Knorr Architecture Blog

Architecture Created in Light

2012-02-16T14:33:00.000-07:00

1. Light Festival, Ghent, Belgium.

If you haven't discovered it already, TED is a great source for interesting lectures on your computer or as an ap on your hand held device. I keep it on my iPhone for down-time in the airport. TED is a nonprofit devoted to "Ideas Worth Spreading." It started out in 1984 as a conference bringing people together from three worlds: Technology, Entertainment, Design. Since then its scope has broadened. Along with two annual conferences -- in Long Beach and Palm Springs -- and the TEDGlobal conference in Edinburgh UK each summer, TED includes award-winning talks on its video site. Many of them are architecture-related topics.

Pantheon, Rome.

Notre Dame du Ronchamp by Corbusier.

A recent lecture by Roger van der Heide is worth checking out on TED: "Why Light Needs Darkness." Mr. Heide is a lighting designer who offers an insightful way to look at the world -- paying attention to light (and to darkness). His lecture is illustrated with examples from classic buildings (the Pantheon) to modern icons (Ronchamp). His vision is about the play of light around us. His ideas remind me of the book "In Praise of Shadows" by the Japanese novelist Jun'ichiro Tanizaki. Originally published in 1933, "In Praise of Shadows" was translated to English in 1977. It explores the meaning of dark in contrast to light in art, sculpture, architecture, and literature.

55,000 LED lights...

Architects are used to considering sunlight inside and outside of buildings and since the nineteenth century we have been able to consider the effect of artificial lighting on architecture. But only recently has light become a building material in itself. Consider the architectonic forms designed for the Light Festival in Ghent, Belgium. The Luminarie De Cagna created an LED cathedral in a neo-renaissance style. The structure employs 55,000 LED lights and is 91 feet tall at its peak. It is tempting to fantasize about true renaissance architects like Michelangelo or Bernini might have done with the same materials.

.... in Ghent.

Capitol Architecture Redux

2012-01-23T19:40:00.002-07:00

A lightweight dome atop a ponderous base.

I blogged about this subject before: the ugly state capitol building in Colorado and why it is not worth saving. Nevertheless, a fund drive is underway. Local columnist Tina Griego wrote an article praising the antique architecture. It was another opportunity to promote my lost cause. Here is my letter published by the Denver Post.

Official parking.

19 January 2012

To the Editor:

Tina Griego’s homage to the state Capitol pines for a relic that does not deserve salvation.

Classical?

The facility was built when Colorado had a population one-tenth of what it is today. It is cramped, awkward, and an unworthy symbol for Colorado. Any nostalgia for the outdated building cannot legitimately be for the architecture. It is an ungainly historic mishmash. The wedding cake dome of flighty proportions sits unengaged with a weighty - though lackluster - base. Cars nuzzle up against its flanks because there is no plan to accommodate twenty first century needs like parking, pedestrian access, or the simple duties of governance.

Restoring the Capitol is a bandwagon without critics; it is assumed that opposition is akin to kicking your grandmother. Nevertheless, let me register as the first opponent to preserving our crumbling Capitol with this call: "Mr governor, tear down these walls!" Let’s not lockstep down preservation’s path before considering brighter alternatives.

Form over function.

Sincerely,

Michael Knorr, Architect

"What's up BUB?" -- Architecture on the Lam

2012-01-20T17:00:00.001-07:00

Houses are under construction again in my neighborhood. Unfortunately, many of them are nothing but BUBs -- Big Ugly Boxes. I somewhat expected that the recession might have taught us a few things. That bigger isn't necessarily better. That good architecture can create value. That excess square footage has nothing to do with good architecture. BUBs aren't just in my neighborhood. They get built everywhere, all around the world.

A BUB in England.

I don't like the flippant epithet "MacMansion" applied to every new and large house that gets built. (It is a trite insult that has lost most of its meaning.) However, I have to concede that a lot of new construction begs the moniker. BUBs have no class. They contain boxy rooms encased in boxy shells with a bit of applied or implied decoration. (Slap on a few dormers add a turret and call it architecture.) In reality, architecture has gone AWOL. BUBs have no spirit. No life. The lights may be on, but nobody is home.

Take a deep breath. As the recession nears its end let's resolve to build a little better than we did before.

Photo Credit: Oxymoron

To the Student in Architecture

2012-01-17T12:25:00.001-07:00

This week's Time magazine noted that college students least likely to find a job upon graduation have a degree in -- wait for it -- architecture.

It used to be that the construction industry (home building in particular) led the economy out of recessions. This recession (or this jobless recovery) will see no salvation in building. In fact, the building industry (or, more accurately, the bogus banking system that financed it) was a primary cause of the current recession. What underlies the activity of building? Architecture, of course.

Even in the best of times, the profession of architecture never had enough jobs to go around. When I was teaching architecture I knew most of my students would either (a) not graduate with a degree in architecture or (b) not become licensed architects even if they got a degree. The main reason was the absurdly low availability of good jobs. And yet, despite this attrition, the schools still produced far more architecture graduates than the job market could sustain.

Students continuously go into architecture with grand misconceptions about what architecture is all about. I taught many students whose dads who were home builders. They (fathers and sons) thought architecture would be a great way to follow in dad's footsteps on a professional level. The truth is, home builders probably make more money than architects and with far less stress. To such young people I say: try a degree in construction management or finance.

I had several students from middle eastern countries. They were from privileged families and a degree in architecture had a certain upper-class, professional allure to them. Their actual interest in architecture was nil and they expected the degree to be handed to them wrapped in a silver ribbon. I am certain they never have and never will actually practice architecture. But they and others like them flood the limited job market anyway.

Others were told by high school mentors: "you're artistic and good in math; you should be an architect." Often, these starry-eyed students find out in their third or fourth year of college that architecture is not at all what they thought it would be. Math and art are tiny little components of an architect's work. Then they are faced with the dilemma of considering whether to plow through because they already have several years invested or cut their losses and start again in a more congenial field.

Too many students go into architecture with no idea how thin the opportunities, how low the salaries, and how few people actually rise above entry level ranks. It is shameful what the profession pays its interns and novices. My office has often hosted groups of high school students who think they want to become architects. I do my best to discourage the thought. Star architects like Liebskind and Calatrava have warped the public perception of architecture. These stars get outrageous press; young people conclude that architects cause to happen glorious structures that float above the mundane world. Ha! Developers and investors cause things to happen; architects work at their largesse. I tell these aspirants do not go into architecture because you think it will lead to fame, happiness, and wealth.

To the student in architecture: do not persist with the program because you want to, but because you have to. Have a clear understanding of the limitations (power rests not with the architect but with the developer) and the time requirements (a degree, a lengthy internship, a licensing exam that often takes years to complete). If, despite this bleak knowledge, you still aspire to be an architect, then nothing I say will change your mind. If you have a passion for architecture you have deaf ears to practical thoughts.

There is not much I can do to help such hapless souls. I receive a constant flow of inquiries for employment. Many of them are from new graduates. Sadly, many of them are also from experienced architects who have been with established firms for twenty, thirty years. I'm sorry there is no work for you. As Time magazine said: graduates from architecture schools are the least likely to find a job. It's not just the economy. It is a flaw in the system.

* * *

The previous paragraph was going to conclude this blog entry. On rereading, I cannot leave on such a negative tone.

Yes, employment prospects in the field of architecture are, and always have been, dismal. However, a degree in architecture is great preparation for a myriad of jobs. Architects are generalists. Their education covers math, art, engineering, history, business, and project management. These skills can be applied broadly. Architects can market their talents in many different ways. Urban planning, law, historic preservation, education, facilities planning, graphic arts, -- all have openings for people with an architectural education. The student of architecture may find himself or herself employed in a completely unexpected capacity. And, of course, it's not like there is no work in architecture. There is some work. My office has projects that keep us busy. Other architects do as well. And the economy will improve.

My real message to students in architecture is: understand clearly what you are getting into and do it for the right reasons. Then, as you stand on that precipice that overlooks your life, maintain the belief that the future is bright, even if unknown.

Okay, I feel better now.

Illustrations:
Graduation pic by Kyle James
Mountain Sunrise, Catskill by Thomas Cole, oil on canvas

Julius Shulman: Architectural Photographer

2011-11-05T18:55:00.000-06:00

Photographer Julius Shulman was our greatest photographic chronicler of modern architecture from the mid-twentieth century well into the twenty-first. He both documented and romanticized the work of the important architects working on the west coast: Rudolf Schnindler, Frank Lloyd Wright, Richard Meyer, John Lautner, etc. At the same time he created enduring myths about modernism, Los Angeles, and the atomic age. The film Visual Acoustics by Arthouse Films, narrated by Dustin Hoffman, is not to be missed. This cinematic biography of Julius Shulman respects and enlightens his work. It was released in 2008 and continues to make the art house and film festival circuits. It is also available on DVD from Netflix.

Modern Architecture Tour

2011-10-24T14:49:00.001-06:00

The first Denver Modern Home Tour was a success! We want to thank the four-hundred-plus people who took time to visit our property on Saturday. All were friendly and generous in their appreciation for modern architecture. I am sure the perfect autumn day contributed to the good mood everybody seemed to share. I enjoyed many conversations throughout the day. It is gratifying to realize how interested people are in good design. It was also fun being interviewed on KWGN Channel 2 before the tour.

The tour creator, Matt Swinney, was delighted with the results and intends to return to Denver next year with an even bigger event. Meanwhile, his organization, Modern Home Tours, LLC of Austin, TX, has other tours planned. The next one is November 12th in Houston. For information follow this link:

http://houstonmod.modernhometours.com/

Garden in Houston.

Denver Modern Home Tour

2011-10-12T17:12:00.000-06:00

MICHAEL KNORR & ASSOCIATES is honored to be selected for the first-ever Denver Modern Home Tour.

1. Denver Modern Home Tour.

On Saturday, October 22, 2011 from 11:00 am - 6:00 pm, join us to tour 8 of Denver's most recent examples of contemporary residential architecture. We have previewed all of the properties and think you will find something interesting at each location. There is a broad array of design choices, sizes, and neighborhoods.

Please come by our featured property, 4501 E. Dartmouth, during the tour. For advance TICKETS go to this link: http://denver.modernhometours.com/

For a MAP and INFORMATION on all eight homes go to this link: http://denver.modernhometours.com/tour-homes/

We look forward to visiting with you on the 22nd!

2. Denver Modern Home Tour.

Photos:

Rob Munger

What Does Steve Jobs Have To Do With Architecture?

2011-10-07T18:20:00.001-06:00

This is a blog about architecture. So, what does Steve Jobs have to do with architecture?

Steve Jobs
1955-2011

The primary link is not technical innovation. (The PC has been as widely-used by architects as the Mac, if not more so.) Steve Jobs' lasting contribution to our world is design excellence. Apple products are distinguished from the competition because they are designs that get people excited about using technology. From the iMac to the iPod to the iPhone to the iPad, Steve Jobs created irresistibly attractive products that people crave. Steve Jobs made design cool. That is what Steve Jobs had to do with architecture. Steve Jobs demonstrated that design -- all design -- matters. We are better for it in all areas where design is a factor. Design has moved from something elitist to something cool. All fields of design benefit from this, including architecture. Steve Jobs insisted on great design, ease of use, and a swaggering style accessible to all. In some way this has helped architects present their case for good design. Does good architecture make a difference? Of course it does, because good design always makes a difference. The evidence is readily available in the success of Apple. We owe thanks to Steve Jobs for providing that proof.

Philosophy of Architecture II

2011-10-03T10:29:00.000-06:00

1. Stonehenge contains messages from the past that are
still being deciphered.

The philosophy of architecture is a big subject. In my opinion, architecture is ultimately a storage medium for information. The information it contains tells stories about us. Architecture speaks to us just as movies or music or novels convey moods and emotions and values. And just as movies tell different stories in different ways, architecture reveals or explains different things about the way we live, the nature of our religions, our hopes and aspirations. As stated earlier, most people think of architecture as simply a variety of styles. However, it is the stories contained in architecture that are important. Style is secondary to other qualities that convey information such as volume, sequence of events, and many other abstract characteristics.

