PROFILE

We bring the wonder and mystery of the cosmos down to earth. We believe that architecture's role in society should be to give glimpses of the massive, hidden, dark, and abundant things all around us in the universe, in order to unsettle our habitual ways of being on earth.

Our projects are conceived as ecologies of lively, discrete objects that engage one another democratically and without hierarchy. Our objects are not reductive, like sticks, bricks, or nails, but rather fully-formed and specific things like jacks, crystals, ziggurats, mountains, cities, and forests. In our work, objects can be moved, rotated, scaled, or copied, but they can never be deformed or fused together, losing their identity.


We therefore operate as collectors and curators rather than sculptors or drafters. Our projects appear chunky, playful, provisional, and even sometimes like models built at full scale. The ecologies of objects that form our buildings set the stage for a new discussion of sustainability based on abundance rather than lack, where the world is not running out of everything but rather full of vibrant things that simply need to be oriented, organized, and thought in new ways.

In our practice, everything is invented and nothing is taken for granted. We are committed to using our expertise in design, computation, construction, and energy intelligence to build a radical and hopeful future.

What We Bring to the Table


Our primary expertise is with urban, cultural, civic, entertainment, residential, and landscape projects at a wide variety of scales, from the largest giga-projects in the world to small civic and residential works with exceptional design opportunities.

Each project is developed meticulously in a three-dimensional environment to control form, coordinate systems, detail facades, and visualize construction sequencing. We are leaders in collaboration on federated models, using REVIT, Tekla, and other BIM systems, and in building teams and processes around these contemporary platforms. We are also versed in the benefits and risks of various methods of project delivery used in the United States, Germany, Austria, France, the Middle East, Korea and China. We have extensive experience working with Executive Architects on joint ventures in international settings.

Principal Tom Wiscombe brings his previous 10 years of experience at Coop Himmelb(l)au, where he was Partner and Chief Designer for several major projects, to every project at TWA. These projects include the 70,000 square meter BMW World in Munich Germany, and the 40,000 square meter Lyon Museum of Confluences, two of the most complex and innovative projects built this in century.

We Make Buildings Like Cities


There used to be a division between disciplines like architecture, urban planning, and terraforming, but in today’s most ambitious, large-scale projects all of these fields have collapsed into something much more like world-building. TWA is heavily involved in these future-oriented giga-projects now, operating from the idea that buildings can and should be as diverse – and often as big – as a cities. We are engaged in some of the worlds most radically ecological projects, challenging conventional categories of building, city, and nature with exciting new arrangements of human and non-human objects, functions, and spaces.

Commitment to planetary energy


At TWA, every project connects ideas about form and space to opportunities for leveraging planetary energy, such as the abundance of solar radiation hitting the earth. Principal Tom Wiscombe’s extensive architectural experience in Europe translates into deeply integrated thinking about sustainability as a basic element of good design, and results in sophisticated, active and passive systems that are fully integrated into overall design concepts. We believe that we are at the beginning of a revolution, and that architecture must act fast to advise and influence industry to create flexible, efficient, and non-modular Building Integrated Systems.

While we are primarily known for our iconic design work, our office is also committed to innovation in workflows, energy sources, materials, and methods of construction for the 21st century.

Our Creative Space

We have a uniquely open, indoor/outdoor creative office space located in the historic American Cement Building near downtown Los Angeles. Our office represents the best of design and architecture, and positively influences our whole working culture. We love to have clients visit and take part in the design process, where we often fly through our latest 3D files with VR effects.

Deep Collaboration


The role of the Architect is changing fast, and we do not accept that the relationship between disciplines should be confrontational—everyone loses. Our leadership experience in building some of the world’s most complex structures gives us the knowhow – and humility – to understand the concerns of our construction partners. Whenever possible we use a design-assist model of project delivery, where contractors, engineers, and architects begin working together early in the design process, making outcomes more integrated and reducing risk for the owner.

Within the office, we use large collaborative workstations (nicknamed “Thunderdomes”!) to design together in real time. This process is immersive, intense, and highly productive. It allows everyone to contribute and communicate without the lags and slow iterative design techniques of traditional architectural practice.

Cultural and Entertainment Design


TWA is laser-focused on cultural and entertainment projects. We believe that architecture has a major role to play in enlivening our cities and creating social engagement. After COVID, the public realm must be re-thought. We believe in the ancient human instinct to come together to create cultural imagination.

Fiction, storytelling, and gaming are all modes of entertainment we understand, but also modes that must be radically transformed for the 21st century. You hear that cinema is better on the sofa at home- but this is only because our institutions and the market have failed us and we feel the need to withdraw into the private sphere. There is not one way of creating imagination, in fact the new technology and media of today give us limitless possibilities in terms of projecting human experience into the unknown.

Our work in the realms of cinema, museum, theater, and sports gives us the expertise to understand and question the typologies of today, and invent new ones. Principal Tom Wiscombe was Design Architect for BMW World, Munich, the Museum of Confluences, Lyon, The UFA Cinema Center, Dresden, The Qiddiya Performing Arts Center, and recently, NEOM Theater City.

Architecturalizing Landscape


We often hear about “landscape architecture,” without a clear definition of how this is different from “landscape design” or even from “landscaping.” This lack of clarity is not a problem of language but rather a problem of ideas. The cultural discourse of landscape has fallen behind those of art and architecture because it fails to take a stand as something distinct from science on the one hand and from outmoded philosophical ideas about nature on the other. One of the most suspicious claims we hear is that landscape design should mirror some primordial planetary state where things were untouched by humans; the problem with that is that there is no such thing. Humans have spent millenia engaged in accidental terraforming of the planet through agriculture, domestication of animals, and deforestation.

At TWA, we are committed to the idea that all landscape is synthetic and therefore must have an independent aesthetic and ecological agenda that does not rely on origin stories. We have found that the best way to proceed is to architecturalize landscape rather than trying to figure out what a landscape architecture might be. An architecturalized landscape is one that is based on unapologetically terraforming the earth, with all of the freedom and possibility that implies. We believe that landscape design is ripe for transformation in terms of what we consider to be natural, what we mean by ecology, and how landscapes of the future should gather human and non-human, organic and inorganic entities into surprising configurations.

PEOPLE


People

Tom Wiscombe, AIA, NCARB

Founder + Principal

Tom Wiscombe, born in 1970, is Principal and Founder of Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) in Los Angeles. His work is known for its powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, and tectonic inventiveness, all underwritten by contemporary ecological thinking. He combines his renowned design expertise with a deep knowledge of construction and project delivery — gleaned from a thirty-year professional career — to create projects with the highest level of care and craft.

Tom’s work is radical in its treatment of architectural entities like ground, massing, interior, circulation, apertures, and ornament as independent objects within loose, curated collections, rather than as incomplete parts of a unified, singular whole. This approach stems from his influential theory of the flat ontology of architecture, which imagines architecture —and the world — as a set of discrete, lively entities that relate to each other in democratic rather than derivative ways. This allows his practice to move beyond received hierarchies of big to small, part to whole, and existing to new, and toward a deeply ecological understanding of buildings, cities, and landscapes.

Tom is a leading voice in contemporary design culture, speaking, writing, and organizing discourse around the ideas of today. His 2021 monograph, Objects Models Worlds, captures the breadth of his practice and ideas.

Marrikka Trotter, Ph.D, LEED GA

Senior Associate

Marrikka Trotter is Associate in charge of Communication Management and Business Development at Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) in Los Angeles. She is a prominent voice in contemporary design culture, speaking, writing, editing, publishing, and organizing venues for architectural and urban theory and criticism today. Her award-winning scholarship runs the gamut from the history of intellectual, imaginative, and technical intersections between architecture and geology to big-picture provocations on architecture and ecology today.

Marrikka also brings over twenty years of practice experience to her engagement with architectural ideas, allowing her to interface with emerging opportunities and technical developments within the discipline with ease. As the head of the Architectural History and Theory Curriculum at the Southern California Institute of Architecture (SCI-Arc), she balances a commitment to greater equality and justice in the world with the conviction that innovative and breathtaking architecture matters more today than ever.


 

Kam Ku, AIA 

Senior PROJECT ARCHITECT + PROJECT DOCUMENTATION LEAD

Kam has been working as a Project Architect/Manager for the past 30 years. He completed his licensure requirements in California. He has worked on domestic and overseas projects; project types range from commercial, educational, hospitality, mixed-use, retail and entertainment. His specialty is high-rise hospitality and retail projects.

Apart from his professional practices with my previous employment, he founded a design collective, OCDC, to work on research and competition projects. It was active from 1998 to 2016, tallying 50+ projects, and received many design awards. He drew design interests from multidisciplinary practices such as industrial, graphic, and transportation design, experimenting with many digital design softwares and fabrication techniques intended for other design disciplines.


Charles Jacobs Jr.

