2013年 安信金融大厦，深圳 （初步设计）
2011年 港铁 “2020铁路愿景规划”，香港（完成）
雷姆・库哈斯是OMA 的创始人，于1975 年创立 OMA。他毕业于伦敦建筑联盟，并于1978 年出版了《癫狂的纽约——一部曼哈顿的回溯性宣言》一书。1995 年，库哈斯在其著作《小、中、大、超大》中，以“一部建筑小说”的形式总结了 OMA 至当时曾参与的项目。库哈斯与六位合伙人一起，共同带领着 OMA 和AMO ，开拓超越建筑的实践。库哈斯曾获得多个国际性奖项，包括2000 年度普利兹克建筑奖和 2010 年威尼斯双年展金狮终身成就奖。库哈斯同时身兼哈佛大学教授，负责城市项目。
SELECTED HONORS / AWARDS
Golden Lion Award; Award for Lifetime Achievement
Appointed to EU Reflection Group by EU Council of Ministers
The European Council of Foreign Relations
Dutscher Architektur Preis Honorable Mention,
Netherlands Embassy, Berlin, Germany
Membership Legion D’Honneur, Highest French Honour awarded by the French Government
Pritzker Architecture Prize
Cronocaos, 12th International Architecture Exhibition in Venice
OMA Book Machine, AA, London
Dubai Next, Vitra Design Museum, Weil am Rhein
OMA in Beijing, MoMA, New York
Image of Europe, Heldenplatz, Vienna
Image of Europe, Rond Point Schuman), Brussels
Image of Europe, Haus der Kunst, Munich
Content, Kunsthal, Rotterdam
Content, Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin
Mutations, Raffinerie, Brussels
Mutations, Arc en Rêve, Bordeaux
New Urbanism: Pearl River Delta, Documenta X, Kassel
Rem Koolhaas and the Place of Public Architecture, MoMA, New York / Wexner Museum, Columbus, Ohio
OMA: The First Decade, Boijmans van Beuningen, Rotterdam
Deconstructivism (group exhibition), MoMA, New York
Project Japan: An Oral History of Metabolism, Taschen
Al Manakh II, Archis
Al Manakh, Archis,
Harvard Design School Guide to Shopping, Taschen
Great Leap Forward, Taschen
S,M,L,XL, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam, and Monacelli Press NY
Delirious New York: A Retroactive Manifesto for Manhattan, Oxford University Press
大卫‧希艾莱特于2008年加入OMA，在2009年成立OMA 香港辦公室，并于2010 年成为合伙人。大卫‧希艾莱特领导OMA 在亚太区的众多项目，他带领设计和监督的项目包括深圳证券交易所、腾讯北京总部以及台北艺术中心。大卫‧希艾莱特领导最近竣工的中央电视台CCTV大楼的最后阶段工作，以及OMA为香港西九文化区设计的发展蓝图。大卫‧希艾莱特于燕豪芬理工大学修读建筑及建造科技。在加入OMA 前，他是SeARCH 的总建筑师。
2011年 香港透视杂志40 Under 40 (建筑及城市设计组别)
2007年 荷兰建筑学会2007年金字塔国家奖 2006年 美国建筑设计记录先锋奖 1996年 德国汉诺威Constructec建筑奖
Ik ben altijdArnhemergebleven——荷兰阿纳姆建筑之夜
OMA是一家世界前沿的国际合伙人事务所，从事建筑师设计、城市规划及文化分析。OMA的建筑及规划项目遍布全球，致力追求建筑物灵动的造型，创造日常空间使用的不同可能性。OMA由七位合伙人领导。包括雷姆·库哈斯、大卫·希艾莱特、Ellen van Loon、 Reinier de Graaf、Shohei Shigematsu、Lyad Alsaka 以及管理合伙人Victor van der Chijs,在鹿特丹、纽约，北京及香港均设有事务所，并将于多哈成立新事务所。
OMA近期完成的作品包括位于北京、将摩天大楼重塑成环形的CCTV大楼；伦敦的罗斯柴尔德新总部大楼——新院（2011）；美国康乃尔大学建筑，美术及规划学院延伸部分米尔斯坦堂（2011）；格拉斯哥的癌症疗养中心Maggie’s Centre(2011);美国达拉斯的威利剧院（与REX联合设计，2010）、韩国首尔可多角度转向的多用途展亭Prada Transformer(2009)。其他备受好评的项目包括葡萄牙波尔图市音乐厅（2005）、西雅图中央图书馆（2004）、柏林的荷兰大使馆（2003）、芝加哥的伊利诺理工学院学生活动中心（2003）及纽约的Prada 旗舰店（20010等。
OMA亚洲由合伙人大卫·希特莱特（David Gianotten）联同协理姚东梅、傅唐安（Adam Frampton)、金刹迪（Ravi Kamisetti) 和Michael Kokora带领，员工总数约100人。
Rem Koolhaas of The Netherlands Is the Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate for the Year 2000
Los Angeles, CA—Rem Koolhaas, a 56 year-old architect from the Netherlands, has been named the Pritzker Architecture Prize Laureate for the year 2000.