2. The Temple Philae in Egypt tells stories about religion.

Architecture tells us about the culture, climate, lifestyle, religion, and physical attributes of the people for whom it is built. We can look at an Egyptian temple and learn about the gods and demons that dominated their thinking. The ruins of Pompeii tell us about the daily activity of ancient Romans. We can visit a Gothic cathedral and see the progression of human understanding in engineering, their aesthetic attitude towards light, their spiritual goals. These are stories that can move people and make us think. They have nothing to do with architectural style per se, but with deeper aesthetic values which architecture embodies.

3. Ruts in the road convey archaeological information about Pompeii.

4. The forum at Pompeii conveys information about daily life in Pompeii.

The information stored in architecture is more than the obvious archaeological record. Architecture provides information about what might be or could be. This is the territory where things get really interesting. These characteristics are hints about the philosophies that underlie all architecture.

5. Chartres cathedral is a tale of illumination and faith.

Illustrations:
1. Wigulf
2. Anon. 1800. Public Domain
3. Dvortfirl
4. Achille Etna Michallon 19th century. Public Domain (Louvre)
5. BT

Philosophy of Architecture I

2011-09-30T17:05:00.002-06:00

All architecture is rooted in philosophy. Philosophy underlies all decisions a designer may make. Put another way: it is nearly impossible to design something without having a point of view. Otherwise, we might as well use a gang of monkeys to randomly construct our buildings.

1. Mies Van der Rohe designed the Barcelona Pavilion as an expression of
Bauhaus philosophy: rational, simple, industrial, and unadorned.

We tend to think of architecture as a collection of styles. A menu of choices. It is certainly no such thing, except in the most superficial sense. Nevertheless, the history of architecture is generally told as a story of evolving styles. Styles are a convenient way to categorize the varieties of architectural experience, but behind those styles are philosophies. In other words, behind every style is a set of ideas and a system of values that drive it. That fact is more important than the styles that manifest under various philosophies of architecture.

2. Contemporary architect Santiago Calatrava believes architecture
is a direct expression of the underlying structure.

Every major architectural style originates in a particular philosophy of architecture. Each style emerges from the cultural requirements of the society in which it develops and is influenced by the history that preceded it. Architecture does not come about without architects thinking about these sorts of things. Any style is the product of a particular system of thinking about the meaning and purpose of our built environment.

3.Architect Bruce Goff believed every building
should be designed as if no building ever existed before.

Perhaps simple, utilitarian buildings can exist without serious thought behind them. However, when a building aspires to be architecture we have to start thinking about the purpose and meaning of the overall space, the outward appearance, and every detail that contributes to the whole. There is no one way to design a building. The choices one makes and the direction one takes are driven by a value system, whether deeply felt or only dimly perceived. Why are certain elements there? What materials should be used? How should we merge size, form, volume, texture and structure? Which are the “right” choices? These are, at root, philosophical questions and are only addressed within a theoretical framework. An architectural philosophy need not be particularly complex. But it must be there in some form or the simplest design decisions become too complex to bear.

4. De Architectura by Vitruvius.

Many books have been written about theories of architecture. The oldest known is De Architectura by the Roman architect Marcus Vitruvius Pollio (1st century B.C.E.) He is still citied today as an authority on architectural principles. Every architecture student learns his famous definition of architecture: a structure which has the qualities of firmitas, utilitas, venustas. That is, it must be strong, functional, and beautiful.

5. Saint-Pierre de Rafael. A renaissance plan
reflecting the rational values of the time.

Other books are architectural manifestos written by architects to justify or explain their work. Among the more influential in the modern era are The Timeless Way of Building by Christopher Alexander, S,M,L,XL by Rem Koolhaas, and Learning From Las Vegas by Robert Venturi.

There are also many histories which describe the theoretical goals behind architecture. An excellent example is An Outline of European Architecture by Nikolaus Pevsner.
There are probably as many theories and philosophies of architecture as there are architects. The important thing to remember is that architecture is not mere buildings; it is buildings that reflect ideas.

6. Renaissance symmetry in the Villa di Poggio Giusto Utens.

Illustration credits:
1. Ashley Pomeroy
2. Lauren Manning
3. Chad K
4. Public Domain
5. Public Domain
6. Public Domain

A Viewpoint on Architecture

2011-09-26T20:45:00.001-06:00

This blog veers around and through a variety of architectural topics. But the journey has not been random. This blog has a point of departure and a goal. A viewpoint. Perhaps it is time to reiterate what that viewpoint is. Obviously, this blog is for those who love architecture and want to know more about it. It is addressed to laypersons and architects alike.

1. Wisconsin state capitol building interior.

2. Porcelian Room, Palacio Real de Madrid.

With architects I am preaching to the choir, of course. Many of them will have different viewpoints, but I hope this blog encourages debate and provides inspiration. I am happy to discuss the fine points of architecture well past midnight with anyone who is interested.

With non-architects I am having a conversation with the congregation of people who are thrilled by the power that (some) architecture possesses. We often do not know why or how this power exists, but when chanced upon, it is a source of deep pleasure. It is the reason many of us travel the world: to see different and interesting man-made spaces like cathedrals, museums, skyscrapers, and homes. Great architecture may be humble or grand, ancient or new, transitory or permanent. It is the essential characteristics of any and all of these that this blog explores.

3. Dining room by Michael Knorr.

4. Kitchen by Michael Knorr

This blog asks (though only partially answers) what is the essence of architecture? Architecture -- great architecture in particular -- is more than just structure. True architecture uses space to express the highest aspirations of humankind and our search for beauty. Practical necessities sometimes obscure the fact that the essence of architecture is the space within. Spatial relationships are the core of architectural experience. To fully appreciate architecture we need to look beyond the facade of buildings and into their heart. This blog aims to do that by describing the qualities that make architecture more than mere buildings.

5. Wayfarers Chapel by Lloyd Wright.

The opinions in this blog are straightforward and grow from a simple premise: that good architecture is possible and that it can be achieved by deliberate means. This is true whether talking about a humble home or a monumental public building. It is true (or, more accurately, can be true) for any place intended for human habitation. Good architecture is a result of planning for certain results and creating environments to support those results in the most beautiful and structurally satisfying manner.

Truly great architecture is rare. The everyday buildings we encounter -- super markets, gas stations, convenience stores, and, sadly, even our homes -- are frustratingly ordinary. Most people come in contact with great architecture primarily through pictures. Pictures usually focus on building exteriors, which, of course, tell only part of the story. This type of experience is twice-removed from reality. First, flat pictures can never really explain three-dimensional space. Even a 3-D movie would lack the total sensory experience of actually approaching and walking through a work of architecture. Second, the fixation on facade that most pictures present reduces architecture to surface treatments. Architectural criticism by this method devolves to a battle of styles. On this basis, we look at and analyze architecture from pretty pictures that have little to do with the full experience. Architects encourage this approach because we love to represent our work in the most flattering light. Disturbing distractions are edited in Photoshop. Representations of people are often avoided in the these photos and buildings assume an etherial otherness that doesn’t really exist. Even this blog suffers from this shortcoming. However, architecture is more than glamor shots. To fully appreciate architecture we need to experience it directly. We ought not just look at architecture; we need to feel it.

6. Societe Generale Headquarters, Paris. Stained glass dome.

7. Milwaukee Art Museum by Santiago Calatrava.

This blog shares the limitations of photographs. No combination of text and pictures can substitute for the real experience, but it may lay the groundwork for a way of understanding architecture.

For most of us there are limited opportunities to encounter great architecture in person. In particular, we seldom have access to the most important aspect of architecture: the space within. The Chinese philosopher Lao Tse (alternately: Lao Tzu or Laozi) said the reality of a container is the space within. At first this sounds cryptically mystical. But when you think about it, this is simply a matter of fact. Lao Tse uses the example of a tea cup. It performs its function (containing tea) in the space that is defined by structure. The purpose of a tea cup is to contain tea. The shell of the cup makes this possible, but the space inside the shell -- what some might consider nothingness -- is where the reality of its function occurs. The reality of the tea cup takes place in the void, the space within. Frank Lloyd Wright was fond of quoting Lao Tse’s aphorism, connecting it to architecture. Wright insisted that the reality of architecture is the space within -- not the shell we see in photos or glimpsed from a passing car.

8. Auldbrass living room by Frank Lloyd Wright.

To understand architecture we must look beyond the facade to the spatial effects inside. This blog explores why some spaces seem to rise above the ordinary and mundane to be truly meaningful. It dissects architecture with straightforward concepts. At times, it explores the why of architecture (philosophy). Sometimes it discusses how certain architectural effects are accomplished. And sometimes it looks at the inevitable ambiguities and curiosities in architecture. All of this is done within the context of the space within. The intention here is not dry academics. This is about the enjoyment of architecture. I hope the reader will share my enthusiasm for the incredible adventure of exploring all facets of the architectural experience as presented in this blog.

9. V.C. Morris Gift Shop by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Photo Credits:
1. MJK
2. Brian Snelson
3. Office
4. Office
5. Jessicacu
6. Poulp
7. MJK
8. Charles N. Bayless
9. Jet Lowe

ARCHITECTURE + DESIGN Film Series

2011-09-01T11:43:00.000-06:00

1. Bauhaus-influenced chair by Marcel Breuer.

The Denver Film Society and Design Onscreen are starting their third annual architecture and design film series. Several new films stand out this year. Bauhaus: Model and Myth explores the goals and history of Germany's Bauhaus movement and the effect of politics upon it. Desert Utopia: Midcentury Architecture in Palm Springs will reveal the roots of the current upsurge of interest in modern architecture. EAMES: The Architect and the Painter will explore the life of an important midcentury innovator.

2. Eames house, Pacific Palisades, CA.

If you have not seen the 2009 film Visual Acoustics: The Modernism of Julius Shulman, do not miss this biography of modern architecture's greatest photographer.

3. Kaufman house by Richard Neutra, Palm Springs, CA.

All films are accompanied by architects or historians holding Q&A sessions as well as receptions at local restaurants. For dates, times, and detailed info follow this link to the Denver Film Society web site.

Photo Credits:
1. Borowski
2. llpo's Sojourn - flicker.com
3. Barbara Alfors

Good Architecture Isn’t Timid

2011-08-07T10:20:00.069-06:00

One measure of good architecture is that it does not hesitate to make a statement. This means that with good architecture there is always a clear understanding of the design intent. Good architecture is not timid. It is bold. Not that architecture should be bombastic or boorish (that's bad architecture), but the best examples of architecture are not timid in their esthetic expression.

1. Brasilia government buildings. Oscar Niemeyer architect.

Unfortunately, examples of good architecture are few, while examples of less-than-good surround us in abundance. Un-inspiring buildings confront us wherever we go. Bland shopping centers. Mundane office buildings. Housing designed to the minimum expectations of the “target market.” Nobody thinks much about this because bland buildings are pervasive We perceive them as the normal state of our environment. However, ubiquity is not quality. Rather than looking to buildings as a source of inspiration (which they could and should be), we are, for the most part, used to seeing them not at all. Aggressively bad buildings are not the problem. Most of us can spot the horrific right away and we deride the perpetrators of ugliness with a shrug of disdain. The real problem is the mundane buildings that fill our world with visual static: annoying enough to make us vaguely uncomfortable, but not so dangerous that we would forcibly remove them. So, given the pervasiveness of less-than-desirable architecture all around us, let’s focus on the rare good architecture in the hope it will be nurtured in the future.

2. National Center for Atmospheric Research. I.M. Pei architect.

3. Bridge and tunnel to Miho Museum, Japan. I.M. Pei architect.

Many qualities contribute to good architecture. As stated above, one of them is that good architecture is not timid. What does this mean? Take the design of a simple column, for example. The structural reason for the existence of a column is simply to support something, like a beam or a girder. But its esthetic significance can have much more meaning. A series of columns can create a rhythm that gives a building life and interest. We cannot be timid about these things. One column may be a requirement of structural necessity. But an architect can create, by repetition and manipulation, a grand colonnade that makes movement through a building a delight. Architecture can transform a mundane column into a sentinel witness to dappled light and magical vistas.