BIM Manager and Technical Lead

Originally from Washington D.C., Charles' upbringing in an artistic environment imbued him with a deep appreciation for creativity & a distinct perspective on design.  He earned his Masters degree at the Catholic University of America in 2006, where he was recognized for outstanding achievement. He has 15 years of experience as a Senior Designer and BIM Lead, including at AECOM and EYP, and has spent the two decades developing design interfaces and workflows that allow seamless design collaboration.

Leveraging his leadership and technical skills, Charles works tightly with TWA designers and technical staff to maintain cohesion across all project geometry and documentation. He is currently focused on large cultural projects in the Middle East.


Binghao Yao

SENIOR Designer


Binghao Yao came to architecture through an early love of drawing and woodworking and his affinity for science and technical innovation. After earning his Bachelor of Architecture degree from Soochow University in Suzhou, China, Binghao pursued advanced education in the United States, earning his professional Master of Architecture degree from the University of California at Berkeley. With extensive international competition experience and experience at high-profile offices, Binghao brings strong design skills, the ability to meet tight deadlines, and sophisticated graphic ability to the table at TWA. His specialty is project coordination with large numbers of designers.



Dheer Talreja

CTO / MODEL SUPERVISOR

Dheer Talreja holds a Bachelor of Architecture degree from NIRMA University in Ahmedabad, India, and a Master of Architecture II degree from the Southern California Institute of Architecture. His experience includes residential and commercial projects at a variety of scales with a focus on digital visualization, fabrication, and technical drawings. His specialty is operating our 3D printing farm in support of the large working models we produce at TWA.





Jordan Micham
Senior Designer


Jordan Has a B.S. in Architecture from the University of Cincinnati, and an M.Arch. II from SCI-Arc. He has worked with Patterns, Oyler Wu, and RIOS, building his expertise in building geometry and interiors. His specialty is mixed-use and commercial interiors, as well as cultural venues and amphitheater design. His specialty is clean modeling and thinking around the bend.

Noah To Mora

SENIOR DESIGNER


Noah received his B. Arch degree from California State Polytechnic University, and has since become a new leader in the office, with a keen eye and precision in his work. He leads teams of designers and takes management roles for large building projects as well as competition projects. His specialty is concrete and steel structure.

Bobby Cheng

PROJECT Designer


After earning his BArch degree at Nanchang University in Jianxi, China, Bobby Cheng gained several years of design experience in leading architecture studios in the US before completing his Master of Architecture degree at Yale University. With a background in architectural theory as well as practice, he brings strong theoretical and research skills to TWA along with his design acuity. He specializes in the design of circulation and egress for large buildings.

Chenglu Xue

project DESIGNER

Awarded with a Master of Science in Advanced Architecture Design from the University of Pennsylvania, and obtaining his Bachelor of Architecture from Tianjin University in China, Chenglu has an amazing eye and ability to enliven everything he works on. He often does our “world diagrams” which capture TWA’s architecture in a social mode, filled with inhabitants and life and everyday things. His specialties are lighting, media, and glass.

Yutao Chen

PROJECT Designer


Yutao Chen holds a Master of Advanced Architectural Design from UPENN, and works on public realm aspects of our projects, in terms of landscape, shade, and atmosphere. He is accustomed to laying out large public spaces- both interior and exterior. Yutao’s specialty is large, detailed Godzilla Drawings that TWA uses to represent relations between construction, technology, and the social world.


Iris Gu
PROJECT Designer


Awarded with her Master of Science and Advanced Architectural Design from the University of Pennsylvania, Iris Gu is a hyper-focused and talented designer, able to bridge between structure, plan, and function. Her specialty is Food and Beverage design and services, contributing to the overall liveliness of TWA’s buildings. Her specialty is large Godzilla Drawings revealing the inner life of our architecture.

Panjing Zhu

PROJECT Designer


Panjing graduated from the UPENN Master’s Program, and has a B.Arch. from Xiamen University. Her focus at TWA is building programming and services, as well as area control and diagramming. Her specialty is hospitality design.

Xiaoxian Wang

PROJECT Designer


Xiaoxian earned her Masters of Science and Design at the University of Pennsylvania. She previously worked at Mark Foster Gage Architects before joining TWA, where she worked on large-scale hospitality projects for NEOM, including Elanon. She brings strong design skills and a great eye to the team, and currently is working on large-scale cultural projects in the Middle East. Her specialty is assembling kits of parts.

Wentao Pan

PROJECT Designer

Wentao graduated from UPENN in the MSD-AAD program and holds a B.Arch. from Nanjing Tech University. His talents include parametric modeling, transportation projects, and is a member of the International Solar Energy Society. His specialty is advanced geometry including stepped and oblique forms.

Chengyu Zhang

PROJECT Designer


Chengyu received his Architectural Master's Degree from Columbia University, and his B. Arch Degree from SCI-Arc. He often works in competition teams, focusing on building programming, layouts, and area control. His specialty is the exploded axo.

Niyousha Zaribaf

JOB CAPTAIN

Holding a Bachelor of Science and a Master of Architecture from Pratt Institute in New York City, Niyousha brings strong previous experience to her work at TWA. Her design work, influenced by her previous years at SOM, is precise and modern, supporting TWA’s repertoire of raw, simple, powerful forms. Her speciality is section drawings.

Daniela Abella Guerra

job Captain

Dani graduated with a Masters degree from Pratt Institute. Her focus at TWA is BIM modeling and project documentation and graphics. Her speciality is elevation drawings and precise line weights within a BIM Cloud environment.


Alvin Li

JOB CAPTAIN

Hailing from Los Angeles, California and receiving his Bachelor’s degree in Architectural Design from the University of Southern California, Alvin is known as a great leader and team coordinator, often serving as the connection point between our Rhino and Revit teams. His speciality is running BIM in the cloud, and site planning and landscape.

Matthew Pak

JOB CAPTAIN

Matthew’s technical and creative architectural expertise ranges from interests in AI, Robots, and hardcore architectural design. Matthew earned a Master of Architecture from SCI-Arc, which included visions of a city landscaped by robots. At TWA Matthew controls project geometry and documentation through deep Revit models.

Suyue Jin

technical Designer


Jin earned her Master’s degree from SCI-Arc, and her Bachelor’s from the Changzhou Institute of Technology. She has worked for Xuberance, Shanghai, doing industrial design, and studies under Eric Moss. She is a BIM expert at TWA, focused on tectonics and logistics. Her specialty is visualizing construction sequencing for complex projects.

RECOGNITION


Recognition & Awards

2020

AIA Next LA Design Honor Award

for the Dark Chalet

AIA Next LA Merit Award

for Orange Barrel Media Headquarters

2017

AIA Next LA Design Honor Award

for the Sunset Spectacular

Los Angeles Business Council Design Award

For Main Museum of Los Angeles Art

Chicago Athenaeum American Architecture Award

for Main Museum of Los Angeles Art

2016

Nominated for the USA Artists Award


Winner of the West Hollywood Sunset Spectacular Competition

2015

AIA Next LA Design Award

for The Main Museum of Los Angeles Art

2014

AIA Next LA Design Honor Award

for Kinmen Passenger Service Center

Second Prize, Stage II, Kinmen Passenger Service Center Competition

Open International competition

2013

Winner, MoCA Pavilion for The New Sculpturalism Competition

Invited competition

2011

First Prize, Shenyang Civic Sports Center Competition

Invited competition

First Prize, Shenyang National Games Judo Arena Competition

Invited competition

2010

AIA Award winner, ARCH_IS ‘Young Architectural Talent’ Award

2009

‘Best and Brightest’, Esquire Magazine


ICON Magazine’s ‘20 Architects Who Will Shape the Future’

2008

Selected as one of ICON Magazine‘s ‘50 Most Influential Design Practices’

2007

Second Prize in Novosibirsk Pavilion Competition

Open international competition

Finalist, Stage II, Czech National Library Competition

Open international competition

2005

Second Prize in Seoul Performing Arts Center Competition

Open international competition

2005

Second Prize in Seoul Performing Arts Center Competition

Open international competition

2004

Architectural League Young Architect’s Prize

2003

2004 NY Engineering Awards - Platinum Award for P.S.1

MoMA/ P.S.1 Young Architect Award



Accolades


Last summer, TWA debuted what’s known as the Sunset Spectacular, a three-sided, craglike, 67-foot-tall tower of steel that looks like it could have been mined from a metallic alien world. Vertical digital screens adorn the two sides oriented toward the street, and the ground level has an opening into which pedestrians can enter to see a light and video show projected onto its interior hull. It’s part Blade Runner, part Star Trek—and it’s a next-generation billboard in the heart of the Sunset Strip, an outdoor advertising mecca rivaled only by Times Square.


Fast Company 2022


TWA’s work has for years been at the forefront of conceptual approaches to context, energy, and the objectlike nature of buildings. But Wiscombe maintains that he’s not satisfied or interested in ending with the architectural image: “As an academic, I notice more and more a break between ideas of what architectural representation is and how we build or what construction documents are. I guess I’ve become tired of that binary. Anything that draws the architectural eye back into landing things on the earth is now my goal.