In Europe, he has a number of completed projects that have won high praise from critics, including a residence in Bordeaux, France; the Educatorium, a multifunction building for Utrecht University in the Netherlands; the master plan and Grand Palais for Lille, France which is his largest realized urban planning project; and the Kunsthal, providing exhibition space, a restaurant and auditoriums in Rotterdam.
In a development in Fukuoka, Japan, his Nexus Housing is a project consisting of 24 individual houses, each three stories high. Koolhaas also has projects in Portugal, Korea and Germany, the latter being a new embassy for the Netherlands in Berlin, which is currently under construction.
He has a number of major commissions in the United States that will come to fruition within the next two years: a student center for the predominantly Mies van der Rohe campus of the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago and a new central public library for Seattle, as well as buildings in San Francisco and Los Angeles. Koolhaas has also been working for Universal Studios, owned by the Seagram Company, on a master plan and headquarters buildings.
Koolhaas’ work and ideas often spark critical debate in areas in which he has been working. While his radical design for the Seattle Public Library has won praise there, initial reports described Seattle as “bracing for a wild ride with a man famous for straying outside the bounds of convention.”
“It seems fitting that as we begin a new millennium, the jury should choose an architect that seems so in tune with the future,” says Thomas J. Pritzker, president of The Hyatt Foundation, “In fact, Koolhaas has been called a prophet of a new modern architecture. It’s not surprising that the Museum of Modern Art has had not one, but two exhibitions devoted to his ideas.”
The Bordeaux house, named as Best Design of 1998 by Time magazine, is one of his most important works, designed to fill the needs of a couple whose old house had become a prison to the husband who has been confined to a wheel chair following an automobile accident. Koolhaas proposed a home in three sections, actually what he prefers to describe as three houses, one on top of the other. The lowest part he calls “cave-like, a series of caverns carved out from the hill for the most intimate life of the family.” The “top house” is divided into spaces for the couple, and spaces for their children. Sandwiched in between is an almost invisible glass room, half inside, half outside, meeting the grade on one side, where the client has his own room for living. This room is actually a vertically moving platform, 3 X 3.5 meters (10 X 10.75 feet ), functioning as an elevator, which allows the man access to all levels. One wall of the elevator is a continuous surface of shelves providing access to books for his work.
Koolhaas published his first book, Delirious New York , in 1978. Author James Steele described it as “an offbeat but well-expressed and incisive look at the pattern of urban growth.” A Los Angeles Times article described the book as “bulging with novel theories and images about that city—among them an image of the Chrysler Building in bed with the Empire State Building.”
More recently, he wrote S, M, L, XL, which Time magazine called “the ultimate coffee-table book for a generation raised on both MTV and Derrida.” The Pritzker jury considers Koolhaas’ writings so important that the prize citation says he is as well known for his books, plans and academic explorations as he is for his buildings.
Pritzker Prize jury chairman, J. Carter Brown, commented, “Rem Koolhaas is widely respected as one of the most gifted and original talents in world architecture today. The leader of a spectacularly irreverent generation of Dutch architects, his restless mind, conceptual brilliance, and ability to make a building sing have earned him a stellar place in the firmament of contemporary design.”
Bill Lacy, the executive director of the Pritzker Prize, wrote in his 1991 book, 100 Contemporary Architects, “As an architect/philosopher/artist, Dutchman Rem Koolhaas has expanded and continues to expand our perceptions of cities and civilization.”
Lacy, who is president of the State University of New York at Purchase, added, “Koolhaas has amassed an intriguing array of brilliant projects that continually blur the line between urban design and architecture. He has a rare talent and ability to think in design terms that range from the smallest construction detail to the concept for a regional master plan.”
The formal presentation of what has come to be known throughout the world as architecture’s highest honor will be made at a ceremony in Jerusalem, Israel on May 29, 2000. At that time, Koolhaas will be presented with a $100,000 grant and a bronze medallion. He is the first Pritzker Laureate from the Netherlands, and the 23rd to be honored.