4. Residence at Shadow Creek. Michael Knorr architect.

5. Residence in Denver, CO. Michael Knorr architect.

Another thing about columns: they are usually too skinny, like little toothpicks holding far too much visual weight. An engineer’s job is to find the lightest, cheapest, and most efficient way to enclose space. That is a good and proper goal. But an architect’s job is to acknowledge the minimum requirements of structural engineering and sculpt them into a beautiful environment. Some would interpret this to mean that adding expensive finishes and excess space is the way to better architecture. This approach misses the point. We don’t need to “gild the lily” to create beauty, but neither do we need to live on the level of the lowest common denominator. Only the timid would acquiesce to an impoverished mindset that treats any embellishment of space and structure as wasteful or unnecessary. The most necessary thing in life, once we have satisfied our basic survival requirements, is the need for beauty.

We could also talk about flimsy arches that make some buildings appear as if constructed with cardboard. We could talk about stone veneers applied like wallpaper instead of the gutsy product of the earth it should be.

6. Roman arches.

7. Residence in Rancho Santa Fe, CA. Michael Knorr architect.

Please understand: this does not have anything, really, to do with columns or arches or stone. There are no rules in architecture about the number or size of columns. That is just an example. The actual resolution of esthetic issues depends on the inherent theme of a particular design. The point is that most buildings are afraid to address such issues at all. Most buildings are timid amalgams of engineering necessity and market-study illusions. They are not real architecture. The best results and the greatest architecture only come from bold decisions that galvanize our attention and establish a better environment in which to enjoy life. In these arenas, good architecture is never timid.

8. Residence in Denver, CO. Michael Knorr architect.

Photo credits:
1. Mario Roberto Duran Ortiz
2. Daderot
3. 663 highland
4. Rob Munger
5. Rob Munger
6. Seynaeve
7. Rob Munger
8. Rob Munger

Architecture is More Than Skin Deep

2011-08-02T10:16:00.001-06:00

Architecture is more than the outside of a building.

1. The classic dome of Gustav Vasa church in Stockholm.

It is a common misconception that architects take care of what we see from the street and interior designers take care of the rest. When this happens, it is the result of an architect’s abdication of his or her true realm: creating spaces. Interior designers collaborate on the final resolution of those spaces with colors, textures, hardware, and furnishings. However, if the architect has not provided worthwhile spaces from the beginning, then everyone else -- from interior designer to lighting consultant to landscaper -- can only place band-aids on an injury. They can only try to fix what was never right to begin with.

2. The Air Force Academy chapel interior (Colorado Springs)
is a direct expression of exterior forms.

3. Air Force Academy chapel exterior.

Perhaps the idea that architecture is only the outside of buildings comes from its representation with exterior photographs in magazines and books. These flat simulacra are mere shadows of architecture. They are not the real thing. Yet we commonly judge buildings by pictures without considering the total experience. Architecture is more that the exterior elements. It is the interior space, It is sounds reverberating through a building. It is an environment of aromas. It is feeling the warmth of the sun radiated by stone and mortar.

4. A house designed by Charles Rennie Mackintosh.

5. An interior designed by Charles Rennie Macintosh.

We cannot detach architecture from its environment and study it as an isolated object. The sounds and scents of nature contribute to the feelings we have about our buildings. The mood of the Golden Pavilion in Kyoto is different from the environment of an Italian villa. Neither can be removed from its surroundings and maintain the same meaning. Environments establish the character of architecture. Context matters.

Architecture is more than the outside of a building and great architecture is more than the sum of its parts.

6. The galleria in Milan.

7. Santa Maria del Carmine, Milan.

Photos:
1. Xauxa.
2. Hustvedt.
3. BigacSC99.
4. Hunterian Museum Collections (Public Domain).
5. Public Domain
6. chensiyuan
7. Giovani Dall'Orto

Architecture: Bringing Light to Darkness

2011-07-29T10:38:00.000-06:00

Perception requires light over darkness. Without light we cannot see. Architects use light to reveal space. As much as we might say that architecture is a pile of building materials we could also say that it is the manipulation of light to reveal form. The architect's palette consists of light, shadows, and revelations of color.

1. U-Bahn station, Munich.

Understanding space (architecture) is no different than understanding the manifestation of any other thing.

The following examples may shed light on the subject.

2. Guggenheim Museum by Frank Lloyd Wright.

3. Futuna Chapel, Wellington, New Zealand.
John Scott, architect.

4. AIG Tower, Hong Kong.

5. Hagia Sophia, Istanbul.

6. Grand Central terminal, New York.

7. Pan American Exposition, Temple of Music.

8. Ohare neon walkway, Chicago.

9. Sainte-Chapelle, Paris.

10. Sainte-Chapelle, Paris.

11. Pennsylvania station, New York. (Demolished.)

Photos:
1. Guido Worlein
2. Kaschkawalturist
3. Craig Martin
4. Chow Meisy
6. Mark Estabrook
7. C.D. Arnold
8. Chicago at Night
9. Jean-Christophe Benoist
10. Didier B
11. Unknown

Architecture Redux: Shops by Libeskind

2011-07-25T10:46:00.000-06:00

Many superstar architects use the same forms repeatedly. Frank Gehry has done his Bilbao art museum as a music museum (Seattle Center) a concert venue (Disney Hall, L.A.) and a band shell (Pritzker Pavilion, Chicago). Daniel Libeskind has recycled his characteristic angular shapes as an art museum (Denver), a media center (Hong Kong) and an educational building (London Metropolitan University).

Libeskind's Las Vegas mall. Rumor has it that
the entrance was modified to avoid bad
feng shui. Chinese customers perceived
the aggressive angular shapes as jaws of death.

A recent Libeskind work is a shopping mall in Las Vegas. The City Center project could be a museum or a concert hall, but, apparently, the same forms serve well as a mall. It is impossible to deny his signature style and it makes a fine space for upscale vendors.

Mall interior: the sculpture is not by Libeskind.

Mall interior: easily remodeled as a museum if the mall fails.

All architects work with evolving leitmotifs, so it is not surprising or detrimental that the current crop of superstars explores similarities within their respective bodies of work. The public responds favorably (or the designs would not be repeated) and boundaries are expanded for all architects. What bothers me - just a little bit - is the haphazard way these signature buildings seem to be thrown together. Jumbled angles with no organizing theme. Interior volumes that often defy function. Like Michael Brady (the fictitious architect who headed The Brady Bunch) every building comes out looking the same in a one-size-fits-all approach to design. These computer-generated chunks of architecture make amusing sculptures. But their willfulness seems to say, "We exist simply because we can."

Is anyone else getting weary of these one note sambas?

All photos:
Wm. T. McDonough

Architecture in Downtown LA - Part III

2011-07-08T08:48:00.249-06:00

You Can't Fight City Hall

The most prominent building in downtown Los Angeles used to be the city hall. Gleaming white against the sky (at 454 feet), it has stood as a powerful symbol of the city since 1928. The structure has appeared innumerable times in movies and TV. It has been destroyed in several disaster movies and was a stand-in for The Daily Planet in the 1950s television series The Adventures of Superman.

Los Angeles city hall.

Prior to 1964, concerns about seismic design made it impossible for any building in Los Angles to exceed the height of city hall. With changes in engineering technology and public policy, it is dwarfed today by the U.S. Bank Tower (73 stories), Aon Center (64 floors) and many other banal office blocks. (At present, there are 509 high-rises in the city of Los Angeles.)

One might think that the city hall would be a weak relic amidst powerful downtown towers twice its height. The surprising thing is that it still dominates the part of downtown in which it stands. Set back in a landscaped buffer from the streets that surround it, starkly white against the sky, and rigidly art deco in profile: this building makes a big impression. The city hall is distanced a few blocks from the massive towers of "new downtown." It is not buried in Manhattanesque redevelopment and, for this reason, stands as proudly as it must have in 1928. For architecture buffs it is a worthy historic site.

Travel by Train

In fact, there are several survivors of old Los Angles that still grace the downtown district. A previous blog entry mentioned the well-preserved Bradley Building. There is also the original and venerable Catholic church, La Iglesia de Nuestra Senora Reina de los Angeles, founded in 1814 and rebuilt in 1861. (Not to be confused with the architectural massif of Our Lady of the Angels.) However, the crown of old buildings in downtown Los Angeles must rest on Union Station. Opened in May 1939, it is small compared to central stations in other major cities. It is, nevertheless, a grand example of transportation architecture. Today it is a hub for long-distance trains and for the city's commuter rail system.

Union Station.

The Future of Downtown LA

Well-preserved and still employed in its original purpose, Union Station is a fitting emblem for Los Angeles. Its Spanish-revival architecture recalls local history. The crowds in its great hall indicate a re-energized central city. This building is a perfect place to conclude our series on downtown Los Angeles. There could be plenty more to examine: Disney concert hall by Frank Gehry, the towers of new downtown, various condo restorations on Spring Street. However, Union Station is a positive note on which to close. It symbolizes the old and new coming together. It offers hope that no longer is Los Angeles "72 suburbs in search of a city," as Dorothy Parker famously quipped. It is, instead, a city striving to create a center for its far-flung suburbs. At first, in my little investigation of downtown LA, I ambled down Broadway and thought nothing has changed after decades of decrepitude. But one need only walk a little longer and a little further to discover that the core is still alive and there is hope for a fully viable center for the sprawl that is Los Angeles.

Union Station central waiting room.

Photos:
All by MJK.

Architecture in Downtown LA - Part II

2011-07-08T08:37:00.000-06:00

1. Figueroa Hotel.

My explorations of downtown Los Angeles took me past the Figueroa Hotel, 939 Figueroa Street. Surrounded by parking lots, it is a lonely survivor from old Los Angeles. Built in 1925, it is lavishly Moorish in a movie-set sort of way. It looks like a place that would be fun to stay in, however, on-line reviews on various travel sites are tepid at best. Do your own research if the place looks tempting.

2. Lobby, Figueroa Hotel.

If you are looking for more serious historic architecture downtown, the Bradbury building is the place to check out. It is impeccably maintained and fully occupied, a rarity on Broadway. I made a pilgrimage to this site when I was in architecture school. It is admired by architecture buffs for its light-flooded atrium, fine iron work, and forward-thinking interiors. This is advanced architecture for the year it was built, 1893. In the meantime, film buffs became aware of the building through its frequent use in movies and TV. Most memorably, the building is the setting for several scenes in the dystopian cult classic Blade Runner with Harrison Ford.

3. Bradbury building at 304 Broadway.

Local architect Sumner Hunt was first hired to design the building. He was unable to fulfil the lofty aspirations of the developer, Lewis L. Bradbury. The commission then fell to Hunt's draftsman, George Wyman who is credited as author of the building.

4. Bradbury building entrance.

5. Bradbury building atrium.

6. Historic American Buildings photograph.

The main floor of the Bradbury building is open to the public without charge.

Photo credits:
1. MJK
2. MJK
3. MJK
4. MJK
5. MJK
6. Historic American Buildings Survey

Architecture in Downtown LA - Part I

2011-07-05T15:30:00.000-06:00

One can visit Los Angeles and never go downtown. Other attractions beckon louder. The beaches, Rodeo Drive, Hollywood, the Sunset strip. Looking for architecture, you're more likely to ferret-out Gehry in Venice, Wright in the hills, and the Greene brothers in Pasadena. What reasons are there to go downtown? Well, I attended a conference sponsored by Dwell magazine at the downtown Marriott and was forced to go downtown for the first time in decades. I carved out some free time to revisit old sites and see what was new and what, if anything, had changed. The self-guided walking tour was full of discoveries.

