moment of “authenticity” that would stand out separately from the entertainment
value of the whole. In that respect it conforms to what Koolhaas says in S M L XL
about authenticity, quoting from Habermas: “The authentic work is radically bound
to the moment of its emergence: precisely because it consumes itself in actuality;
it can bring the steady flow of trivialities to a standstill, break through normality, and
satisfy for a moment the immortal longing for beauty—a moment in which the eter-
nal comes into fleeting contact with the actual.”^121
Koolhaas makes further play with the ambiguity that is inherent in this motif of
“authenticity.” In a bare-faced parody of modernity, he pitches against each other
two construction techniques that might possibly be used in the project:
The first, guided by speed, suggested the establishment of an initial
base, then the rapid assembly of prefabricated elements, which would
finally be cloaked in a balloon of ferro-concrete foam, sprayed on form-
work of chickenwire. In the second scenario, the building became
hyper-substantial: it would be built in reinforced concrete by a handful
of workers at an enormous expense of time.
In the first case, sudden erection would become spectacle; in the
second, almost imperceptible progress, a potential source of suspense:
the workers would visibly age during the course of construction; chil-
dren would become adults as the building remained stubbornly un-
finished. More disturbing, the first building would be instant but
immaterial; the second, slowly (if ever) completed, but “authentic”:
opposites ostensibly based on the same plans, sections, architecture.^122Here Koolhaas deliberately separates the two moments of spectacle and authentic-
ity so as to point to their inevitable mutual involvement. Modernity unites the con-
tradictory dimensions of the programmatic and the transitory—it refers both to a
project that aims to design a future of liberation and emancipation and to an experi-
ence of acceleration and melting. The contradiction is driven to an extreme by play-
ing off speed against substance, and artificiality against authenticity. Nevertheless, it
is intrinsically the same design that is involved, but materialized in different ways. By
making play with this ambiguity, Koolhaas touches on the specific character of the
modern that lies precisely in the mutual intertwining of these contradictory dimen-
sions. The extraordinary thing about this project is that all these elements are inter-
locked in one unique gesture while the hiatus between them nevertheless remains
palpable.
The Sea Terminal is an articulation of the deterritorialization that is caused by
the networks of transport and communication. This articulation is atectonic: the con-
struction is not congruent with the design, because the helmet is repeatedly drilled
and weakened at precisely those spots where it ought to be as strong as possible. It
nevertheless succeeds in giving the place a unique resonance. Whereas deterritori-
4
Architecture as Critique of Modernity