Landing on the earth” is something the Dark Chalet certainly does well. While the project raises many intriguing theoretical questions, the more interesting story tells of highly practical issues of documentation, representation, and construction. In an unorthodox move, TWA assumed responsibility for much of the modeling, detailing, and fabrication files for the complex facade. TWA also upended the look and use of construction documents, which cut up a building into thousands of flat, isolated details. For Wiscombe, the ideal CD set is “the Revit file plus a ‘Godzilla’ drawing or five ‘Godzilla’ drawings or however many are necessary to represent the full picture of the building so that ‘everyone gets it.’


Davis Richardson
Architects Newspaper: Tom Wiscombe Architecture’s Dark Chalet touches down on Powder Mountain

There is a connection between Tom and Denis Diderot, located in the vastness of their respective ambitions and in their explicit provocation, both social and cultural. But the difference is also profound and crucial: if for Diderot objects existed outside the contemplating subject, available for the understanding, for Tom objects exist alongside subjects and subjectivities, including his own, which are also objects. This permits lateral connections and altogether unexpected affinities to emerge alongside clearly identified interests and biases: toward the mysterious and ancient, the futuristic and the fictional, and away from traditions and affirmations of all kinds.


Thom Mayne
Pritzker Prize Winner, FAIA 2021


Like Kubrick’s Star Gate sequence, Tom avoids well-trodden routes to the unknown. In fact, I think he’s the first architect to say something dramatically effective about the capacity of mystery as a programmatic and polemical force in architecture, rather than simply use it as a common trait of the radical architect. The stuttering, glitchy, repetitive organization of offsets and objects within objects, like the matryoshka doll to which he refers, is just one way in which he gives structure to the deferral of finitude, and by extension, to any problematic relational view of the world. For Tom, mystery is both concept (wonder) and matter (dark).

Indeed, with 2001, we should just go into the hypnotic, psycho-spatial, technicolor void and prepare to be transformed. I go there quite often with my work, and when I do, I usually find Tom there too. His helmet is jet black; mine is bright blue.


Neil Denari, Architect, 2021

This project [The Dark Chalet] is unanimously recognized for its aggressive rigor, control over gravity, and materiality, adding grace to complexity. We should all sleep better at night knowing that beneath the nerve-wracking gymnastics, there is an underlying performance rationale. Undeniably, it is a dastardly, indivisible fusion of tectonics and stereotomy. Grotesque yet inexplicably attractive, it is a strange, mesmerizing new realm where familiar associations weirdly unfold and unravel.


Michael Fox, David Hertz, Kunlé Adeyemi, Mohamed Sharif
AIA LA Next LA Jury

Tom is one of the most inspiring and engaging architects I have ever worked with. His work is beautiful, relentless, and technologically innovative. As a leader in the solar industry, I am particularly impressed with the 364% energy positive solar system that Tom designed for my project -- an audacious achievement perfectly integrated into the architectural form. Tom is also a true leader: attentive and responsive to me as his client and to the other stakeholders involved, and yet always surefootedly committed to the integrity of the design vision and to ensuring its execution in the world without compromise. I consider him to be a world class talent.


Tom Buttgenbach, Co-founder and CEO of 8 Minute Energy
Developer of the largest solar fields in the U.S. 6,092,826,119 kWh of solar energy produced to date...and counting.

I am convinced that Tom is one of the most important young architects working in the United States today. I admire his work for its formal and conceptual inventiveness, but also for its deep-rooted constructability. His design for The Main Museum is premised on the idea of weaving existing historical features together with bold, contemporary architecture, creating an incredible resonance.


Tom Gilmore
Developer Responsible for the renaissance of downtown Los Angeles, client for the Main Museum.

Tom brings a sense of playfulness and wonder to what otherwise can be an arduous process of realizing the unconventional in public architecture. From winning the City of West Hollywood's design competition for the Sunset Spectacular Digital Billboard, through his incorporation of advanced construction engineering, evolving digital technologies and new art milieu, and responsiveness to community and client concerns, Tom inspired me with his positive attitude and commitment to partnership in delivering quality design and innovation to the Sunset Strip. I throughly enjoyed working with him and hope I'll have more opportunities to do so in the future.


Joanna Hankamer
Director of Planning and Community Development, City of South Pasadena

Tom Wiscombe's highly original designs command our respect and our fascination. As a theorist, he has also done a great deal to shift architecture away from the Deleuzean deadlock of the previous generation of design authors, and I have profited greatly from his contributions in this area.


Graham Harman
Philosopher Author of A New Theory of Everything, Immaterialism, and Weird Realism. Named one of the 50 top contemporary philosophers.

I have known Tom Wiscombe for many years both personally and professionally; as an architect, an academic peer, and finally, as a personal friend. Without a doubt, Tom is one of the strongest designers and thinkers of the current generation of Los Angeles architects. His prodigious output of work is recognized internationally for its inventive and intelligent architectural vocabulary.

Tom’s dedication to questioning architectural standards through inventive interpretations of form, function and context explores architecture as a cultural artifact that is shaped by contemporary issues, and ensures the profession’s relevance within the increasingly complex and integrated realms of the creative and the instrumental. I am consistently impressed with his ability to produce a highly rigorous, energetic and thoughtful body of work.


Thom Mayne
Founder, Morphosis and Pritzker-Prize winning architect

I’ve loved learning from the cornucopian, ecotopian visions of Tom Wiscombe for a long time, and I’m a lot happier for it. He’s the kind of person who makes you know that we’ve got this, and boy do we ever need that as the human-designed stage set collapses around our ecocidal selves. What the world needs now is Tom, Tom Tom.


Timothy Morton
EcophilosopherAuthor of Hyperobjects, Dark Ecology, and Human Kindness.
Named one of the 50 top contemporary philosophers.

I worked very closely with Tom as the Owner’s representative for the New Akron Art Museum in Akron, Ohio- a 7-year, $42M project. The Art Museum received his undivided attention throughout—believe me when I say this was not an easy task.

Tom is a great partner who clearly gets how to transform and incorporate the needs and desires of the client into amazing architecture. Through his professionalism and understanding, he gracefully navigated some difficult and trying processes, including challenges from a Board of Trustees and the City of Akron.


Carol Murphy
Owner’s Rep.Representative of the director and board of trustees for the Akron Art Museum.

Over the past 10 years working in high end custom residential real estate development, I’ve worked with a handful of architects, some very well known. Of these architects and firms, TWA is hands down the most enjoyable to work with. TWA’s level of engagement and attention to detail is unprecedented. The quality of work product they produce reduces stress for the entire build team. TWA does a phenomenal job navigating the sensitive balancing act between client’s needs and architectural design. At this level of high concept architecture, we often find ourselves building prototypes with details and conditions that have not been designed or built before. TWA is among a small group of architects who are capable of designing, and more importantly executing with finesse at this level.


Charlie Patton
Owner’s Rep. the Dark Chalet

I can’t say enough about Tom Wiscombe and the rest of the team at TWA. We’ve worked with TWA for more than five years now, first on the winning submission for a project in the city of West Hollywood, and subsequently on other media and commercial real estate development projects. There are a lot of good designers, but none who combine Tom’s level of design might, intellect, innovation, passion and dedication. TWA has consistently delivered on projects with tight deadlines while being cognizant of and committed to delivering within the budget. Tom has an unparalleled ability to find a design solution that perfectly marries a daring and beautiful form with an compelling intellectual idea, and in doing so has developed a language all his own.


Pete Scantland
CEO Orange Barrel Media

PUBLICATIONS


Publications


Objects Models Worlds


The definitive TWA monograph.

PURCHASE

Objects Models Worlds


Limited Black-on-Black Edition.

READ MORE


Object Models Worlds (Abridged)


TWA Pocketbook #1

PURCHASE


Conversations about Architecture and Objects


TWA Pocketbook #2

PURCHASE


WRITINGS & CONVERSATIONS

On Mass Vs. Graphics: A Conversation

Excerpted from Objects Models Worlds

On Mass Vs. Graphics

Joe Ledbetter / Tom Wiscombe



Tom Wiscombe I’m really excited about our ongoing project together  — to think about what happens to architecture as a toy or a model, but also to think about a toy or model as architecture. One of the things that interests both of us is the relation between mass and graphics, and how graphics can be used to alter the reading of mass. Some graphic moves can reinforce boundaries, while others can create ambiguity. We both sometimes use fake reflections or shadows across objects to these ends. . . when did you start doing that?

Joe Ledbetter  I’m really excited about this project as well. It’s challenging and a bit out of my wheelhouse which makes it all the more thrilling. I know I’m still trying to wrestle with the idea of architecture as a toy and a toy as architecture. Where do the definitions overlap? Maybe definitions are too limiting? In any case, I can’t wait to really tackle this together.

I began playing with artificial highlights and shadows when I first began to work in 3D back in 2004. I stumbled across this idea as I was trying to replicate 2D characters from my paintings into designer toys. I instantly found it created a really unique and interesting look —  something that stood out from the crowd. Holding the toy in my hands, it seemed superimposed because it somewhat defied reality and the nature of light and the physical environment. It felt subversive against nature in a playful way.