1. One of many forlorn theaters.

My first impression was that nothing has changed. That was because I walked down Broadway and found the same derelict theaters, discount stores, and joyerias ("se venda oro!") that have dominated the street as long as anyone can remember. It was unchanged and uninviting. Sure, there were obvious attempts to revitalize downtown with new anchors at its extremities. There are the cultural icons of the Chandler Pavilion and Disney Concert Hall on the north. On the south side of downtown are Staples Center, the convention hall, and L.A. Live. This includes the Ritz Carlton and Marriott hotels. Like plates on a dumbbell, these are weighty ends to downtown, but the stuff in between is light in juxtaposition to these renewal efforts. However -- and this is a strong however -- there are signs of new life. Go a block off Broadway to Spring Street and find many old financial buildings reborn as lofts. Sprinkled on the edges of the district are new contemporary loft-style buildings as well. Downtown L.A. is tentatively participating in the urban renaissance that has swept many inner cities. Trendy shops and restaurants have not have followed, yet. But that may happen with a little more time. It is still a dicey proposition. Between the lofts are handsome, but abandoned, buildings that teeter between life and death. Some sport marquees that plead for a cameo in a movie, re-mindful of the would-be starlets that parade their assets on Sunset Boulevard a few miles up town.

2. On Broadway.

3. Derelict deco.

A big-time contribution to the possible salvation of downtown Los Angeles cannot be ignored: the new metro system. Actually, it is not all that new. Comprising five lines and 79 miles of track, the bulk of the system debuted in the 1990s. Today Metro Rail carries a ridership of 350,000 daily weekday boardings. To my mind, this is what makes downtown L.A. ultimately viable. I have visited the city many times since the rails were inaugurated, but had no idea how extensive it is. From downtown you can easily get to Hollywood, Long Beach, Pasadena, and elsewhere. It would even be possible to make a viable tourist trip to L.A. without ever renting a car (surprise!) and it is possible to live downtown without feeling isolated. In my explorations I used the downtown subway lines several times. It was cheap and clean.

4. The five lines of Metro Rail.

As it turns out, my first impression of today's downtown was wrong. Broadway may be it shabby, but there are signs of renewal and hope pressing in. My previous blog entry explored one new work of architecture in downtown L.A.: the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels. The next few entries will explore more architecture in downtown Los Angeles. In sum, they make downtown a not-so-bad place to visit and a possible place to actually live. Stay tuned.

5. Auditioning for a role.

Photo credits:

^{1. MJK}
^{2. MJK}
^{3. MJK}
^{4. RickyCourtney}
^{5. MJK}

The Architecture of a Cathedral

2011-07-01T16:22:00.000-06:00

Church architecture is a recurring theme in this blog. The reason is simple: churches (and synagogues and temples) are pure architecture. Aside from the obvious purpose of providing a spiritual meeting place, the main function of an ecclesiastical building is to enclose space in a beautiful manner. What better assignment could an architect ask for?

1. Entry plaza, Our Lady of the Angels.

Our Lady of the Angels is one such space. As the main Catholic cathedral serving the Los Angeles diocese, the building was controversial when built. Replacing a venerated historic building damaged by the 1994 Northridge earthquake, its non-traditional architecture is an affront to some. An intern of mine visited the cathedral not long after it opened in 2002. He did not like its aggressive modernity. I had seen published photos of the cathedral (uninspiring) but wanted to reserve judgement until experiencing it in person. That finally happened last week.

2. The Virgin Mary marks the cathedral's main entrance.

The cathedral was designed by Pritzker Prize-winning Spanish architect Rafael Moneo. Jumbled-looking in photographs, the hands-on experience is exhilarating. If you are a traditionalist, of course your opinion would differ. There is nothing traditional about this building. Right from the get-go, the main entrance is off-center and backwards. Unlike any cathedral of which I'm aware, you enter from behind the altar and are required to traverse an austere side aisle to the rear. From there you make a right term and an about-face before the glory of Our Lady of the Angels is fully revealed. In any standard cathedral the nave is exposed at once. Not so here. This is a fresh and daring strategy that makes perfect sense. The main space becomes the worthy goal of an architectural pilgrimage.

3. The nave.

But, wait, it gets better. Moneo uses the long entry aisle to organize a series of side chapels. Chapels are standard fare in Roman Catholic churches, but here they are starkly modern, as well as prominent, features in the sequence of events. The most remarkable thing about these side chapels is the way natural light is introduced from a hidden source. This happens because the chapels slip underneath the nave's higher volume so natural light can be borrowed from large, unseen windows. This is a fresh version of the old Renaissance magic trick of flooding the focal point of a space with hidden clerestory windows. It makes the object of veneration appear other-worldly. Roman Catholic architects have been at this for a long time and it is reinterpreted anew in Our Lady of the Angels.

4. Side chapel.

All told, the overall impression made by this edifice is one of strength, austerity, and high drama. Does this fulfill the architectural assignment of being a good religious space? I think so. It is, certainly, not beautiful in the conventional sense. There is no comfort here from the familiar. But there is a certainty of purpose that seems appropriate for an (authoritarian) religion. It is a job well done.

5. Nave windows.

Our Lady of the Angels is theatrical, calculated to awe. Some readers may wonder why I am less critical of this space than I was with another theatrically religious building: the Mormon Temple in San Diego. (See previous blog entry November 14, 2009.) Both exhort towards religious emotions. But this Catholic version somehow carries more gravitas. It is architecturally savvy. It is much less of a cardboard stage set than the Mormon version. Perhaps the weight of centuries of architectural expertise has paid off for the Catholics. I also appreciate the fact that Catholics let you roam freely through their architecture whereas Mormons restrict access. (The only other religion that has given me a more difficult time with access to holy spots is Hindu. But that's another story.)

If you want to make your own evaluation, this site at Grand Avenue and the Hollywood Freeway is worth a visit. I offer the accompanying pictures for your consumption, but, remember: two dimensional representations are never the same as experiencing the real thing in living three dimensions. Bon apetit.

Photo credits:

1. Los Angeles
2. MJK
3. Kjetil Ree
4. MJK
5. MJK

Renzo Piano, Architect

2011-06-29T14:28:00.000-06:00

1. Interior, San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

Among the best architects working today is Renzo Piano. He is Italian, but practices internationally. He captured my attention with his work at the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. Another of his designs - the addition to the Chicago Art Institute - also has brilliant effects. But, most of all, I like this quote from the current issue of Time magazine. When asked what any person could do to any average home to make it a better place, Renzo Piano replied

2. Exterior, San Francisco Museum of Modern Art.

"Throw away some of the furniture, paint everything white, clean the windows and see if you can make them wider. It's about luminosity."

That is one thing you certainly experience in Renzo Piano's architecture: luminosity. Perhaps that is a quality too often lacking in most buildings.

3. Chicago Art Institute.

Photos:
1. nlamore
2. Caroline Culler
3. Amerique

Architecture and Landscape Architecture

2011-06-20T20:01:00.002-06:00

A Legoretta-like wall frames and formalizes this garden walk.

Architecture and landscape architecture are inextricably intertwined. As an architect I am fully aware that my buildings look best when the wrapping around them contributes to the presentation. We frequently delay photographing our projects because the landscaping is inadequate or immature or incomplete. Landscape architects often join the project team too late and with too few resources. It is a sad fact that most of their work is done at the end when the budget is exhausted. Landscaping is an easy thing to do later, so, to the landscape architect's chagrin, later it often is. That does not diminish its importance.

An organic beginning with an architectonic terminus.

What would Versailles be without its gardens? Fallingwater without its lush natural setting? A contemporary home without an indoor/outdoor connection?

A tea house in the background establishes a purpose and a goal.

Conversely, landscape architecture works best with the support and companionship of architectural elements. It struck me touring the Denver Botanical Gardens last week that random architectonic elements give the landscaping a sense of place and purpose. A walk in the woods can be a fine experience, but we often seek a place of shelter or an architectural frame from which to appreciate the natural environment. Japanese gardens sometimes contain an azumaya. It is a garden-viewing-place; a small gazebo of sorts where one can appreciate and contemplate the garden itself. Every type of garden is enhanced and uplifted by architectural elements.

All photos taken at the Denver Botanic Gardens by MJK.

Architecture: The Best Phase

2011-06-11T13:27:00.071-06:00

Architects usually describe their work process in phases: schematic design phase, design development phase, construction documents phase, etc. Another phase - the best one, in my opinion - is hardly talked about. My favorite phase is when construction has started and the rough framing is in progress. Residential architecture in the United States is still built mostly with lumber, not cold steel or lumpy concrete. We use real wood, from trees.

I love walking a job site and smelling the sap from fresh sawn wood. Southern pine. Douglas fir. Hem-fir. All woods have a sweet smell that is released by hammer and saw. I love the sound of the rotary blade doing its work. Of nails being driven into the grain. Joists and studs and blocking finding their proper places and roof beams lifted against the sky. All of this is a three-dimensional efflorescence of what previously existed only on paper or on a computer monitor. The idea is taking shape. Nothing mars it at this phase. No wrong colors, no decorating mistakes. Just pure form materializing.

Framing is the best phase of architecture.

All photos: MJK

Architectural Addendum: Subirachs at Sagrada Familia

2011-05-29T13:26:00.001-06:00

As a small addendum to the previous entry, a word about the more recent additions to the facade of Sagrada Familia.

1. Subirachs sculpture on Sagrada Familia.

The recent monumental sculptural expressions on Sagrada Familia (the Passion Facade) are not designs by Antonio Gaudi. They are the works of Barcelona sculptor Josep Maria Subirachs. To architectural critics his work is not Gaudi-esque enough; some call it cold and unemotional. I find this assessment flat-out wrong.

Subirachs work does not mimic Gaudi's style, nor should it. It is completely original and fitting. It is a continuation of the themes established by Gaudi without slavish imitation. (Just as Gaudi imitated no one before him.)

I am proud to have two examples of Subirach's work in my collection. One is a lithograph by the artist showing his drafting table in the foreground with his design for a knight sculpture used in Sagrada Familia; in the middle ground is the rooftop and chimney caps of Gaudi's La Pradera, the inspiration for Subirachs' knight. Sagrada Familia is portrayed in the distance. The second is a wood carving which Subirachs executed as a study for his knight. Both are treasured gifts from Bill McDonough, purchased at Subirachs home in Barcelona. (Subirachs actually spends most of his time at Sagrada Familia, where he lives and works on site. Bill met Subirachs there and was introduced to his son, Dani, who was authorized by the elder Subirachs to sell these works to Bill.)

2. Subirachs lithograph. (Numbered 50 of 75.)

3. Subirachs wood carving.

Photos:
1. Rob Munger
2. M. Knorr
3. M. Knorr

Gaudi and the Architecture of Sagrada Familia

2011-05-27T12:34:00.000-06:00

Gaudi and the architecture of Sagrada Familia have been mentioned several times in this blog. For those who don't already know, Antonio Gaudi (1852-1926) is Spain's greatest architect. In Barcelona he is treated like a saint. His monk-like lifestyle and single-minded devotion to God and architecture did not discourage such appreciation. To this day, Gaudi has many admirers and followers.

Gaudi's most famous and most important work is Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. Under construction since 1883, he devoted the final decades of his life to this enormous structure.

Gaudi's work is usually lumped-in with the art nouveau style (modernisme in Barcelona) popular at the turn of the nineteenth century. It is understandable how Gaudi's florid, exuberant forms are categorized in this manner. His architectural excesses were dismissed by Frank Lloyd Wright as "architecture with a laxative." This was mistranslated in Spain at the time as "architecture with a suppository." Either way, it suggests the effusion of architectural decoration that leaves no surface unaffected. To many this exhurberance is excessive.

In my opinion, this focus on the surface characteristics of Gaudi's architecture misses the point of his genius. Rather than being among the first of the art nouveau architects, he is better understood as one of the last of the Gothic architects. Gothic architecture swept through Europe in the thirteenth century. It emphasized a new verticality in architecture, using exoskeletons of flying buttresses to reduce the mass of exterior walls. It also featured vast quantities of stained glass that introduced unprecedented amounts of light into the interiors of great cathedrals. Gothic architecture was essentially a structural revolution that replaced the traditional architecture of the day to become the new modern. Gaudi, at heart, was also mostly concerned about structure. Where Gothic architects used flying buttresses to resolve the structural weight of their immense cathedrals, Gaudi introduced angled columns to pick up the gravitational forces of heavy roofs and towers.

