What the eye does not see?

With great passion, everyone expresses their opinions about the competition for the National Library and, above all, its results. More so those who should preferably remain silent, and less so those who actually have something to say. As a result, the not-so-large golden "wave" in Letná has raised a significant wave of discussion.
In the media, we notice the washing of “green phlegm”, “octopus”, “Smurf castle”, etc., perhaps in every case, while only eight finalist proposals were mentioned in more specialized circles. But what about other proposals? No one has yet noticed how unique and exclusive a showcase of all the trends in contemporary architecture has emerged right under the noses of Prague's citizens.
So what can we trace?
First and foremost, it is an effort for decoration. It is quite clear that architects consider minimalism to be clichéd and exhausted. The new decor is clearly seen in the structure of the material and its transformations. In the proposals, we find many references to various fragmented shapes, organic cross-sections, and flourishing applications. Shapes are sometimes analytically deconstructed, though entirely randomly compared to cubism. The coloring and rhythm of some decor are strikingly similar to the aesthetics of the 1960s. Generally, we can say that most proposals turn to tried-and-true elements, citations, or even retro styles. Is there a vibrant historicism in contemporary architecture? In the 1860s, pseudobaroque and neorococo began to be applied as historicizing imitations. It was a time when not even 150 years had passed since these styles.
Currently, it will be 100 years since the first functionalist swallows – in 1907 Adolf Loos built the controversial department store with a purist facade, Goldmann und Salatch. We are not lagging behind in Bohemia either: for example, in 1909, Josef Gočár built a functionalist staircase in Hradec Králové, ahead of his time. Are we then in a completely comparable situation as the historically derided architects of the 19th century? After all, even the winning Kaplický had to first clarify his inspirations in the past (Art Nouveau curves, baroque colors) in order to be accepted by many.
Minimalism and neo-functionality can also be found abundantly in the proposals, fortunately in slightly modified forms. Often, the vertical, stark structure of glass and concrete is postmodernly negated; at times, the aesthetics of these buildings are interwoven with striking decorative verticals.
The reminiscence of the 1960s is alarmingly visible in the proposals. A suspended glass facade, exposed structure (let's specifically mention things like diagonal pillars used, for instance, in the office building at the intersection of Evropská and Thákurova), the mentioned decor, color combinations of white with rich colors or black, rhythmic simple shapes (especially circles), the use of plastic, and chunky rounded forms.
In the proposals, we also find many whims. One popular article on the library topic stated that some architects were trying to be more "Caplický" than Kaplický himself. This is evidenced, for example, by the project of Jiří Skřítecký from Atelier 8000. The main element of the building, a small tower, is in the now-characteristic phallic shape of Kaplický, additionally broken by differently sized circles, behind which a vividly red circular spiral is visible.
The project of Dimitrije Stamatiadis is absolutely in the style of so-called regional postmodernism – the building, covered with uniform tiles, is of a very unremarkable, uniform layout. We should also mention the very remarkable project of Pavel Vandas. He placed a maze of alleys in the outer square outline, featuring variations of historical facades as if from many ordinary apartment buildings. It is a completely original solution that defies all concepts and primarily offers a theoretical contribution to contemporary architecture, which we hope is not meant to be taken seriously in practice. It reflects all historicizing tendencies, crowned by an archaizing portal with Ionic columns, a tympanum, and even a triglyph sculpture on top.
Once interesting, but now very overused, a motif is brought forth by the project of the Petrovic & partner architects studio, which places a monumental elongated, flat, horizontally positioned, hollowed-out, glass-opened cube on the main body of the building. This motif is primarily known from contemporary Swiss and German architecture. The monumentality of the cube was indelibly outlined in the design for the Estonian National Museum, where it is a kilometer long; the attempt to evoke an overwhelming impression from this gigantic mass will, therefore, always be a weak semblance devoid of any inventive contribution.
Many architects also bet on the effects of floor plan shaping modeled after the Berlin Jewish Museum. As an example, we can mention the "folding" project of James Reinda, evoking the opening of a book or notebook, or the letters "ZIS" or "S" on their side.
How, then, do we distinguish between quality and unquality projects? First, let's realize whether it is even worth it. Let’s drop the idea of imagining each project on the site of Špejcharská turn. Naturally, not every project fits there, and we unnecessarily deprive ourselves of the true grasp of specific proposals. Not to mention that after the first fifty or so proposals for “Špejcharská turn a thousand times different”, we will begin to be literally allergic to it.
The overview of proposals presented at the exhibition Eye over Prague offers a diverse probe into all possible trends of contemporary architecture. It will not always leave you feeling cheerful.