Architecture however is an entirely different animal. You really have the opportunity to play on these massive scales and work with the sun, different times of the day, seasons, weather, hard shadows, etc., not to mention taking into account the angles at which people will see and experience the structures. You get to dictate how people view your work to some extent, though at the same time you can’t control when they will experience it. The variables seem a bit overwhelming to me. How much are you thinking about creating natural and artificial shadows, reflections, etc. while you’re designing? Are you thinking a lot about how natural shadows will cast? How much do you leave it up to chance and let the environment do whatever it’s going to do?

TW  I totally agree that objects are so much more intriguing when they defy reality, or are as you say, are “subversive against nature.” Architectural design software reached a point about 20 years ago when it could perfectly recreate natural shadows, and that always bothered me. What is the purpose of mirroring reality as we already know it or modelling things we can easily predict? When I was a kid, I remember loving off-world sci-fi scenes where there were 10 moons or 3 suns, casting multiple shadows and reflections, and destabilizing “earthiness.”

So yes, at some point about 7 years ago, I started thinking about how to remove a building from its relational atmospheric network and put it in an alternate one. We invented what we called the “light studio” which was a kind of miniature digital stage where we lit digital models using all artificial lights. We used grids of fluorescents, fields of starlights, and even strange illuminated objects just out of the scene  —  all with the intent of defamiliarizing the way architecture reflects its context. We eventually took these shadows and reflections and physically embedded them into the architecture as different materials and facade types. When the building is built, you get the feeling that it is not quite meant for this world although it may exist in it.

It’s interesting that you began to anticipate 3D toy designs in your paintings, and that those shade/shadow effects somehow remained in the actual 3D object. What was a kind of strategy of increasing realism becomes a technique of speculative realism. It is a kind of magic trick, where at first you think you are seeing a figure with some features graphically emphasized, but you then realize that the graphics are actually destabilizing the figure, making it vibrate. Architecture is really hard to make vibrate like that! It is so big and there are so many cultural projections on it, and of course there is gravity that always keeps it pinned in place. Do you ever use fake gravity?

JL I’ve found that I have become more interested in defying gravity the longer I design toys. I suppose the limitations of gravity have always been a challenge for people throughout the ages. I love finding new ways to balance a toy or give the illusion that the figure is jumping or even flying. I’ve always felt that a static pose can often be quite boring.

Some of my favorite examples are my charging Ram, the “Pelican’t” and my Wolfgang figure who is leaping in excitement. A more recent project involves a stack of characters hitching a ride on a scooter. Here I am trying to create the sense of weight and movement, all while balancing an impossible stack of creatures. But none of that is using “fake gravity,” which I suppose is the opposite of defying it. By “fake gravity” you mean emphasizing and exaggerating weight and gravity’s effects?

TW  For me the term “fake” implies a world of imagination rather than scientism where things follow known laws. I love the idea of gravities pulling massive and tiny things together but not the idea that it is a universalizing force pulling architecture into low, bottom-heavy structures close to the ground. That inadvertently sets everything into a hierarchy, and mirrors the quality of the earth as a bunch of matter sedimented around a point. I prefer quantum “spooky action at a distance” to gravity — all though they are both technically “laws” of physics, SAAD seems almost impossible. SAAD creates weird communications and mirroring effects between things that make the world seem animate and mysteriously ecological. I also love that the term “fake” adds a funny, lighthearted quality to “gravity” which is something very heavy and dark and serious, as in dark humor.

When I look at your Wolfgang figure, I see you not only defying gravity, but creating a kind of alternate physics. His tongue is heavy and hits the ground, but then his leg is weightless but poised and his skull and eyes are literally able to penetrate the shell of his body. The laws of gravity and recoil and magnetism all seem to be in play, and operating differentially rather than uniformly. It’s one thing when, in cartoon reality, Wiley Coyote tries to catch a flying anvil and his arms stretch out, but another when you make physical models like you do with everyday physics operating in the background. It’s a lot like how I try to “defer” landing in my architecture — through illusion and sleight of hand. I love the way you do that in your stack-of-figures piece, by setting it on a puffy cloud of dust (with stars). Great move. While rationally you know it’s a structural device, you just don’t care because its precariousness is what drives the imagination.


The Inner Life of Models

LOG 50: Model Behavior, Fall 2020


Bruce Nauman described his “Model for a Trench and 4 Buried Passages” (1979), as a concept model for a subterranean space at an unknown, “much larger” scale. When confronted with this piece, the viewer is forced to speculate what it might be like to encounter it on a vast, almost planetary scale, and what its purpose might be. Is it a supercollider? A mausoleum? Originally shown in Nauman’s studio, the sculpture raised the surreal possibility that everything in the room could also be a model of some other, giant thing. Taken as a precedent, Nauman’s piece illustrates the crucial power of scale, which tells us more than anything else what a particular construct is for. Architecture too often becomes a mirror of the human medium scale, crystallizing our routinized sense of our position as primary and special. Upending scale expands our vision of reality to include things that exist equally but on radically different registers, like galaxies, mountains, and corona viruses. Architecture today should embrace the potential of the miniature and the gigantic in our contemporary experience.

In buildings, we always associate the scale of things with the number of pieces from which they appear to be made. One of the reasons the CCTV Tower by OMA seems charming and toylike is that its envelope features an overscaled channel pattern that overpowers the regularizing grid of its glass curtain wall and stands out against its background of conventional buildings, with their refined articulation. The result is a building that appears smaller than it is, making the entire city seem strange. Or consider Frank Lloyd Wright’s Ennis House, which is parted out into unexpectedly small “textile blocks” and consequently feels more like a Mesoamerican temple than a residence. A related technique from the world of special effects, known as “greebling,” involves the almost maniacal addition of fine surface detail and subdivisions to small, in-camera models so that they resemble vast technical objects like spacecraft. When medieval architects began designing smaller containers like reliquaries, baldachins, and tabernacles that had previously been the purview of other guilds, these quickly became vehicles for mixed-scale and mixed-material speculations. Tiny vaults and oriels were combined with out-of-scale jewels; miniature castles were topped with crystal turrets; structures were clad in too-big walrus plaques and crowned with oversized golden eagles. Freed from the structural logistics and construction techniques that limited larger works, these “micro-architectures,” as the historian François Bucher called them, ceased to function as replicas of full-scale architecture and became instead lively collections of multiscalar objects in the general form of a known type. Composite entities such as these never resolve into a unity, as in tired models of part-to-whole, but remain bundles of parts that continually catch your attention one-by-one.

On Engagement: Trotter + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

Buildings Are Toys Are Buildings

Excerpted from
Objects Models Worlds


On Mass Vs. Graphics
Joe Ledbetter / Tom Wiscombe


Tom Wiscombe I’m really excited about our ongoing project together  — to think about what happens to architecture as a toy or a model, but also to think about a toy or model as architecture. One of the things that interests both of us is the relation between mass and graphics, and how graphics can be used to alter the reading of mass. Some graphic moves can reinforce boundaries, while others can create ambiguity. We both sometimes use fake reflections or shadows across objects to these ends. . . when did you start doing that?

Joe Ledbetter  I’m really excited about this project as well. It’s challenging and a bit out of my wheelhouse which makes it all the more thrilling. I know I’m still trying to wrestle with the idea of architecture as a toy and a toy as architecture. Where do the definitions overlap? Maybe definitions are too limiting? In any case, I can’t wait to really tackle this together.

I began playing with artificial highlights and shadows when I first began to work in 3D back in 2004. I stumbled across this idea as I was trying to replicate 2D characters from my paintings into designer toys. I instantly found it created a really unique and interesting look —  something that stood out from the crowd. Holding the toy in my hands, it seemed superimposed because it somewhat defied reality and the nature of light and the physical environment. It felt subversive against nature in a playful way.

Architecture however is an entirely different animal. You really have the opportunity to play on these massive scales and work with the sun, different times of the day, seasons, weather, hard shadows, etc., not to mention taking into account the angles at which people will see and experience the structures. You get to dictate how people view your work to some extent, though at the same time you can’t control when they will experience it. The variables seem a bit overwhelming to me. How much are you thinking about creating natural and artificial shadows, reflections, etc. while you’re designing? Are you thinking a lot about how natural shadows will cast? How much do you leave it up to chance and let the environment do whatever it’s going to do?

TW  I totally agree that objects are so much more intriguing when they defy reality, or are as you say, are “subversive against nature.” Architectural design software reached a point about 20 years ago when it could perfectly recreate natural shadows, and that always bothered me. What is the purpose of mirroring reality as we already know it or modelling things we can easily predict? When I was a kid, I remember loving off-world sci-fi scenes where there were 10 moons or 3 suns, casting multiple shadows and reflections, and destabilizing “earthiness.”