Gaudi's Sagrada Familia is still an unfinished building. The largest and tallest spire, at the crossing of the transepts, has yet to rise to the heavens. However, what is currently built clearly reveals the intensity of structural expression behind the architectural forms. Many of his earlier projects were, in retrospect, experimental prototypes for Sagrada Familia. But on this work alone, Gaudi qualifies as one of the greatest architects of the twentieth century.

The Architecture of Bruce Goff: Crystal Chapel

2011-05-24T15:09:00.006-06:00

Bruce Goff created stunning works of architecture beginning in the 1920s to his death in 1982. A few of his works were completed posthumously. However, many of his projects - including some of his best - were never built. One such example is the Crystal Chapel, designed in 1950 for Norman, Oklahoma. A scale model of the project was built at the time to aid in fund raising. The model was so convincing that some people, upon seeing published photographs, thought the chapel had actually been constructed. Many architectural pilgrims are said to have been disappointed upon visiting Oklahoma and being told that the building never existed. The model has long been destroyed and money and politics prevented the real thing from materializing. Now we have a new model to appreciate. The video below by Skyline Ink Animation Studios presents a computerized animation that gets inside Goff's vision in a way no cardboard model ever could have. It was produced for an exhibition organized in 2010 at the Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art in Norman, Oklahoma.

Glass in Architecture

2011-05-19T08:06:00.032-06:00

For those of us who grew up with (and loved) Walt Disney's Tomorrowland, the Monsanto House of the Future, Bucky Fuller, and the architecture in Superman comics... this one's for you:

I usually avoid being a shill for manufacturers' products. But this vid by Corning Glass has great architectural appeal and presents an optimistic vision. It is a futurist fantasy of the world of tomorrow as it is now unfolding.

Architectural Spring Flowers: Another Tour

2011-05-15T11:28:00.218-06:00

1. Lantern at Gamble House, Greene & Greene. 1908.

Last week another spring architectural tour was on the calendar. This time it was Denver's Wash (Washington) Park neighborhood. The district is "famous" for its classic American bungalows and arts-and-crafts architecture. This was a popular housing type built throughout the country in the early decades of the last century.

Unfortunately, the Wash Park tour featured clever decorating and spiffy landscaping, but was slim on architectural excitement. So, instead of featuring any homes from this tour, I offer a few examples of truly great original architecture from the arts and crafts movement (broadly construed). These are works that any student of architectural history will recognize. They are original works of genius that continue to influence architects to this day.

2. Blacker house, Greene and Greene. 1907.

3. Gamble House, Greene and Green. 1908.

4. Frank Lloyd Wright home and studio, Oak Park, IL. 1889.

5. FLlW home and studio, playroom interior.

6. Willow Tea Room, exterior, by Charles Rennie Mackintosh.

7. Tea room design drawing.

8. Tea room interior by Charles Rennie Mackintosh.

9. Residence by Walter Burley Griffin, Grinnell, IA. 1912.

10. Stinson Library by Walter Burley Griffin. 1914.

11. Wyntoon estate by Bernard Maybeck. 1906.

Photos:

1. Wikipedia

2. Mr. Exuberance

3. John L. Poole

4. Josh Delano

5. Phillip Turner

6. Dave Sousa

7. Wikimedia

8. Dave Sousa

9. Knorr

10. Knorr

11. Enos Brown

Soaring Architecture

2011-05-15T11:13:00.033-06:00

Thank you to our friend, Greg Walke, who forwarded this contribution to our Architectural Oddities file. It is the home of Joanne Ussary who bought a used Boeing 727 for $2000. She moved it to its current sie for $4000 and spent an additional $24,000 for revovations. There is a personal Jacuzzi in the cockpit. No word on what the site for this aerie cost.

Architectural Spring Flowers: Observatory Park

2011-05-01T16:59:00.182-06:00

Spring brings forth flowers, dandelions, and home tours. The season has started in Denver and neighborhood architectural tours are available for the picking almost every weekend. The University Park neighborhood (or, as some call it, Observatory Park) had its tour on May Day.

Holland House by Eugene Groves.

This is one of my favorite neighborhoods because it is about as eclectic as they come. How many neighborhoods boast a Russian Orthodox church, complete with onion dome, only a few bocks from an Anglican Catholic church as well as the usual complement of protestant and Roman Catholic places of worship? Architectural styles range from Victorian to Denver Square to bungalow to ranchette to English cottage to neo-Mediterranean to mid-century modern. On top of all that, there is a charming old park with big trees and a 19th century observatory. This neighborhood has it all.

Close-up of Holland House with ovoid dome.

Under the dome.

This year's tour offered nothing in innovative, cutting-edge architecture. However, there were a few architectural oddities that made the afternoon worthwhile. One was an all-concrete, art deco home designed by architect Eugene Groves in 1932. More odd than beautiful (as these photos attest) it has the grey, lumpy quality characteristic of much art deco architecture. The living room ceiling is an ovoid dome -- also of concrete -- with ziggurat pendentives. Acoustically, it performed like a whispering gallery and there was some vague claim to spiritual qualities. This dome is also the most distinctive feature on the exterior as it pokes above a tall hedge on Josephine Street. The rear of the house has a concrete stairway that ascends to a roof deck. The whole thing reminded me of Rudolph Steiner's esoteric (almost creepy) architecture.

Dining room ceiling.

Holland house, stairs to roof.

The tour was also an opportunity to inspect the old Fitzroy mansion (1893 - now used by Accelerated Schools) and the neighborhood's centerpiece, the Chamberlin Observatory (1890). The original grandeur of the mansion can still be discerned under the disarray of its current function but it would take millions to fully restore its beauty. The Richardsonian Romanesque edifice was design by architects Fuller and Wheeler of New York.

Fitzroy mansion.

Chamberlain Observatory.

The observatory, on the other hand, is a fully functional time machine that takes you back to Denver's early boom/bust excitement. In addition to this spring tour, the observatory hosts frequent open house dates. During an open house you can climb a ladder under the dome and peer through the 20 inch, 100-year-old Clark refractor as well as a wide variety of amateur telescopes. The next one is May 14th; admission $1. The observatory was designed by Denver architect Robert Roeschlaub. He based his design on the Carleton College Observatory in Northfield, Minnesota.

All photos: MJK

Architectural Heat

2011-04-17T12:39:00.000-06:00

Outdoor fireplaces and firepits have become popular in the last couple of years. As an architectural amenity they have gone from rare to almost de riguer in new custom homes. Whether this is a passing fad or a permanent standard is difficult to predict. The key to longevity will be how often people really use them. In my Las Vegas home I never used the outdoor fireplace. If the evening was chilly, I was inside. Other people feel differently. I have been at parties where an outdoor firepit was a cozy focus for after-dinner conversation. Another key to success is making this feature an integral component of the architecture. If it is designed well it can be a visual focal point and a magnet for activity. Here are a few random firepit examples culled from the internet. Some are manufactured products, others are custom designs. The manufactured products availble at garden centers and furniture stores start as cheap as $400 and go up to $4000 and beyond.

Architecture Tour in LA - HOUSE IV

2011-04-10T16:06:00.001-06:00

This is the fourth and final installment about new architecture on an AIA-sponsored tour in Los Angeles.

Reminiscent of the Case Study houses.

HOUSE IV - NIGHTINGALE DRIVE RESIDENCE

This review of four recent examples of modern architecture has been all about the details. The Nightingale Drive residence, high above Sunset, may have some of the best. Every turn of a corner or intersection of materials has been meticulously designed. This attention to detail almost seems Japanese in character. However, this house is thoroughly in the Neutra/Eames/Koenig tradition. This means it is unmistakably American and unmistakably L.A. It was designed by Studio Pali Fekete Architects.

An LA pool with an LA view.

Glass and steel...

...and notice the detail of patio meeting house.

A bath hovers above the landscape.

Bathroom railing detail. (Look closely).

Elegant bar-b-que.

Elegant kitchen.

Stairs beside a water wall.

Creative use of skylights.

Photos: MJK

Architecture Tour in LA - HOUSE III

2011-04-07T10:24:00.000-06:00

Outdoor fireplace. One of two poolside.

This is the third blog entry describing a recent tour of architecturally significant homes in Los Angeles. The tour was sponsered by the LA chapter of the American Institute of Architects.

HOUSE III - MULHOLLAND DRIVE RESIDENCE

This was easily the largest and most lavish home on the tour. It is available for $15,000,000.00.

Designed by David Thompson Associates with interior staging by Assembledge+ and Billy Rose Design it is ostensibly a renovation of an existing home. Clearly, though, the renovation was extensive enough to properly call this original architecture. There are many standout design elements here, from sculptured walls to a spectacular kitchen to numerous contemporary fireplaces. The two most remarkable items were the windows (metal frames sandwiched in walls of structural glass) and the patio (an assemblage of rusted steel fireplaces, a Barrigan-esque water sculpture, and an infinity-edge pool spilling towards views of the San Fernando valley.

Water spilling into a spa.

Looking back at the main house.

One of many indoor fireplaces.

A hidden skylight brings light to a bath.

A magic trick: suspending windows in fixed glass.

Looking at the pool from a second floor bedroom.

All photos: MJK

Architecture Tour in LA - HOUSE II

2011-04-06T10:56:00.001-06:00

Glass, steel, decks, and stairs.

This is the second in a series of photo essays on a recent home tour sponsored by the Los Angeles chapter of the American Institute of Architects. All of the homes are relentlessly modern, exquisitely detailed, and quintessentially LA.

HOUSE II - Brentwood Residence

Interior photos were not allowed at this home, designed by Cory Buckner Architects. It was another example of crisp detailing and dramatic siting. Perched on an impossibly steep hill with classic views from West Hollywood to Santa Monica Bay, this star was ready for its closeup. One quirky thing was immediately noticed: there are no handrails on any stairs inside or out. Building codes have very specific mandates about this sort of thing. Were the architect and owner such artistic purists that handrails were removed to prevent any interruptions in planes and space? Whatever the reason, the precarious ride was enjoyable.

A pool hovering above the site.

Interior stairs sans railing.

Exterior stairs sans railing.

The studio/guest house is downhill from the main floor.

Entry stairs (street above) and water feature.

All photos: MJK

Architecture Tour in LA - HOUSE I

2011-04-05T14:14:00.001-06:00

Latimer Road residence.

The Los Angeles chapter of the American Institute of Architects sponsors regular tours of new architecture. The most recent was last Sunday, focusing on four modern homes in the hills off Sunset Boulevard. Each one was better than the next, but all were notable for exquisite details, great siting, and a relentlessly modern attitude. There were no stunning "Fallingwater moments" on this tour. That is, no house stood out as an overwhelming architectural image. However, all were proud products of of their place and time. All of them looked like Case Study houses fifty years after. (The Case Study houses were a mid-century architectural program in LA that promoted a modern esthetic.) In other words, these homes could properly exist nowhere but Los Angeles. Transparent to the environment and structurally minimalist, they were all mature examples of sophisticated and fully developed modern architecture. The next four blog entries are a photographic report on these homes. Remember: it is the details that are important here.

HOUSE I: Latimer Road Residence

Designed by Rick Leslie Architects, at 4700 square feet this is the smallest of the four homes on the tour. It is also the most lived-in and friendly. Nestled in a warren of roads down Rustic Canyon, the setting is out of a Raymond Chandler murder mystery. The rainy morning contributed to that feeling. However, rain made the canyon green and the house was a welcome retreat on a dreary day.

A sliding panel conceals a TV over the fireplace.

A straightforward outdoor fireplace.

The canyon property was terraced to accommodate a pool.

Cabinets and niches detailed with finesse.

A simple tub, simply detailed.

Out of the Neutra tradition: an industrial esthetic transparent
to the natural environment.

A surprise peek-a-boo niche
between stairs and living room.

Stairs, pure and simple.

All photos: MJK

World's Most Beautiful Architecture (Part 2)

2011-03-31T11:59:00.012-06:00

The previous post listed five of ten Lonely Planet's "world's most beautiful buildings." Here we continue with comments on the final five of Lonely Planet's selections.