Born in Rotterdam, Rem Koolhaas spent four years of his youth in Indonesia, where his father served as director or a newly formed cultural institute. Following in the footsteps of his literary father, Koolhaas began his career as a writer. He was a journalist for the Haase Post in The Hague, and later tried his hand at writing movie scripts.
Koolhaas’s writings won him fame in the field of architecture before he completed a single building. After graduating from the Architecture Association School in London in 1972, he received the Harkness Fellowship for travel and research in the United States. During this period, he wrote Delirious New York, which he described as a “retroactive manifesto for Manhattan” and which critics hailed as a classic text on modern architecture and society.
In 1975, Koolhaas founded the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) in London with Madelon Vriesendorm and Elia and Zoe Zenghelis. Focusing on contemporary design, the company won a competition for an addition to the Parliament in The Hague and a major commission to develop a master plan for a housing quarter in Amsterdam.
In 1987, Koolhaas was hired to design and build the Netherlands Dance Theater in The Hague. Composed of three areas, including a stage and auditorium, a rehearsal studio, and a complex of offices and dressing rooms, the theater garnered Koolhaas immediate acclaim.
Delirious New York was reprinted in 1994 under the title Rem Koolhaas and the Place of Modern Architecture. The same year, he published S,M,L,XL in collaboration with the Canadian graphic designer Bruce Mau. Described as a novel about architecture, the book combines works produced by Koolhaas’s Office for Metropolitan Architecture with photos, plans, fiction, cartoons and random thoughts. The title refers to the way the architect decided to arrange the book: instead of a chronological timeline, it is organized by project size.
Koolhaas has designed a number of residences, cultural buildings and an “educatorium” a name alluding to a factory of learning, a shared facility at Utrecht University, among many other projects and planning commissions. In a major competition, Koolhaas was selected to design the new Campus Center at Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago, one of the first new structures on the historic campus designed by Mies Van der Rohe. In 1999, he was awarded the commission to design the new main library for the city of Seat …
Rem Koolhaas is that rare combination of visionary and implementer—philosopher and pragmatist—theorist and prophet—an architect whose ideas about buildings and urban planning made him one of the most discussed contemporary architects in the world even before any of his design projects came to fruition. It was all accomplished with his writings and discussions with students, many times stirring controversy for straying outside the bounds of convention. He is as well known for his books, regional and global plans, academic explorations with groups of students, as he is for his bold, strident, thought provoking architecture.
His emergence in the late seventies with his book Delirious New York was the start of a remarkable two decades that have seen his built works, projects, plans, exhibitions and studies resonate throughout the professional and academic landscape, becoming a lightning rod for both criticism and praise.
One of his earliest plans for the expansion of the Dutch Parliament aroused such interest that other commissions followed. The Netherlands Dance Theatre in The Hague was one of the first completed projects to garner critical acclaim from many quarters. Since then, Koolhaas’ commissions have ranged in scale from a remarkably inventive and compassionate house in Bordeaux to the master plan and giant convention center for Lille, both in France. The Bordeaux house was designed to accommodate extraordinary conditions of use by a client confined to a wheel chair without sacrificing the quality of living. Had he only done the Bordeaux project, his niche in the history or architecture would have been secure. Add to that a lively center of educational life, an Educatorium (a made up word for a factory for learning) in Utrecht, as well as housing in Japan, cultural centers and other residences in France and the Netherlands, and proposals for such things as an Airport Island in the North Sea, and you have a talent of extraordinary dimensions revealed.
He has demonstrated many times over his ability and creative talent to confront seemingly insoluble or constrictive problems with brilliant and original solutions. In every design there is a free-flowing, democratic organization of spaces and functions with an unselfconscious tributary of circulation that in the end dictates a new unprecedented architectural form. His body of work is as much about ideas as it is buildings.
His architecture is an architecture of essence; ideas given built form. He is an architect obviously comfortable with the future and in close communication with its fast pace and changing configurations. One senses in his projects the intensity of thought that forms the armature resulting in a house, a convention center, a campus plan, or a book. He has firmly established himself in the pantheon of significant architects of the last century and the dawning of this one. For just over twenty years of accomplishing his objectives—defining new types of relationships, both theoretical and practical, between architecture and the cultural situation, and for his contributions to the built environment, as well as for his ideas, he is awarded the Pritzker Architecture Prize.