So yes, at some point about 7 years ago, I started thinking about how to remove a building from its relational atmospheric network and put it in an alternate one. We invented what we called the “light studio” which was a kind of miniature digital stage where we lit digital models using all artificial lights. We used grids of fluorescents, fields of starlights, and even strange illuminated objects just out of the scene  —  all with the intent of defamiliarizing the way architecture reflects its context. We eventually took these shadows and reflections and physically embedded them into the architecture as different materials and facade types. When the building is built, you get the feeling that it is not quite meant for this world although it may exist in it.

It’s interesting that you began to anticipate 3D toy designs in your paintings, and that those shade/shadow effects somehow remained in the actual 3D object. What was a kind of strategy of increasing realism becomes a technique of speculative realism. It is a kind of magic trick, where at first you think you are seeing a figure with some features graphically emphasized, but you then realize that the graphics are actually destabilizing the figure, making it vibrate. Architecture is really hard to make vibrate like that! It is so big and there are so many cultural projections on it, and of course there is gravity that always keeps it pinned in place. Do you ever use fake gravity?

JL I’ve found that I have become more interested in defying gravity the longer I design toys. I suppose the limitations of gravity have always been a challenge for people throughout the ages. I love finding new ways to balance a toy or give the illusion that the figure is jumping or even flying. I’ve always felt that a static pose can often be quite boring.

Some of my favorite examples are my charging Ram, the “Pelican’t” and my Wolfgang figure who is leaping in excitement. A more recent project involves a stack of characters hitching a ride on a scooter. Here I am trying to create the sense of weight and movement, all while balancing an impossible stack of creatures. But none of that is using “fake gravity,” which I suppose is the opposite of defying it. By “fake gravity” you mean emphasizing and exaggerating weight and gravity’s effects?

TW  For me the term “fake” implies a world of imagination rather than scientism where things follow known laws. I love the idea of gravities pulling massive and tiny things together but not the idea that it is a universalizing force pulling architecture into low, bottom-heavy structures close to the ground. That inadvertently sets everything into a hierarchy, and mirrors the quality of the earth as a bunch of matter sedimented around a point. I prefer quantum “spooky action at a distance” to gravity — all though they are both technically “laws” of physics, SAAD seems almost impossible. SAAD creates weird communications and mirroring effects between things that make the world seem animate and mysteriously ecological. I also love that the term “fake” adds a funny, lighthearted quality to “gravity” which is something very heavy and dark and serious, as in dark humor.

When I look at your Wolfgang figure, I see you not only defying gravity, but creating a kind of alternate physics. His tongue is heavy and hits the ground, but then his leg is weightless but poised and his skull and eyes are literally able to penetrate the shell of his body. The laws of gravity and recoil and magnetism all seem to be in play, and operating differentially rather than uniformly. It’s one thing when, in cartoon reality, Wiley Coyote tries to catch a flying anvil and his arms stretch out, but another when you make physical models like you do with everyday physics operating in the background. It’s a lot like how I try to “defer” landing in my architecture — through illusion and sleight of hand. I love the way you do that in your stack-of-figures piece, by setting it on a puffy cloud of dust (with stars). Great move. While rationally you know it’s a structural device, you just don’t care because its precariousness is what drives the imagination.




On Flat Ontology: Harman + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

On Discreteness: Morton + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

On Models: Reiser + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

On Landing: Trummer + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

A Specific Theory of Models

AD: On Beauty, September/October 2019
Architecture needs new scales of engagement. The scope of anthropocentric attention is one of familiarity and comfort, defined by and for the human hand and eye. It turns all the diverse and wild entities of the world into things “for us,” as if all the snowflakes, gas giants, polar bears, kittens, and aircraft carriers of the world existed only to serve the human mind. Now is the time for architects to engage with the massive variety of entities and scales that make up reality, as unsettling and unfamiliar as that might be. Freed from allegiance to the human scale, architecture can refocus on challenging our expectations of what our access to reality is like. In the philosopher Timothy Morton’s Hyperobjects (2013) we see what can happen when we shift our attention from the human scale to that of the half-life of plutonium or the slowly shifting drone of the standing pressure wave over the Atlantic Ocean.We might also consider objects at a scale much smaller than human existence: “hypo-objects,” perhaps. In place of the human scale, we might jointly leverage the resources of the vast and the miniature, conceiving architecture at the scale of planets or toys. The aim would be to enchant the familiar by flattening assumed scale hierarchies onto a single ontological plane, as in the film Men in Black, when a jewel on the collar of a cat is found to contain a galaxy. ...



Download PDF︎

On Tectonic Fictions: Gannon + Wiscombe

Download here ︎︎︎

TWA Monograph

Kasra Press, 2017
While this turn towards objects could be misunderstood as a simplistic focus on gratuitous things torn from all context, in fact it has more to do with shifting focus towards the alluring qualities of things-in-themselves, while at the same time, realizing their fundamental inaccessibility. Consider a Bengal tiger, Kubrick’s monolith, a Mexican crystal cave, a blood-comb jellyfish: each has an inaccessible interior life which is not reducible to bundles of external relations. For architecture, this does not mean that relations do not exist, but rather that architectural entities might relate at a distance without literally flowing into or becoming one another. In any case, architecture would cease to be a hollow conduit of flows and instead become a nesting of objects within objects. This points to a new form of coherence in architecture, which theorist John McMorrough has spoken about as the space “between collage and emergence,” where objects simultaneously retain discreteness, but enter into...

Tom Wiscombe Interview with
Zachary Tate Porter

Offramp 11: Ground, Spring/Summer 2016
At first it was an intuition about severing and drawing out the connection between a building and its landing, but now I have begun to see it as crucial to a larger framework of thought. I think of buildings as worlds, not as extensions of World or Nature, terms I find to be a very slippery subject at this point in time. Those terms too often generalize and reduce the huge variety in form, scale, and agency of entities that make them up, favoring a kind of ontological lump. If architecture itself is a world, that means it might have a continuous boundary. Like a planet let’s say, versus a landscape. While those two things may sound related, one is a circle that has an inside and an outside, and the other is a line that implies surface and goes on forever. I think that the idea of architecture as landscape is now exhausted, and I think the conflation of the two actually degrades both and kills their specificity as concrete entities.



Download PDF Link ︎

None More Black

Hatch: On the State of Quick Images, Spring 2015
So, what you heard were my smart friends basically saying, “But seriously, are you talking about a new project of autonomy? And, if so, in what terms and how do you deal with context which is there, like it or not?” So, what I was fighting for in the review, and what we’re all fighting for in the studio right now, is the idea that over the last ten years, mass media has begun a campaign to make architecture provincial. We always hear about context, as if architecture could be drawn forth from it. I will tell you, it cannot. So in studio we are turning the volume up to eleven to see how we could be contextual but in a radically different way, by being so self-reflexive that the building literally creates a new world and then begins to influence and remake its context. That is why we are using the “light studio” I mentioned earlier—the light studio is of this earth but also not of this earth. It is real but it has no determinate scale. The effects it produces might range from something like a toy to something like a black hole. This interest is related to Timothy Morton’s hyperobjects, or rethinking the world in terms of things which are massively distributed and disassociated with anthropocentric notions of scale.



Download PDF ︎

The Object Turn: A Conversation

Log 33, Winter 2015
In architecture, a similar shift is underway. Formal experimentation based on smooth manifolds and continuous variation – both generalizing models despite claims to the contrary – seems exhausted as a project. Instead, an alternative is gaining traction, one focused on a world made of discrete, withdrawn entities, things that vex and exceed definition through relations alone. This impulse decenters the human–object or mind–world relation that weaves through architecture as phenomenology or other modes of direct human access, instead tapping into a strange sub-phenomenal world that we can’t see or know but can try to imagine. It forces a reevaluation of the discourse of sensation and superficiality in architecture, opening up the possibility of crossing over between how things appear and their strange inner realities. In Guerilla Metaphysics, Graham talks about this crossing over in terms of allure, which could be understood as a combination of allusion – we can only allude to objects to which we have no direct access – and alluring, that is, powerfully seductive. Reorienting toward objects also injects life back into the concept of difference in kind over difference in degree, which ’90s architectural discourse promised but ultimately failed to deliver...



Download PDF ︎

Towards a Flat Ontology of Architecture

Project: Issue 3, Spring 2014
Consider the orca.
A biologist might tell you that orcas are, like any creature, the product of DNA mutation coupled with natural selection over time, as if that explained everything about the evocative thing right there in front of our eyes. In that worldview, the orca is simultaneously reduced to an outcome of interactions of tiny atomic units and of enormous ecological systems. In a theoretical and popular world obsessed with networks, flows, and processes, it seems like the orca must also be a network or a flow or a process; to a hammer everything looks like a nail. But this denies the specificity and discreetness of the orca: the depth of its slick black rubbery skin, the alien figuration of its white patches, its toy-like scalelessness. Rather than undermining the orca by attempting to justify or generalize it, why not instead embrace its specificity as an object, with all of its mysterious, irreducible character and inclinations?