Imam Mosque, Iran

2. Blue Mosque.

1. Iman Mosque.

I've never been to Iran (yet). So, I can't speak with firsthand knowledge about the architectural qualities of the Imam mosque. From pictures, the pale blue mosaics of the interior remind me of many mosques I have seen. In particular: the Blue Mosque in Istanbul. In both cases light is refracted and becomes mystical in its effects.

Hermitage Museum, St. Petersburg, Russia

Also on my "to do" list. Much documented in pictures and tales of palace intrigue, there are many layers of interest here.

3. Hermitage

Crac des Chevaliers, Syria

Why would Lawrence call this the "finest castle in the world"? My vote goes to the fortress city of Carcasonne. Crac des Chevaliers is a lonely little castle. Carcassone is a vast medieval compound. The later was spectacularly restored by Violette-le-Duc in 1853 and stands largely intact to this day.

4. Crac de Chevaliers.

5. Carcasonne.

Museu Oscar Niemeyer, Curitiba, Brazil

6. Museu Oscar Niemeyer.

Any building by architect Oscar Niemeyer is worth studying. His best-known works are for the capitol city Brasilia where (like Walter Burley Griffin in Canberra) he created an "ideal" city out of nothing. Niemeyer's contribution to twentieth (and twenty first) -century architecture is his skill in combining mid-century modern aesthetics with the sensuous forms of Brazil. His buildings look as if the undulating sidewalks at Copacabana coalesced into three-dimensional structures.

Hagia Sophia, Istanbul, Turkey

This vast enclosure is always near the top of my list of great buildings. (See March 4, 2010 blog entry.) There are other great mosques, like the Blue mosque and the Imam mosque, but Hagia Sophia was the first of the greatest. Intended as the center of Christendom when built by Justinian in 360 A.D. it became a prototype for hundreds of mosques and is now a museum. Keep in mind that for a millennium it was the largest enclosure in the world.

7. Hagia Sophia.

Photo credits:

1. Nick Taylor
2. Classical geographer
3. Robert Broadie
4. Xviun
5. Jean-Pierre Lavoie
6. dani.sonksen
7. Philz

World's Most Beautiful Architecture (Part 1)

2011-03-25T10:28:00.000-06:00

1. Guggenheim Museum.

The Lonely Planet web site has identified its top ten "most beautiful buildings." (Link above.) The article starts with a reasonable disclaimer. "...this isn't a top 10 list. There are just too many styles of buildings, each worthy of a top 50: sacred buildings, homes, skyscrapers, theaters..." Fair enough. However, without criticizing the choices, it is hard to resist commenting on them. In the same order cited by Lonely Planet:

2. Guggenheim interior.

Frank Gehry's Museo Guggenheim, Bilbao, Spain

This is one of the most popular modern buildings in the world. It revitalized interest in architecture and set off a worldwide building boom in museums by Gehry and other star architects. Gehry's work is definitely dramatic, with cockeyed geometry and unexpected twists. His computer-generated forms inevitably produce original spaces but, somehow, they always seem contrived and willful. This building gets an A+ for orginality and a D- for coherency.

3. Potala Palace, former seat of the Dalai Lama.

Potala Palace, Lhasa, Tibet.

This is an interesting choice. Exotic and evocative, this palace and seat of government is a sad reminder of the Chinese onslaught against Tibetan culture. The Chinese army has replaced the Dalai Lama. Military tanks dominate the courtyards where religious ceremonies took place. As architecture this immense building is an abstract extension of the hill upon which it sits. It is organic and mystical despite the recent history that defiles it.

4. Bibliotheca Alexandrina.

Biblioteheca Alexandrina, Egypt.

An architectural homage to the original Alexandrina library, this saucer-shaped building has flown in under my radar. I don't have much to say about it, but it looks like a worthy site for architectural junkies. The "vast rotunda space can hold eight million books" according to Lonely Planet. It does not say how many it actually holds. The original Alexandria library was burned to the ground in 48 B.C. by Julius Ceasar. It was one of the greatest institutions of the ancient world.

5. Interior of Sagrada Familia.

Sagrada Familia, Barcelona, Spain

6. Sagrada Familia with construction cranes.

This is Antonio Gaudi's masterpiece: a grand exuberance of stone. The (still unfinished) interior is a procession of angled columns and knobby connections that look like trees and branches under the influence of extreme weight. That is not far from the truth. Unlike Gehry's unusual forms being completely arbitrary, the strange angles at Sagrada Familia are a direct response to the structural forces playing on them. Think of Sagrada Familia as a three dimensional diagram of the mathematics behind the engineering. Viewed this way, the building is not art nouveau (as it is usually classified) but the last logical extension of Gothic architecture. A completely original work of art, Sagrada Familia belongs on this list of beautiful buildings.

Taj Mahal

7. Taj Mahal at dawn.

It is the sublime proportions, the spacious setting, and its ethereal whiteness (the marble cosntruction is luminescent) that make this builidng beautiful. It is impossible to criticize a builidng that people stare at like a teenage boy in love with a beautiful girl. Rising out of (polluted) mists the Taj Mahal seems like a mirage. Add the back story of its purpose (a monument to love lost) and this building becomes irresistable.

Photo credits:

1. Rob Munger
2. Rob Munger
3. Ondrej Zvarcek
4. Barcex
5. Charles Curling
6. Rob Munger
7.Dan Searle

Scientific Proof for Good Architecture!

2011-02-28T13:46:00.004-07:00

1. High ceiling for high energy over gathering space contrasting with
lower, more intimate, ceiling over dining area.

Finally there is scientific backing for an idea architects have long espoused: that good architecture is good for people. The current issue of Psychology Today (January/February 2011) has an article about "how ceilings shape behavior." Citing several sources it demonstrates what architects have always claimed (but could never prove) that the height and color of ceilings affects our mood and behavior. In general, extremely high ceilings can be uncomfortable and overwhelming, except for gatherings of many people in in a party atmosphere. Low ceilings encourage intimacy and conversation, say in a dining room or window seat. Light colored ceilings raise perceived height and dark colored ceilings bring it down.

Somehow the typical American home has accepted the standard eight-foot ceiling as the norm. The article quotes a University of Minnesota study that reports "people in 8-foot-high rooms feel more confined, while those in 10-foot rooms feel freer." Further, "Low ceilings can trigger feelings of confinement, making places like basement apartments seem all the more crowded and unbearable."

2. A low ceiling at surrounding galleries adds emphasis to central space.

Much of the research in things like this comes from the fields of marketing and advertising for purposes that have nothing to do with architecture. Architects must be content with thinking serious thoughts in their ivory towers until they come to similar conclusions.

Of course, manipulating scale and creatively introducing variety remains a challenge for architects. However, it is heartening to know that good architecture is not simply a matter of taste and opinion and more a matter of good practice for human well-being.

3. Playing with scale.

Credits:

1. Worley residence by Michael Knorr. Photo by R. Munger.

2. Florida Southern Chapel by Frank Llloyd Wright. National Archives American Building Survey.

3. Worley residence by Michael Knorr. Photo by R. Munger.

Capitolizing (sic) on Good Architecture

2011-02-26T10:31:00.003-07:00

Wisconsin is in the news a lot this week because of a battle between unionized state workers and anti-union, budget-cutting Governor Scott Walker. That is not what this blog entry is about. It is about the backdrop for union demonstrations: the Wisconsin state capitol building. It has been highly visible in TV and print news.

Approach to the Wisconsin state capitol.

I have long thought that Wisconsin's capitol is architecturally one of the best. It's classical motif is not unusual or particularly remarkable. However, its proportions and interior spaces are exceptional.

On the outside the Wisconsin state capitol has gravitas: a grounded heft to the proportions that make you take it seriously. The interiors have a three-dimensional spatial excitement, with pedestrian bridges spanning the galleries and numerous skylights to draw the eye upward. The building materials are lush (43 varieties of stone) and beautifully executed (hand-crafted glass mosaics and furniture). Other state capitols (not all, but many) are unfortunate victims of having been built too early in a state's history and do not have the grandeur of a powerful political center. Construction on Wisconsin's capitol began in 1906 and was completed in 1917. Wisconsin was, perhaps, at the height of its economic power and able to execute an exceptionally fine building. It was designed by George Brown Post (1837-1913), an accomplished classicist. He contributed to the famous Columbian Exhibition in Chicago in 1893, a classical extravaganza.

Numerous bridges span interior galleries.

The central dome.

In most ways the Wisconsin capitol surpasses the national Capitol with architectural panache. People are horrified at criticism of our national icon, but that is really what it is: an icon, not an architectural masterpiece. As a symbol of our nation it is just fine. As architecture it has been modified over the years into a clumsy mass of ill-proportioned lumps. At close view the dome all but disappears into its bloated base. The interior spaces are drab and uninspired. The house and senate chambers are gloomy. Not so with the Wisconsin masterpiece.

Every detail is exquisitely executed.

The Wisconsin state capitol building currently glistens with $145 million worth of renovations completed in 2001. This National Historic Landmark is worth a visit if you are anywhere near Madison, Wisconsin.

Numerous skylights add natural light.

All photos by MJK.

Architectural Model of Monticello

2011-02-02T12:57:00.000-07:00

Paper model of Thomas Jefferson"s Monticello.

I got a nice email from Robert Anderson in Los Angeles. He noticed my list of "top ten works of architecture" which includes Thomas Jefferson's Monticello:

I came across your top ten list of buildings and saw that we share a high regard for Monticello. I have designed an inexpensive, museum-quality paper model of Monticello based on the HABS drawings and I am trying to get out the word to Jefferson aficionados. I would greatly appreciate it if you would check out my website and consider adding the link on your top ten page. I designed the model over many months when my daughter was sick to take my mind off of things. I think the end result does justice to Jefferson's architectural genius. I hope you will agree.

http://www.monticellomodel.com

By the way, your designs are impressive too!

Best regards,

Robert Anderson

Los Angeles

I have also added Mr. Anderson's link to the sidebar.

If any reader orders and assembles this paper model, let me know how it turns out. Pictures would be great too.

Street Architecture

2011-01-30T13:13:00.000-07:00

The Spire condominiums on 14th.

Light rail crossing 14th Street.

Several weeks ago I wrote about Denver's 14th Street: a "New Edge for the City." This was about the new developments adjacent to Denver's theater district and convention center. New condos, hotels, restaurants. Now the city is investing millions of dollars in street improvements with pedestrian resting spots, trees, and Times Square-type signage. This three-minute animation produced by Parsons Brinkerhoff Project Visualization Group shows what the street will look like by the end of 2011.

Credits:

Photos, M. Knorr.

Video, Parson Brinkerhoff.

Architectural Battleground

2011-01-12T12:08:00.000-07:00

The Denver Post recently reported the story of a home built in 1958 that the owner intends to demolish for his new "dream home." ("Street Fight" by Jeremy P. Meyer, The Denver Post, December 25, 2010.) The home is located in Belcaro, a desirable residential neighborhood. The owner, Gary Yourtz, was temporarly stalled in his plans by a city ordinance that allows anybody to challenge proposed demolition by filing a landmark designation application. Mr. Yourtz spent $18,000 in legal fees to make this legal obstruction go away.

The Denver Post published a letter I wrote on the subject:

To the Editor:

The article about Gary Yourtz’s efforts to protect his property from the clutches of historic preservationists is disturbing. As an architect I am familiar with his home. It is, as the preservationists aver, a wonderful example of modern design. However, what dreamworld are people living in when they think that admiring another’s property gives them the right to control its fate?

I don’t know what the replacement home will look like. Maybe it will be better than the existing structure; maybe worse. That judgement in the eye of the beholder is not the point. The right of Mr. Yourtz to improve his surroundings by his own criteria within the bounds of codes and zoning is the only pertinent issue. I don’t understand the desire to hijack property without assent from or compensation to the owner. There are other methods available to preservationists. They might buy it themselves or raise funds to preserve it through a trust.

We live in a vibrant metropolis where change and growth is part of the deal. Those who seek more predictable environments should visit Williamsburg or Disneyland.