Ceremony Acceptance Speech
I have prepared a short speech. And maybe I should start with an anecdote. It may be a strange anecdote, but coming from the Netherlands, and being born in 1944, meant paradoxically that I was ignorant of the issue of Jewishness until the age of twenty-one. In my youth, in my country, it was, completely unusual to indicate anyone’s religious or racial background, and it was an issue that we never spoke about. That changed drastically when I first came to New York, and was welcomed, on the Institute for Architecture and Urban studies, led by the architect Peter Eisenman, who deserves, in my view, the Pritzker Prize even more than me.
The first time I was there, Peter Eisenman took me by my coat like this, in a very aggressive way, and said, “Do you know why you’re here, Koolhaas?” And I said, “No.” “You are here to represent the Gothic element.” So that put me in my place, and probably explains some of the feelings of my situation here.
Anyway, I want to begin by performing my thank you’s. I thank Cindy Pritzker and the Pritzker Family and its foundation for their exceptional identification with architecture. I thank the jury who make such an inspired decision this year. I thank my partners at my office O.M.A. Each and every five-hundred-fifty of them have made the contribution that now turns out to be critical. I thank the Harvard Design School for supporting my double life as a futurist. And I thank my clients who triggered our work by burdening us with their needs.
After my thank you’s I have written three little anecdotes, or three little episodes that for me indicate both the recent past of architecture, the current situation of architecture and the perhaps imminent, future of architecture. And, I want to discuss some of the potential evolutions that I—if I’m not careful it will blow away the evolution that may happen in the imminent future. I want to start in 1950—fifty years ago.
Fifty years ago, the architectural scene was not about a unique individual, the genius, but about the group, the movement. There was no scene. There was an architectural world. Architecture was not about the largest possible difference, but about the subtleties that could be developed within a narrow range of similarities within the generic. Architecture was a continuum that ended with urbanism. A house was seen as a small city. The city was seen as a huge house. This kind of architecture saw itself as ideological. Its politics stretched all the way from socialism to communism and all the points in between. Great themes were adopted from beyond architecture, not from the imagination of the individual architect’s brain. Architects were secure in their alignment with what was then called society, something that was imagined and could be fabricated. It is now 2000, fifty years after the idyllic caricature that I just described for you. We have Pritzkers, there is a fair amount here sitting on the first row—therefore we have unique and singular identities, signatures even. We respect each other, but we do not form a community. We have no project together. Our client is no longer the state or its derivations, but the private individuals often embarked on daring ambitions and expensive trajectories, which we architects support whole heartedly.
The system is final: the market economy. We work in a post- ideological era and for lack of support we have abandoned the city or any more general issues. The themes we invent and sustain are our private mythologies, our specialization’s. We have no discourse about territorial organization, no discourse about settlement or human co-existence. At best our work brilliantly explores and exploits a series of unique conditions. The fact that this site’s archeological aspect is emphasized above its political charge, shows the political innocence is an important part of the contemporary architect’s equipment.
I am grateful that the jury’s text for the 2000 prize, casts me as defining new kinds of relationships, both theoretical and practical, between architecture and the cultural situation. That is indeed a sense of what I’m trying to do. Although I am very bad at predicting the future, too preoccupied by the present, let us speculate for a moment about the next fifty years interval—architecture as it will be practiced in two thousand fifty, or if we are lucky, a little bit sooner.
One development is certain. In the past three years, brick and mortar have evolved to click and mortar. Retail has become e-tail and we cannot exaggerate the importance of those things enough. Compared to the occasional brilliance of architecture now, the domain of the virtual has asserted itself with a wild and messy abandon and is proliferating at a speed that we can only dream of. For the first time in decades, and maybe in millennia, we architects have a very strong and fundamental competition. The communities we cannot imagine in the real world will flourish in virtual space. The territories and demarcations that we maintain on the ground are merged and morphed beyond recognition in a much more immediate, glamorous and flexible domain—that of the electronic.
After four thousand years of failure, Photoshop and the computer create utopias instantly. At this ceremony in this location, architecture is still fundamentally committed to mortar, as if only the proximity to one of the largest piles assembled in the history of mankind reassures us about another two thousand years of lease on our particular niche, and our future credibility. But the rest of the world has already liberated architecture for us. Architecture has become a dominant metaphor, a controlling agent for everything that needs concept, structure, organization, entity, form. Only we architects don’t benefit from this redefinition marooned in our own Dead Sea of mortar.
Unless we break our dependency on the real and recognized architecture as a way of thinking about all issues, from the most political to the most practical, liberate ourselves from eternity to speculate about compelling and immediate new issues, such as poverty, the disappearance of nature, architecture will maybe not make the year two-thousand-fifty. Thank you.