Site Meter
Art
Adrianne Jeffries

Storefront for Art and Architecture: White House Redux

by , 10/18/08

white house redux, control group, storefront for art and architecture, white house design ideas competition, political art exhibiton, politics art


What if the White House, the ultimate architectural symbol of political power, were to be designed today?

In 1792, a competition was held to design the President’s residence, and the result was the current White House. The Storefront for Art and Architecture, in association with Control Group, challenged modern-day designers to do the same thing in a competition called “White House Redux.” International participants submitted almost 450 entries with 55 animations. The twist is that after all the entries were in, judges realized that few of the plans were actually architectural designs. Instead, most were philosophical, political, satirical, often abstract — and highly creative. And you can see 150 of these proposals now at the recently re-opened Storefront for Art and Architecture.

Related Posts

7 Responses to “Storefront for Art and Architecture: White House Redux”

  1. Snark Snark says:

    On what basis were they judging – sheer quantity of self-indulgent bullshit? Did they count off for actual diagrams or renderings of an actual building that an actual president could actually live in in Washington DC?

    In absolutely none of the winning entries did I even see something that resembled a proposal for an actual building; instead, there were amateurish art projects accompanied by pompous liberal-arts gibberish that conveyed absolutely no meaning at all.

  2. Adrianne Jeffries Adrianne Jeffries says:

    i don’t disagree with you.

  3. urbanlegend urbanlegend says:

    well, Snark, the competition called for entries from any one, not only architects. The requirements for the cometition were open ended, meaning there were no requirements for actual architectural drawings – anything that could describe the idea of what to do with the new white house. so i think that the proposal for an “actual building” in this case would have been a bad idea, and would have failed badly…

    i liked the winning entry, and i think it covered a lot of the issues that we face in american society, of course in a very absract way.

    you should really try to step outside of the box and reconsider the necessity to redesign the box

  4. Brian Bostron Brian Bostron says:

    I agree with urbanlegend.

  5. PatrickP PatrickP says:

    Did someone just say “step outside the box?”

  6. eraidesigns eraidesigns says:

    I agree with Urbanlegend. While one could say the competition was open-ended, the competition did call for ideas for a building -for which designs would be very helpful in conveying. That is not to say that we need technical drawings but even just basic renderings would be nice. I also agree with Urbanlegend that the winning design “Revenge of the lawn” is completely innappropriate and has nothing to do with anything at all let alone this contest. In fact, I am not even sure what is written on the proposal is English. Whoever came up with that proposal must either think they’re funny or be mentally impaired.

  7. eraidesigns eraidesigns says:

    oops! I meant to say I agree with “Snark.”

Leave a Comment

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

Please note that gratuitous links to your site are viewed as spam and may result in removed comments.

Add your comments

NEW USER

CURRENT USERS LOGIN

Lost your password?

  • Read Inhabitat

  • Search Categories

  • Recent Posts

  • Recent Comments

  • Browse by Keyword

get the free Inhabitat newsletter

Submit this form
popular today
all time
most commented
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
more popular stories >
What are you looking for? (Solar, HVAC, etc.)
Where are you located?