprised the Japanese government wouldn’t try to protect, seeing as they have a strong appreciation for their history (your reference to van der Rohe’s classic Farnsworth house made me appreciate your comment all the more).
Having grown up among Architectural Record magazines, and in an Architecture office, I am truly saddened to hear that Nakagin Tower is going to be demolished, as I have not even had the chance to visit the building, and shoot endless amounts of photos to remember what it was like in person, from my own point of view. As “ourdreams” said, and d o implied….Nakagin Tower is from a time when the metabolist movement was a dreamy, futuristic thing, that was actually decades ahead of its time….I can only imagine how wild it feels to go into that building, and feel the inspiration Kurokawa had when building this structure. After all…it remains exactly as it was when constructed….what a time capsule!

By: too rittle too rate

too rittle too rate — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 19:38:21 +0000

I’ve lived in Tokyo and always loved this building for its forward-thinking concept, but since I first saw it in 1980 it’s obvious that there has been zero maintenance on the building. Although it’s close to the Ginza, this neighborhood is a bit gritty being next to a freeway, and the dust and grime in the air has taken its toll. It’s clear that there has never been any interest in the building by its owners to preserve it. It reminds of the 50s in San Francisco when the victorian houses were considered urban blight, and block after block were torn down. Now that they’re gone people will pay millions for what inventory is left.

With people like ‘William’, what can you expect? I wonder what the exampled Dubai lighthouse will look like in 30 years? Will William be there to sing its praises and save it?

By: matchbox

matchbox — Fri, 18 May 2007 05:40:13 +0000

Sorry for the rather boring question, but does anybody yet know when precisely the building is going to be wrecked?

By: seva_nmb

seva_nmb — Wed, 16 May 2007 15:48:57 +0000

Surely there is both a preservation and a demolition argument?

In an age where we have the capcity to record data infinitely what will really be ‘lost’ if this tower is demolished?

I truly love and admire 60s and 70s architecture, but preservationism is a stance adopted by historians, not one aligned neatly with a ‘modern’ agenda.

Mike’s comment about the cyclical nature of development in Tokyo is absolutely spot on. Look at the work of Atelier Bow-Wow to see the unique manifestations that a capitally driven environment generates. The redevelopment of land in Tokyo and the state of flux should be embraced by urbanists and architects as delivering new and exciting typological shifts that cannot be ‘designed’. How do we respond to this? Surely the broader context of the nature of the city is of more consequence than the idolisation of a single component?

I lament the loss of any iconic structure of this age, but I feel one should let it go.

http://www.manctransit.co.uk

By: danade

danade — Tue, 15 May 2007 03:13:44 +0000

Apparently,nakagin is seemingly built in modular system.could it be rebuilt in anywhere else?maybe even presented in other form,just like LEGO
it may be a kide of preservation…..

By: d o

d o — Mon, 14 May 2007 06:48:27 +0000

Wake up !

Nakagin was a concept. a prototype and template and the first of it’s kind conceived to acknowledge the demands that would eventually be placed on the planet to shelter and keep our asses safe and warm.
A recipe for a foreseeable (and now) 21st century dilemma : eventual lack of space, toxic building waste, mechanical combustion (also known as CO2 emission), material harvesting, and on and on and on…

+75% of N.America lives bunker-style within gated gabled boxes repeat in plan (for centuries) hidden behind corniced and trim applique; also know as Lifestyle camouflage. And there are these comments that Kurokawa’s iconic tower is a questionable ploy ? Imagine if i took a hammer to the Farnsworth house !

Who has actually seen Nakagin Tower before they made their brilliant comment ?

I expected that these comments come from amateur (photo) journalists !

Those writing with the brilliant thoughts need only spend an hour or two to open up a half dozen years devoted to the current shuffle now being made by apprentices and professionals and talkshow hosts alike vying to save the planet. Sadly, and we’ll soon find out, the answer to this question and concieved a mere 47 years ago… is under the wrecking ball.

By: ourtimes

ourtimes — Sun, 13 May 2007 02:22:23 +0000

Kurokawa made Capsule Tower knowing that humans are easily sold with ideas of “novelty” and “change”, however on top of that, he was also concsious enough to create a building that could be updated according to future needs. Specially nowadays, where environmental concerns are high, re-use of the building in the way the architect intended it should be respected.
The interior is out-dated, no doubt, because it is higly based on state of the art technology (of the time, so i guess you can imagine) but it would be replaced by new modules with modern technology (and maybe even some fresh new magenta and cyan paint outside for those who think it looks too “dreary” :P ). If there would only be one metabolist building to be kept alive, i believe it should be this one.
I think that the metabolist movement was created in an era in which people could still dream, and this group of architects truly tried to make these dreams a reality. If the motives for the demolition are purely driven by factors concerning money, i think it would expose how sad our global society has become; there are millions of buildings that have brought nothing to humanity, with no purpose and without any philosphical or artistic touch (which this one has en masse) that would be great candidates for demolition, yet we want to elimiate this one maybe because it stands out not in the way we want (maybe it doesn’t conform to our aesthetic style today but would be a shoe-in in a few decades, so who are we to judge?).
Another contribution the metabolist movement brought to architecture is the following; “Modern Architecture” was considered to be what was the “good” architecture, yet “Modern” architecture had been dictated by western values exclusively, this group of architects stood up and (still agreeing with most priciples of modern architecture) showed the world that it was good to show a bit of local culture into architecture… something Dubai buildings should say a big “thank you” to.
ok…… sorry it was a long post….

By: Joe-sef

Joe-sef — Fri, 11 May 2007 21:25:19 +0000

“These modern type cities and their ability to move on is more important than preserving architecture.
Tokyo has a role to play”

yeah and we can still preserve the memory of the architecture and keep that as part of our culture while moving on right?

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 11 May 2007 19:13:22 +0000

European cities tend to hold to their histories, while cities like New York and Tokyo tend to re-invent themselves.

These modern type cities and their ability to move on is more important than preserving architecture.

Tokyo has a role to play