Download PDF︎

Burrasca Interview

Spring 2014
1. What is Architecture?
Architecture is the characterization of the transition from world to interior.
2. Which is the role of theory in Architecture?
You can't have architecture without theory. You can have buildings but not architecture.
3. What is the role of digital in your working method?
The digital in architecture is now in its third generation. The contemporary digital is about hybridizing techniques, making your own tools and workflows and avoiding single platforms. The most important thing now is to erase any trace or index of digital technique, and produce work that is unfamiliar and magical.



Download PDF︎︎︎

New Models of Coherency

YsoA Louis I. Kahn Studio, 2014
While this turn towards objects could be misunderstood as a simplistic focus on gratuitous things torn from all context, in fact it has more to do with shifting focus towards the alluring qualities of things-in-themselves, while at the same time, realizing their fundamental inaccessibility. Consider a Bengal tiger, Kubrick’s monolith, a Mexican crystal cave, a blood-comb jellyfish: each has an inaccessible interior life which is not reducible to bundles of external relations. For architecture, this does not mean that relations do not exist, but rather that architectural entities might relate at a distance without literally flowing into or becoming one another. In any case, architecture would cease to be a hollow conduit of flows and instead become a nesting of objects within objects. This points to a new form of coherence in architecture, which theorist John McMorrough has spoken about as the space “between collage and emergence,” where objects simultaneously retain discreteness, but enter into...



Download PDF ︎︎︎

Interview by Jeffrey Inaba

Volume #3, November, 2013
Well let me start by saying that I am suspicious of an architecture that is justified by or supposedly generated by climate or climate control. A climate is inherently an air, a heat, an intensity, really the opposite of an architectural object. If you delegate architecture to being a kind of consequence of forces or flows in a particular context, you have a logical conundrum. First, you are saying that something that preceded the architectural object can justify its existence without the object having to do so through the effects that it produces. Second, you are assuming that it is possible to generate architecture out of things which are not architecture, that is, not germane to the discipline. Both of those things sound like very strange propositions to me at this point, and I know you are not yourself proposing them. I am just following the idea down the rabbit hole.



Download PDF ︎︎︎

Beyond Assembly

Material Beyond Materials, January, 2009
There are a multitude of different approaches regarding the application and significance of composites in contemporary design, many of which are represented by the speakers who participated in the SCI-Arc-hosted conference, "Material Beyond Materials-Composite Tectonics." The event centered on investigating the relationships that currently exist between technological advances in materials, innovations in the building industry, and contemporary design discourse and pedagogy. This book documents one of the largest events SCI-Arc has ever organized and probably the first one with a direct emphasis on advanced materials and their use in the architecture field.



Download PDF︎

Subdivisions, Squishing, and Objects in Objects

suckerPUNCH, March, 2013
For the past two years I have been focusing on the relationships between objects, and what I call ‘the problem of subdivisions’. ‘Subdivisions’ has two meanings for me. The first is in terms of how buildings can be dealt with in terms of wholes rather than part-to-whole relations. I am tired of how building massing, interior, articulation, and ground tend to be dealt with hierarchically in contemporary architecture, or one after the other, towards a consequent and linear relation of systems and subsystems.

Imagine instead a horizontal plane, where massing, interior, articulation, and ground are things-in-themselves, and can all influence each other equally but differently. One cannot usurp or subjugate another. Each has some degree of autonomy, although they communicate with one another, push into or anticipate one another, anything just short of fusing together. I call this ‘Objects in Objects on Objects’. Specifically, we are considering enclosing objects, internal objects, and ground objects, an objective which links back to Kipnis’ ‘box-in-a-box’ problem in Towards a New Architecture (1993) . Whether these objects are inside one another or on top of one another, they retain their discrete character. The silhouette of an internal object is just as important as the silhouette of the enclosing object, as in an aquarium full of fish. The ground in this model is no longer the receiver of architecture, but rather a pulled-up, dug-out architectural object in its own right, which communicates with other architectural objects and the land it inhabits.




Download PDF ︎︎︎

Structural Ecologies

AADCU Monograph, 2009
A menagerie of geometries has been developed in the office over the past few years which we use for various projects. They are really prototypes, neither a chunk of building nor a detail. These prototypes are studies of structural, mechanical, and circulatory behavior, particularly in terms of their feedback, collapse, or hybridization as systems. All projects are driven by one or more prototypes, in combination with more prosaic issues of building massing and program. Prototypes are sometimes digitally animated to reveal their range of behavior, in terms of geometric syntax, growth patterns, depth variability, and transformative capabilities such as delaminating, branching, cellularizing, lightening, or thickening. Beam‐branes, surface‐to‐strand hybrids, and hydronic armatures constitute geometric/performative species that link recent projects within a kind of taxonomy.



Download PDF︎

Interview: Objects vs. Parts

Estonian Academy of the Arts, March, 2013
Yes, I am currently consciously avoiding some of the discourse on correlated systems and part-to-whole relations, which have both become dogma, especially in light of wide acceptance of certain digital techniques, in the last decade. It’s that moment, which of course happens every so often, that things which seem solid melt into air, as Marx said in his moment. It is actually funny how a theoretic framework- let’s say, for the sake of discussion, a Deleuzian framework- which is ostensibly about intensive forces, affiliations, and relations can become so entrenched and inflexible. Deleuzian thinking is by no means exhausted, to be clear, but the minute we start believing that any theory from outside architecture can fully describe the complex web of aesthetics, materiality, technology, and politics that constitutes architecture, we have a problem.



Download PDF︎

Emergent Models of Architectural Practice

Perspecta 38, 2006
The idea that innovation, whether scientific, technological, or architectural, is a byproduct of artistic chance or a result of singular genius can no longer be sustained in the 21st century. Complexity theory reveals that innovation - the creation of the new - is the direct result of bottom-up- evolutionary processes. Science knows this; industry is learning. Architecture is just beginning to engage the concept.

In order to move into this space of innovation, architects will have to accept the value of multiplicity and dynamic feedback over the retrograde nature of authority. They will have to accept that architecture might not be about essences and theoretical positions, but rather about exchanges of techniques, expertise and materialities in multiple industries. They will have to accept the architecture is no longer a heroic center, but one micro-intelligence among many...



Download PDF︎

Interview: Yale Constructs

Constructs Yale Architecture, November, 2012
You can’t describe good architecture in terms of its contexts, it always exceeds it context. Look at the white Bengal tiger. Evolution is a terrible way to understand bengal-tigerness. It is reductive, either downwards into parts or upwards into superunities, as in concepts of ecology and so on. You can’t draw forth buildings from information in general, and certainly not from vague notions of Nature or World. And by the way, buildings don’t evolve. That is why I have such a problem with contemporary architecture that is described in terms of the forces or processes that suppossedly generated it, and how architecture solves this or that problem. Animals don’t solve problems, they just are. Architecture does not exist to solve problems either, although obviously buildings do to some extent. Architecture is about freedom, imagination, and mystery. Science is about knowledge. The two are incongruent. Certainly when we talk about the discipline of architecture, we are talking about the humanities and not science.



Download PDF ︎

Patchiness

OnRamp, SCI-Arc, October, 2012
One of the most interesting architectural payoffs of this new realm is patchiness. Patchiness in terms of the variegated visual effect of a calico cat but also in terms of the “irregular in quality, performance, or intensity”.2 Again, what appears to be a lack, becomes a productive source of strength and beauty. The patchy is different from the parametric in the sense that it is not obsessed with establishing continuity via linear gradients but rather it creates intensive coherence through messy crossovers and sudden shifts in character or capacity. These shifts can be figural and high contrast as in tattoos, or have fuzzy boundaries as in the cat’s furry, rough-edged spots. It remains to be seen the degree to which patchy composite materiality and the aesthetics of patchiness can approach one another and productively align. This should not be a goal of patchiness but rather a possibility. For now, we can happily watch as experiments begin to pop up around SCI-Arc in an almost unconscious desire to move toward patchy, hybrid, composite materiality and away from 20th century material adjacencies, the aesthetics of the linear gradient, and theoretical constructs that favor seamlessness.



Download PDF︎

Extreme Integration

AD: Exuberance, March, 2010
In Terry Gilliam‘s 1985 film Brazil, there is an unforgettable scene where Robert De Niro, a guerrilla air-conditioning repairman, responds to an urgent call for help from a sweating man. He has intercepted a call directed to the totalitarian State parodied in the film, and drops in out of nowhere to assist. De Niro removes a standardized interior panel from a wall, and mechanical systems behind literally pour out onto the floor, in a shower of sparks and feeble pulsations. As he makes illegal repairs to the jumble of tubes and wires and ducts, he reveals his motivation: “I came into this game for the action, the excitement, going anywhere. I travel light, get in, get out, wherever there’s trouble.”

Brazil depicts a dystopian world in decline characterized by failing infrastructure and decadent culture. In its focus on dysfunctional infrastructure, this scene in particular speaks to architecture: it takes place at the threshold between the extended visible world and the intensive technological systems and forces that underlie it. These worlds are alternately at odds with or effects of one another: one is dysfunctional, the other merely keeps up appearances. De Niro’s guerrilla operative is the unlikely agent of change.