Sincerely,

Michael Knorr

Yourtz residence designed by Tician Papachristou
and Daniel Havekost in 1958.

There have been a flurry of letters (pro and con) since this situation was reported. The Denver Post editorial board came down on the side of sanity, registering dismay.

To be clear: the existing house really is a good work of architecture. Clean lines; good proportions, sophisticated detailing. I've admired it ever since I moved to Denver. It's the kind of place that House Beautiful and Sunset magazines championed in the 1950s and 60s. Homes like this inspired my early dreams of becoming an architect. Years after "discovering" this house I had the opportunity to study it on a regular basis when working on the Mongile (now Coors) residence right next door. I never got tired of looking at it.

The Belcaro neighborhood has other outstanding works of architecture, including a copper-roofed house by Taliesin Associated Architects (Frank Lloyd Wright's successors) and a bold A-frame by Bill Muchow. The centerpiece of the neighborhood is the massive (33,000 square feet; 70+ rooms) Phipps Mansion designed by Fischer and Fiscber in 1931. Ironically, the neighborhood has long been a focal point for change and architectural diversity.

Having noted all the good things about Mr. Yourtz's existing house and neighborhood, none of this matters. In the end, this issue is analogous to free speech rights. Mr. Yourtz's property is his forum to speak whatever architectural tounge suits his fancy. As long as he doesn't harm his neighbors through code or zoning violations, what business is it of ours that he replaces his mid-century modern design with something new? Some argue that there is harm to the community by "robbing" us of an important piece of our architectural heritage. That argument is, first of all, an abstract asssertion that lacks proof and, more importantly, a huge expansion of the definition of "harm." Warping words in this manner diminishes the impact of real, physical harm when it occurs.

The Denver ordinance allows anyone (in the case of Mr. Yourtz, his antagonist did not even live in Denver) to cause great mischeif. Any house could be labeled "historic" until proven otherwise. Councilman Charlie Brown has indicated he may seek changes in the ordinance; I hope he moves forward with this idea.

Exterior materials are white brick and stained wood.

Finally, what is to be done with historic and architecturally significant buildings? The Phipps Mansion provides one example. It was purchased recently by Tim Gill and Scott Miller. They have the money and desire to restore the tattered structure to its original glory. That's what it takes: money and will. Old structures are expensive to maintain and restore. They require a sympathetic hand and an open purse. It is presumptive to impose the burden of historic preservation on any individual out of the blue. That is what was attempted in the case of Mr. Yourtz with his mid-century modern ranch house. I wish him well with his new home, whatever style it may be.

Architecture on Your Mobile Device

2011-01-10T21:18:00.000-07:00

This blog is now mobile-device-friendly. If you happen to check out these posts on a smart phone it will present itself in an easier-to-read format. Thanks for reading either on your computer or your mobile!

John Lautner, Mid-Century Architect

2010-12-06T09:59:00.003-07:00

John Lautner was one of this country's best architects, however, he is little known by the general public. His work is worth exploring as modern architecture of the mid-twentieth century enjoys a resurgence in popularity.

1. Lautner's Chemosphere house, featured in many movies.

It used to be a truism that in bad economic times traditional architecture becomes popular because it is safe and comfortable. Conversely, contemporary - or modern - architecture was considered a risk during times of uncertainty. This has turned out to be a tired cliche. Times are not great, but forward-thinking architecture is far from dead and is no longer considered economically risky. Perhaps it has been around long enough that modern/contemporary design has itself become comfortable and familiar.

2. The iconic Goldstein residence in Palm Springs.

Mid-century modern is a well-defined, but broad, category. It covers everything from the classic California ranch house to Frank Lloyd Wright usonian designs to the free-form swirls of Bruce Goff. It is the modern architecture of the 1940s through the 1960s. [Note: We will have to have a separate discussion on the difference between "modern" and "contemporary." The terms are often used interchangeably. Is there a distinction?] John Lautner was a hero of the era, inspiring many architects who followed, including myself. There are several good books available on Lautner. The Hammer museum in Los Angeles staged an extensive retrospective of his work last year. If you haven't met John Lautner's architecture, enjoy this short clip from the documentary Infinite Space:

Photo Credits:

1. ikkoskinen.

2. Arch.james.

Architecture and Thanksgiving

2010-11-25T12:05:00.000-07:00

1. The Parthenon.

Today is the American Thanksgiving holiday. On this day we think about those things for which we are grateful. Family. Friends. Good health. Comfort. Etc. Those are the typical thoughts we express. Maybe there is room in our thoughts for architecture: the architecture we may be fortunate enough to inhabit or public architecture we might see in our daily lives. Such thoughts may seem too materialistic for the holiday, but I don’t see it that way.

No doubt: architecture is a luxury. Sometimes community-minded people try to force it into some other category. “We need better architecture for the poor.” Or, “Architects need to solve the homeless problem.” Such admonitions are really about shelter, not architecture. The solutions to these problems are, more often than not, political, economic, social, and, at times, structural. They are not really architectural. Architects may choose to devote time and effort to finding solutions to these serious problems; that is a good thing. And they may craft clever designs to meet the needs of those less fortunate. But the root cause of such problems is not fixed by architecture, no matter how fervently academics and idealists may wish it so.

2. Baths of Diocletian, Rome.

Architecture is a luxury. Yes, it can be sustenance for aesthetic hunger, but that hunger only exists when real hunger is at bay. Architecture -- how buildings look and feel and elevate your thoughts -- is only important after we are clothed and warm. When we have shelter against the elements. If we are concerned about the appearance and arrangement of our environment, then our environment must already be providing us with food and shelter.

3. Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Psychologist Abraham Maslow popularized the concept “hierarchy of needs.” In his theory of human psychology, architecture (as a creative endeavor) is not important until all baser needs have been satisfied. It falls under self-actualization, at the top of his schematic pyramid.

4. Calatrava library, Zurich.

Architecture is only possible when something is going right. It is a sign that not everything in the world is collapsing. For those of us fortunate enough to experience architecture in some way in our lives, we should be thankful. For those of us who are architects we should also be grateful for the patrons that support our work. Few people in this world are able to afford the cost of architectural services, so architecture is a rare commodity. It is almost frivolous. Architects do not save lives like surgeons. We do not, as a result of our profession, feed the poor. Architects do not provide some essential service such as unclogging your drain like a plumber or plowing your street when it snows. Architecture only happens as an extraordinary effort to reach beyond the minimum. Architecture is a luxury. We need such luxuries. Why do surgeons save lives? Why do the poor need to be fed? Why do we need plumbers, maintenance crews, a good economy, world peace, and happiness? We need satisfaction in these areas so we can enjoy life. And when we are equipped to enjoy life, we start expanding our hierarchy of needs into the realms of art, literature, spirituality, song, and, sometimes, architecture.

5. Lotus Temple.

I am thankful that in a world with a dire economy, climate change, and multiple wars we still have the means and time to create and experience beautiful architecture. I would like to believe that the more good architecture we are able to create is an indication we are solving some of our more important problems. If we have any good architecture at all, something is going right.

Happy Thanksgiving.

Photo Credits:
1. Thermos.
2. Anthony Majanlahti.
3. Wikicommons.
4. Wouter Homs.
5. Vandelizer

Earthship Architecture

2010-11-22T19:48:00.000-07:00

Welcome to Earthship homes.

People forget that current concerns about building green are really the second wave of the environmental movement. Conservation, sustainable design, alternative energy -- these are all ideas originally popularized during the 1970s: the first wave of environmental consciousness.

Gathering used tires for construction material.

During that decade people thought we were going to run out of oil (lines at the gas pumps), the earth was about to be overpopulated ("stop at two"), and Rachel Carson influenced a generation (with her book "Silent Spring.") The environmental movement was born.

Wall in progress.

All of these nascent movements merged in another type of residential architecture that emphasized recycled materials and energy efficiency. This was Earthship architecture. Commonly, but not exclusively, made of recycled tires, discarded bottles, and varying degrees of passive and active solar energy systems, these homes are true children of the seventies. They were initially promoted by Mike Reynolds, architect and founder of Earthship Biotecture, a company specializing in the design/build of Earthship structures.

Earthship rising.

Passive and active solar.

Bottles and concrete make a home.

I had submerged my memories of this approach to saving energy until I recently ran across the mother Earthship community in northern New Mexico. This convergence of free-form residences is located near Taos. On vast acreage high on a cliff above the Rio Grande, amorphous structures sprout like well-spaced mushrooms. Tawny colors blend with the high desert landscape. Many of them are even covered with the land; with others it berms against them. The general recipe seems to be one part Bruce Goff, two parts Paolo Soleri, and a dash of Hobbit warren. Seventies high romanticism. Does it have any relevance today? One has to wonder, as "ordinary" houses are now capable of approaching grid-neutral energy efficiency through technological advances. It is not difficult to hyper-insulate any new home and feed collected energy back into the grid. In this context, the Earthships seem anachronistic indulgences. But there is no sense of that inside the community Visitors Center. These are people on a mission and they communicate their beliefs sincerely. Maybe they will survive on the high desert a lot longer than the rest of us living on a lower plane. I don't know, but good luck to them.

Reminiscent of Bruce Goff.

Home sweet amorphous home.

Photos: M. Knorr

Architect Jacques Benedict Design on Market

2010-11-06T11:30:00.001-06:00

Jacques Benedict (1879-1948) was a society architect. His clients were among the upper crust of early-twentieth-century Denver society and Benedict was a member of that group himself. As an architect he created a body of work that exhibited impeccable good taste.

1300 East Seventh Avenue, Denver, CO

The house is located right on the street,
but has large, private gardens in the rear.

One of those designs at 1300 East Seventh Avenue in Denver is currently on the market. Originally constructed in 1923, the property has been extensively renovated by the current owners, Bob and Jane Nettleton. The interior is not an historic restoration. Everything--from kitchen to bathrooms--is new. With a Benedict design, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Benedict's architecture was really about the exterior. Unlike some of his famous contemporaries (Neutra, Wright, Goff, for examples), Benedict seemed unconcerned with spatial sequencing, volume, or inventive spaces. The room layouts in every Benedict home I've visited are not particularly adventuresome. In fact, they seem deployed only to allow windows and walls to serve the exterior appearance of the design. And what great exteriors they are! Benedict's architecture was created from outside/in, rather than inside/out. While Benedict's contemporaries were exploring new spatial relationships on the frontiers of modern design, Benedict was content to create exquisite visions for the traditional gentry. He is a pure product of his l'Ecole des Beaux-Arts education in Paris. He (along with Temple Hoyne Buell) moved in the upper echelons of Denver society and was among the last of the old-school gentleman architects.

French Renaissance Chateau?

This house on Seventh Avenue is among the best of Beneict's exteriors. Long and elegant, it is described as "French Renaissance Chateau." I don't know what that means. What Benedict really did with this house (as with all of his successful designs) is take bits and pieces of historic design elements and arrange them in completely original ways. His talent was using classic features and creating something completely original. He was able to accomplish this successfully because he had a flawless sense of proportion and scale.

Alley and service entrance.

Even though the main attraction of this property is the exterior, one unique characteristic of the plan enlivens the interior: the house is only one room deep. Built on a relatively shallow lot, the clever layout introduces ample light into every space. Some rooms, like the master bedroom and living room, have light from three sides. This introduces an extraordinary quality into what would otherwise be quite ordinary spaces. The updated colors complement the overall feeling of brightness and light. A semi-circular conservatory on the main floor and a sitting room above it also introduce an upbeat atmosphere that is rare in homes of this period.

Irterested buyers can follow the realtor's link for more information: www.christinadebarros.com. If you want to know more about Jules Jacques Benois Benedict click on his link.

Photos: M. Knorr

Architecture Trivia Answer

2010-10-29T11:27:00.005-06:00

The previous blog entry ended with a question: Is the following house a Frank Lloyd Wright design? Or is it authored by one of Wright's many followers?

Wright or faux Wright?

Russell Barr Williamson residence.

