When considering Parc de la Villette, both Tschumi and OMA were similarly and highly concerned with the social implications of their design. What is interesting to investigate, then, is the differences that manifest themselves in their proposals. This is an especially timely investigation because both teams set forth a word, or set of words, which influenced how they conceived of creating space and managed program. This, I feel, can be instructive and inspirational to us as we move forward with our nascent designs, which for the most part have similar ambitions, yet all are using different vocabulary to inform the design.

OMA clearly applied one vocabulary word—layer—to how they created space and managed program on the site. They have accounted for the unpredictability of the user in their scheme for access and circulation which promotes both axial and more random movement through the site. What I find most interesting and perhaps a bit counter-intuitive about their choice of the word “layer” as the driver for their intervention is that they are constructing an experience which will mostly be experienced in plan, rather than in section. While the layering system does allow for the conceptual interaction/intersection/overlap of the different “layers”, I’m not convinced that this would be legible to a user of the park. This, to me, sets up a perhaps undesirable dichotomy between the actual experience and the rather compelling presentation drawings of the proposal.

Tschumi, on the other hand, used the vocabulary of points, lines, and surfaces to create his proposal for the park. While being less concise, his vocabulary is one that does directly translate into the users experience. The follies most definitely will serve as “points of intensity”, as Tschumi asserts, while the lines of the highly-used grid will most definitely guide the user experience. While I actually like OMA’s proposal more in proposal form, I do think that Tschumi’s vocabulary helps to more convincingly situate his ideas off of the page and into reality, a testament to the strength of consistency all the way through a project!