Download PDF ︎

THEORY

A Flat Ontology of Architecture


Architecture today is often designed as a hierarchical exercise in which big dictates small, or the other way around: details make the mass; outside dictates inside; form comes from function; either architectural form produces its landscape or an idea about context dictates architectural form.

TWA approaches architecture, instead, as if all of its parts were laid out on a level playing field. Each part can be operated on independently from the others, and each is treated as a unique and lively entity in its own right. Something which seemed to be the inside of an outside is no longer subservient but rather separate, and can develop its own features independent of its container. Something which is tectonic or ornamental is no longer subservient to the mass it finds itself on—instead it can move and deploy across the grain of the mass, following its own logic.

Ultimately a flat ontology of architecture creates misalignments between parts, and tensions between things we thought were fused together. A stair is no longer a continuity between levels, but a stair-object. A fireplace is no longer a core that centers a space but rather something discrete, with visible gaps to floors and ceilings, that peers back at us. Each entity has a strong separate silhouette. Parts signal to one another but they never fuse, and while one object might contain another, it does not rule it but rather embraces it or allows it to nest within.

Some priorities for a Flat ontology of architecture

A flat ontology of architecture is a way of seeing the world as a collection of lively, complete entities that cannot be reduced to universal elements or systems. While it cannot be codified into a language, it points to a style in the broadest sense. This is not a set of predetermined formal solutions but rather a set of values with aesthetic consequences. These can be listed as priorities:
Chunkiness over Smoothness
Focus on discrete, raw shapes with clear boundaries. Avoid fusing things together into continuums. Prioritize difference in kind rather than difference in degree.


Misfitting over Correlating
Things can acknowledge or anticipate each other, but they do not need to fit. Tension is productive. Gaps present opportunities.


Entities over Elements
Invent lively, composite entities rather than breaking architecture down into universal, rudimentary parts. Architecture is not elemental.


Collections over Taxonomies
Lay assortments of architectural entities on a flat plane. Concentrate on affinities over categories.


Nesting over Subdividing
Nest whole objects inside of one another rather than treating interiors as homogenous space to be subdivided by walls and floors.


Copying over Varying
Produce multiples of things at different scales and orientations rather than continuous variation.


Depth over Shallowness
Give architecture sectional depth. Architecture is not an image.


Muteness over Representation
Create ambiguity and doubt as to a thing’s purpose in the world. Architecture is not a sign.


Discrete Transformations over Deformation
Rotate, scale, or move objects, but do not harm or destroy them. Objects may not overlap, and must remain either side by side or inside one another.


Models over Drawings
Embody projects in chunky, playful models rather than developing them through flat picture planes.


Mystery


The world is full of things that seem familiar and comfortable – things we are instantly able to consume and that reaffirm our existing ways of thinking and being in the world. We believe the highest value architecture has is that is shows us what reality should look like, rather than what we expect it already does look like. We evaluate our projects on whether or not they are mysterious enough, whether they might coax people to return again and again. The sensation we love most is that of not quite knowing what we are dealing with. This is a state of imagination and wonder rather than a state of confirmation and judgment. In this era of rigid ideologies, we believe architecture that vexes and enchants is what the world needs now more than ever. Breaking our habitual relationship with the everyday real, even if just for a moment, is a great form of social engagement.

To this end, our work privileges opacity and depth in massing, suppresses the tools used to make a project, and either avoids or breaks known construction systems to create scale ambiguity.

Throw it Down


“Throw it down” is our office’s primary design method. It involves working with low-resolution chunks in quick iterations using discrete transformations. Although most of our work takes place in the computer, throwing things down, even if not literally with human hands, allows us to produce a sense of playful, effortless immediacy that is too easily lost in digital finessing.

Parts might be massive or tiny. They always appear as diverse collections and sometimes as copy-scale sets. However you see them, they will never be deformed, broken, or fused with other things. They persevere. The only ways we manipulate them are to move, rotate, scale, copy, and slice —that’s it. “Throw it down” means: don’t finesse a composition; make it fast and messy and don’t be afraid to jam things together.

Models


In our office, models exist equally with the things they represent. Seen in this light, models have a lot of weird consequences which have the potential to upend our anthropocentric bias, which is today the source of so many ethical lapses. Building something in miniature, or maybe out of scale in relation to the observer, makes you reevaluate how it might go together and what it might be made out of. It also forces the question of whether everyday reality should really be a constant barrage of medium-scaled things meant “for us.”

Models also tend to have fewer parts than “full scale” things, and so architecture with less visible parts has the potential to appear strangely toylike in a way that makes surrounding things feel more provisional and less known. The alien economy of injection-molded plastic sits in stark contrast to the routines and components of full-scale construction. With models, the shapes and details of each part are crucial: each is distinct and specific. Functional systems like structure and MEP are never emphasized or separated out—instead systems disappear, and are embedded into chunks. In our work, we call these chunks “supercomponents”: parts that contain many complex functions and possess aesthetic features independent from the whole. In a tectonic sleight of hand, functional continuity is embedded but never expressed. 

Model Kit as Method

Parting Out
Create non-obvious parts to create possibility not reductionism. Capture key features not rational breaks. Throw out parts that are infill or appear inconsequent. Curate.


Scaling
Differentially scale parts to emphasize different aspects. The kit thus becomes a space of possibility rather than a holistic, rational set.


Face Toward
Rotate parts to face forward, like a live-model interface. Capture their silhouettes and key internal features.


Spare Parts
Duplicate parts to show different aspects of them or to create an extended set of parts with which to play. Copy-scale is so much more satisfying than continuous variation.


Include Entourage
All of the architecture’s inhabitants, including people, plants, animals, and other accessories, need to be part of the kit. Kits are not abstractions but rather concrete and real.


Include Parts of the Context
This does not mean only the physical site but also a project’s precedents and resonances across space and time. The kit may even include other versions of the project. Treat the site as a set of relevant and strong objects around the building that contribute to the building’s “membership.”


Assembly Manual
Like a technical illustration, assembly manuals should increase the realism of the world of the model. A good assembly manual is indistinguishable from real construction documents.


Parting Together
Never attempt to build the model out of all the parts — they do not make a whole. Rather, select crucial parts and make a project out of those, bridging and infilling between them with new parts as required. The result should never look like a kit or collage but rather a new object.

Landing


There is a kind of fundamentalism to the idea that architecture grows foundation first, up from the soil like a plant. Often what seems to emerge from the ground implies a peaceful continuity with the world as it already exists, as if architecture as it is currently conceived and executed were somehow natural, benign, and expected. Or take “contextual” architecture – why would we assume that what we already have is more valid than what we can imagine?

Our office is committed to the idea of architecture that comes into the world fully formed, radically transforming its surroundings with its arrival. Our projects often seem to hover or dock or perch in their environments, or even appear to bring their own grounds with them! Moving into one of our buildings is more like leaping between worlds than crossing a threshold.

Tectonic Fictions


Architects today often operate in a mode of selection rather than invention, as if we have no control over construction and materials anymore. But we do, if we choose to exercise our power. In fact, we believe that architects must lead in the realm of tectonic invention precisely because industry is generally invested in producing what it is already tooled up to do. TWA is on a mission against what we call “articulation for free” which is basically what happens to architecture when the architect simply relies on selected systems and materials to produce effects. There are all kinds of articulation for free, from bricks and mortar to cast-in-place concrete, to standard metal panel systems, on and on. The effects that these create often break the magic of intended architectural effects because they clue us in to known historical periods, techniques of making, tools, and habits.

Architecture that mirrors known construction tries to convince us that the everyday reality which surrounds us is the only reality possible. This is not the highest and best use of our expertise. Architecture ought to aim to challenge the world we often uncritically accept, and to show us that other forms of reality are possible. Articulation for free is therefore not free at all; it costs our discipline its autonomy and reduces its space of invention.

There are a lot of different approaches we’ve used to create what we call “tectonic fictions” instead of accepting articulation for free. Fake shadows, fake reflections, form-emphasizing, form-de-emphasizing, cartoon silhouettes, and more: all of which supplant industrial aesthetics in favor of surprise and intrigue. Tattoos slide around on forms, sometimes emphasizing, sometimes de-emphasizing features, and generally creating a second or ambiguous reading of form. Metaseams are graphic seams that may or may not be related to tectonic joints. They tend to visually break mass down into large pieces, creating the impression that a building is smaller than it is. Supercomponents are parts of larger objects that also have their own life and qualities. They reveal the “chunkiness” of reality, where all things, even things we might think of as parts, are recognized as whole objects. Nothing exists solely as a subdivision of something else!

CAREERS

Full-Time Positions


TWA is always looking for motivated, talented professionals to join us. Please refer to current vacancies below, but we are also open candidates with other skills.

If you are interested, please submit a Letter of Intent, Portfolio, and CV in a single PDF not to exceed 10Mb to jobs@tomwiscombe.com.

Although we strive to respond to all applicants, due to the volume of inquiries we receive this may not always be possible.

CURRENT OPENINGS

Senior Designer

Full time, In-office
Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) is an internationally recognized architecture practice known for its powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, and tectonic inventiveness. We specialize in civic, entertainment, cultural, and residential design, and we are known for our radical integration of ecological thinking and technology in our work.

Located in the American Cement Building at the edge of downtown Los Angeles, our office is a unique indoor-outdoor workplace with an engaging creative and intellectual environment.

We are seeking Senior Designers with 5-8 years post-graduation professional experience, preferably in a design- and innovation-driven office, to work on several iconic cultural buildings with international clients as well as a variety of other complex, form-driven projects. Successful candidates will collaborate directly with the Principal and an energetic design team on some of the world's most audacious and intriguing projects.

You bring: motivation, a passion for architecture, the ambition for leadership, and an interest in contributing to the work of TWA. We highly value creativity, a commitment to professional growth, and the ability to work well with others.

Salary commensurate with experience and skills. We offer health, dental, and vision benefits, paid time off, paid sick leave, and an employee retirement savings plan with employer matching.

Qualifications
  • Interest in contributing to the specific work and mission of this office
  • Excellent eye for composition and strong graphic skills
  • Expert Rhino skills (scripting not required)
  • Good REVIT skills and experience drawing and assembling SD and DD sets
  • Ability to organize complex buildings according to functional and technical requirements
  • Excellent Photoshop/ InDesign layout skills
  • Competition experience and/or experience in a design-and innovation-driven firm
  • Preexisting authorization to work in the USA

TWA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All applicants for employment are recruited, hired, and assigned based on merit without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, retaliation, parental status, military service, or any other non-merit factor.

Please send your CV, project portfolio (15MB max .pdf file), and a cover letter (indicating availability) to jobs@tomwiscombe.com.
In order to be considered for the position you must live locally or have plans to relocate, and you must be authorized to work in the USA.
No phone calls please; email only.

Project Architect

Full time, In-office

Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) is an internationally recognized architecture practice known for its powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, and tectonic inventiveness. We specialize in civic, entertainment, cultural, and high-end residential design, and we are known for our radical integration of ecological thinking and technology into our work.

Located in the American Cement Building at the edge of downtown Los Angeles, our office is a unique indoor-outdoor workplace with an engaging creative and intellectual environment.

We are seeking a Project Architect with a minimum of 8 years post-graduation experience, including prior experience as a PM or PA, in a design- and innovation-driven office for several iconic cultural buildings with international clients as well as a variety of other complex, form-driven projects. You bring:

Qualifications
  • International competition experience
  • Ambition, passion, and leadership qualities
  • Strong Rhino skills
  • Production experience in REVIT- at least 2 years of office experience is required.
  • Ability to draw and organize complex buildings in legible and thoughtful plans and sections
  • Ability to lead a team of technical designers and mentor younger architects
  • Ability to manage and coordinate external consultants and integrate requirements such as program, structure, circulation, envelope, and FLS into comprehensive building designs.
  • Willingness and ability to travel internationally for work
  • Preexisting authorization to work in the USA

Your role would be to collaborate directly with the Principal on some of the world's most audacious and intriguing projects and manage an energetic and talented design team. We highly value creativity, a good eye, a love of architecture, a desire for professional growth, and the ability to work well with others. Professional licensure is not required.

Starting salary commensurate with experience. We offer health, dental, and vision benefits, an IRA retirement savings plan with employer matching, paid time off, and paid sick leave.

TWA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All applicants for employment are recruited, hired, and assigned based on merit without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, retaliation, parental status, military service, or any other non-merit factor.

Please send your CV,  project portfolio (15MB max .pdf file), and a cover letter (indicating availability) to jobs@tomwiscombe.com. In order to be considered for the position you must live locally or have plans to relocate, and you must be authorized to work in the USA.
No phone calls please; email only.

Intermediate Technical Designer / Job Captain

Full time, In-offic
Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) is an internationally recognized architecture practice known for powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, tectonic inventiveness, and our radical integration of ecological thinking and technology in our work. We specialize in civic, entertainment, and cultural projects.

Located in the American Cement Building at the edge of downtown Los Angeles, our office is a unique indoor-outdoor workplace with an engaging creative and intellectual environment.

We are seeking several Intermediate Technical Designers/Job Captains with 5-8 years post-graduation professional experience, preferably in a design- and innovation-driven office, to work on several complex, iconic cultural projects with international clients. Your role will focus on document production and management, BIM standards, controls, and workflow, and building out the custom REVIT families and systems required for these projects in collaboration with technical detailers, project architects, consultants, and the design team. You will work directly with the Principal and senior design and technical staff to support the project documentation team and develop the resources needed to support the work of the office.

Qualifications
  • Professional degree in Architecture
  • 5-8 years of office experience, post graduation
  • A minimum of 4 years Revit project experience
  • Knowledge of architectural design and the basics of architectural drawing set production and 3D coordination
  • Portfolio demonstrating work in Revit and Revit Family Editor
  • Demonstrated reliability, accuracy, and attention to detail
  • Attention to schedule, workflow, and critical-path project priorities
  • Expert level Rhino skills
  • Expert level Revit modeling skills including wall types, furniture, lighting, symbols, tags, etc.
  • Strong plain-language communication skills and ability to interface with consultants
  • Experience with ACC.
  • Pre-existing authorization to work in the USA

Salary commensurate with experience and skills. We offer health, dental, and vision benefits, paid time off, paid sick leave, and an employee retirement savings plan with employer matching.

TWA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All applicants for employment are recruited, hired, and assigned based on merit without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, retaliation, parental status, military service, or any other non-merit factor.

Please send your CV,  project portfolio (15MB max .pdf file), and a cover letter (indicating availability) to jobs@tomwiscombe.com. In order to be considered for the position you must live locally or have plans to relocate, and you must be authorized to work in the USA.

No phone calls please; email only.

Technical Architect

Full time, In-office
Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) is an internationally recognized architecture practice known for powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, tectonic inventiveness, and our radical integration of ecological thinking and technology in our work. We specialize in civic, entertainment, and cultural projects.

Located in the American Cement Building at the edge of downtown Los Angeles, our office is a unique indoor-outdoor workplace with an engaging creative and intellectual environment.

We are seeking an experienced Technical Architect for several complex, iconic cultural projects with international clients. Your role will focus on document production and management, BIM standards, controls, and workflow, and building out the custom REVIT families and systems required for these projects in collaboration with technical detailers, project architects, consultants, and the design team. You will work directly with the Principal and senior design and technical staff to support the project documentation team and develop the resources needed to support the work of the office.

Qualifications
  • Professional degree in Architecture
  • 6-8 years of office experience, post graduation
  • A minimum of 5 years Revit project experience
  • Knowledge of architectural design and the basics of architectural drawing set production and 3D coordination
  • Portfolio demonstrating work in Revit and Revit Family Editor
  • Demonstrated reliability, accuracy, and attention to detail
  • Attention to schedule, workflow, and critical-path project priorities
  • Expert level Rhino skills
  • Expert level Revit modeling skills including wall types, furniture, lighting, symbols, tags, etc.
  • Strong plain-language communication skills and ability to interface with consultants
  • Experience with ACC
  • Pre-existing authorization to work in the USA

TWA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All applicants for employment are recruited, hired, and assigned based on merit without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, retaliation, parental status, military service, or any other non-merit factor.
Please send your CV, project portfolio (15MB max .pdf file), and a cover letter (indicating availability) to jobs@tomwiscombe.com. In order to be considered for the position you must live locally or have plans to relocate, and you must be authorized to work in the USA. No phone calls please; email only.

Junior Designer

Full time, In-office
Tom Wiscombe Architecture (TWA) is an internationally recognized architecture practice known for its powerful massing, alluring graphic qualities, and tectonic inventiveness. We specialize in civic, entertainment, cultural, and residential design, and we are known for our radical integration of ecological thinking and technology in our work.

Located in the American Cement Building at the edge of downtown Los Angeles, our small office is a unique indoor-outdoor workplace with an engaging creative and intellectual environment.

We are seeking multiple entry-level designers who are motivated, passionate, and interested in contributing to our work. You will work directly with the Principal and Senior Designers on several large, iconic cultural projects with international clients. We highly value curiosity, enthusiasm, a commitment to professional growth, and the ability to work well with others.

Qualifications
  • Masters or B.Arch. Degree
  • Expert Rhino modeling skills (scripting not required)
  • Excellent Photoshop/ InDesign layout skills
  • Good graphic sensibility and careful craft
  • Fascination with 3D printing and model building
  • Preexisting authorization to work in the USA
  • Rendering skills a plus

TWA is an Equal Opportunity Employer. All applicants for employment are recruited, hired, and assigned based on merit without discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy and gender identity), national origin, political affiliation, sexual orientation, marital status, disability, genetic information, age, membership in an employee organization, retaliation, parental status, military service, or any other non-merit factor.

Please send your CV, project portfolio (15MB max .pdf file), and a cover letter (indicating availability) to jobs@tomwiscombe.com. In order to be considered for the position you must live locally or have plans to relocate, and you must be authorized to work in the USA.
No phone calls please; email only.