The house is located at 4800 North Oakland Avenue, Whitefish Bay, Wisconsin. Whitefish Bay is a leafy Milwaukee suburb on the Lake Michigan shore. This is a standout house architecturally, but not unusual for the neighborhood in terms of quality. The north shore suburbs of Milwaukee (Shorewood, Whitefish Bay, Fox Point, Bayside) are affluent; many of the homes here qualify as genuine mansions.

The answer to our trivia question is no, this is not a Wright design. It was built in 1921 by Russell Barr Williamson as his own house. He lived in it for thirty years. This is the same architect who designed the faux Wright design profiled in the previous blog entry.

I was fooled by this one for many years. At some point I read, or was told, that this is a Frank Lloyd Wright design. Perhaps unsupervised, but definitely Wright. Wrong!

Wright was a prolific architect, with hundreds of designs scattered throughout the country. However, there are more Wright look-alikes than one man could ever be responsible for. Many architects rode the crest of his fame to develop alternate visions of prairie style architecture. Not all of them produced great work, but many did. Among the more notable, besides Williamson, are Marion Mahoney, Walter Burly Griffin, and the firm of Purcell and Elmslie. All of these architects are worth looking into, either on the internet or, better, by seeking out the many examples of their work.

Detail of porte chochere.

All photographs: M. Knorr.

Wright or Wrong?

2010-10-24T19:06:00.005-06:00

Bogk residence by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Detail Bogk residence.

One of my favorite Frank Lloyd Wright designs is the Bogk residence in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Built in 1916 it is atypical Wright. It lacks the horizontality of his prairie style architecture from the same period. Instead it is vertical and blocky. Very un-Wrightian: it even allows for a third level attic space. However, this stately home is brilliantly executed with exquisite massing, well-developed detail, and complex interior volumes. It should rate as one of his most sophisticated designs, but is hardly ever mentioned in Wright biographies. The Bogk residence reflects the proportions and ornamentation he was beginning to develop for the Imperial Hotel in Japan during the same period. It also foreshadows his California projects of the twenties which are typically blocky and utilize vaguely-Mayan motifs. These include the Hollyhock House for Aline Barnsdall (1922), La Miniatura for Alice Millard (1923), and the Ennis house (1924), among others.

Also in Milwaukee, less than a mile north, is a similar home.
It displays the same proportions, though it is actually much smaller. It has the same approach to fenestration, the same gold tiles in leaded glass, the same horizontal banding played against vertical structure. One could easily identify this as another Wright design executed on a slightly more modest budget. Many have assumed this to be the case, but this assumption is wrong. This house, originally built for T. Robinson Bours, was designed by Milwaukee architect Russell Barr Williamson. It was completed in 1921.

Bours residence by Russell Barr Williamson.

The confusion is understandable. Williamson worked for Wright in the late-1910s and actually supervised the Bogk resdience for him. Given their proximity in time, space, and lineage it is not surprising the two structures bear a resemblance.

Besides obvious budgetary differences, not everything about the two residences is similar. The biggest divergence is in the interiors. The Wright design bears richer rewards in the interplay of spaces and exhibits a higher sense of drama. In contrast, the Williamson design feels much like the typical bungalow built throughout Milwaukee and the rest of the country during these pre-depression years. It is very pleasant but certainly less adventuresome. The Williamson design differs on the exterior as well. Wright was loathe to use barrel (or "Spanish") tiles on his roofs; Williamson uses them here to great effect. Wright was characteristically stubborn when it came to entries as well. They were often hidden at the end of a circuitous path. This seemed to be deliberate; it was a way of establishing a sense of intrigue. In Wright's Bogk house, however, the main entrance abuts the side drive with little grace and no drama. It is marked only by a stubby little cantilevered canopy. Williamson's design, by contrast, announces the entrance to the house with a pavilion-like structure set back on the right. It complements the house and signals welcome. In this respect, it is the more successful of the two.

Russell Barr Williamson had a distinguished career in Milwaukee. He designed several notable buildings, some in the manner of Wright and others with his own distinctive flair. He died in 1964.

Frank Lloyd Wright also designed many other buildings in and around Milwaukee. Here is another residence only three miles further north in the Milwaukee suburb of Shorewood:

Wright or faux Wright?

Is this Wright? Williamson? Some other prairie school architect?

The answer will be provided in the next blog entry.

All photos: M. Knorr
Research Librarian for Williamson history: Susan Knorr

Is Architecture Like Rugby?

2010-10-02T19:19:00.000-06:00

I went to a rugby game last night. Navy vs. Air Force. Always great fun without the craziness and hype attending NFL games and other professional American teams. Rugby is still a nascent sport in the United States, so the ushers thoughtfully provided a brief guide to the rules, which included this pithy summary:

On the pitch: Navy, left. Air Force, right.

"Rugby has its unique aspects, but like many other sports, it is essentially about the creation and use of space. The winners of a game of Rugby will be the team of players who can get themselves and the ball into space and use that space wisely, while denying the opposing team both possession of the ball and access to space in which to use it." (Italics added.)

In the scrum.

Hmmm. Sounds a lot like???? Architecture. I never thought of it that way before. Of course, with architecture we are not usually "denying the opposing team... access to space." But the rest of it rings right. Sports are often used as a metaphor for life. I suppose Rugby could be a useful metaphor for architecture.

In this game, Navy created and used more space, 19 to 10.

Creating space.

Fast Forward Architecture

2010-09-12T10:42:00.000-06:00

My sister Sue has always patiently gone along with my Quixotic tours of architecture whenever we exchange visits or meet up in some new city. Over the years she has explored with me: Bernard Maybeck works in the San Francisco bay area, Walter Burley Griffin in Iowa, Lloyd Wright in Los Angeles, and Faye Jones in Nebraska. In return for these peripatetic adventures she sometimes comes up with an interesting find of which I was not aware. On a recent train trip from Wisconsin to New Mexico she spotted this gem from her Pullman window.

1. Snapped from the train.

Wow! Who authored this edgy architecture? Yes, it looks like an architectural model with fake trees and cardboard landscape. But it really is a fast forward design that wasn't too concerned with the usual rules. My role as "architectural tour leader" was being eroded since this looked like something I should have known about. I made two guess: this bore the DNA of either Bart Prince or Antoine Predock. Not "Goffy" enough for Prince, maybe. But a little too fragile for Predock. A mystery.

I contacted Greg Walke to solve it. Greg is an architect living in New Mexico. (The snapshots are obviously near the end point of my sister's train ride, in New Mexico, ,judging from the vegetation.) He immediately identified it as a Bart Prince project near Lamy, New Mexico.

2. Fast forward architecture.

For those of you who do not know Prince's work: he has donned the avante garde mantle worn by Bruce Goff. As one of Goff's most creative proteges he completed Goff's annex to the Los Angeles Museum of Art upon Goff's passing. The annex houses the Japanese collection of Joe Price. Joe Price is the son of Harold C. Price who built the famous Price Tower in Bartlesville, Oklahoma, designed by Frank Lloyd Wright.

3. Price Tower by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Joe Price was Goff's most significant patron and later provided several important commissions for Bart Prince. A complicated architectural lineage; if you want to know more about this significant branch of American architecture you can explore these links:

Bruce Goff (Nice short video.)
Price Tower
LACMA Japanese Art Pavilion
Bart Prince

(Thanks for the tip, Sue.)

Credits:

1. Sue Knorr
2. Sue Knorr
3. Emerson Biggens

Finding Peace Amidst Urban Chaos

2010-08-29T17:02:00.001-06:00

Architecture serves many different functions by many different means. One of the functions of architecture is to provide a calm center when surrounded by noise and distractions. Examples are readily available: A home is a place for nurture and family activities. An office building protects the work environment from outside influences. A house of worship provides sanctuary for prayer and meditation. A theater totally and completely shuts out the distractions of everyday life to allow new worlds to emerge on stage.

Since most of us live in metropolitan areas, many of them with big, world-class problems, it may be useful to consider how the built environment can provide relief from urban stress.

1. Indoor/outdoor connections expand living space and
connect with nature on an urban lot.

We can (and should) shape architecture to make life more efficient, more interesting, and more enjoyable. This also means architecture can provide a peaceful retreat amdist chaos. The consequences of world-wide urbanization are noise, congestion, pollution, wasted time. Intense development spawns traffic jams, urban heat sinks, and personal irritations. These circumstances affect everyone living in cities. How we choose to live with this disarray directly affects our mood and wellbeing. Let’s look at different types of architecture and how we can shape them to improve our relationship to the urban environment.

Residential

It is tempting to design our homes as sealed environments that completely shut out the city and its problems. In fact, many of us do live in air-conditioned boxes with drawn drapes and no hint of nature. This is a failure of design. It means that windows are inadequately protected from direct sunlight, that shady outdoor spaces have not been provided, and that the physical structure treats the natural environment as an enemy. In reality, most places have delightful weather most of the time. Given the proper architectural setting, we can enjoy both indoors and outdoors. The architecture of our homes should have spaces that embrace the natural environment while still sheltering us from the bad influences inherent in an urban setting.

Commercial

For a variety of reasons, it is difficult to design commercial buildings without relying on mechanical air conditioning. However, one consequence of this condition is that even our “down time” (coffee breaks, lunch time, commuting, etc.) is divorced from a natural life. To compensate, office buildings ought to be woven into the urban fabric in a way that is integrated with nature wherever possible. Most office buildings huddle

2. Roof terraces provide outdoor spaces for employees in
this office building in Denver, Colorado.

next to freeway exits, isolated by access roads and parking lots. We need to design communities where living, working, shopping, and relaxation are a unified experience. Our commercial buildings also need places that invite us outside (terraces, balconies, courtyards) and interior rooms that utilize natural light.

3. A skylight and ample windows establish a
connection with the natural environment in
this conference room.

Retail

Retail architecture is dominated by big box stores and chain outlets. These corporate entities have formulas for facilities design that are determined in distant headquarters with little recognition of local conditions. That’s why everything tends to look the same wherever you go. This is a difficult circumstance to overcome. But small efforts can go a long way in improving our shopping experience.

Integrating residential, commercial, and retail design into user-friendly communities is a strategy for finding peace amidst urban chaos. Retail environments should be conceived as neighborhoods rather than shopping centers. Time and energy is saved for more productive and more enjoyable pursuits when neighborhoods integrate residential, commercial and retail functions. This notion is a function of both urban planning and architectural design. It is not a new idea, but it is only a good idea if implemented everywhere throughout the urban fabric. There’s not much point in providing nice places to escape urban chaos if you have to drive twenty miles to get there.

4. European sidewalk cafe.

The solution lies in providing nodes of activity that interweave work, entertainment, recreation, and living. Every new project is an opportunity to employ this strategy as a means to a brighter future.

5. Integrating residential, commercial and retail is a strategy
for finding peace amidst urban chaos. (Paris cafe.)

Credits:
1. Photography Rob Munger. Architecture by Michael Knorr & Associates.
2.-3. Architecture by Michael Knorr & Associates.
4. Photography Shawn Lipowski.
5. Photography Arnaud25.

Mr. Governor, Tear Down These Walls

2010-08-14T17:04:00.001-06:00

There is lots of conversation recently about the dire condition of the Colorado state capitol dome. It is crumbling away as you read this. Something must be done -- soon. However, more than just the dome is in bad shape. This would be a good time to question the viability of the entire building.

The Colorado state capitol building in Denver.

The golden dome is a familiar fixture in downtown Denver. It has been around longer than our oldest legislators. With its prominent location and its august function, we tend to think of the building as something truly significant. Take a closer look. The state capitol building has never been good architecture. Not only is it structurally vulnerable, it is esthetically and functionally inept. Thus, it fails on all three legs upon which architecture should rest: commodity, firmness, and delight (in the words of Vitruvius).

A brassy interior.

Underneath: crumbing structure.

E.E. Myers designed the building in 1886. The Illinois-based architect devised an ungainly Victorian pastiche of meaningless Greco-Roman details. Mr. Myers specialized in the design of government buildings, none of them remarkable. Other architects designed state capitols in the classical style with much greater effect. Wisconsin’s, for example, has exterior gravitas and interior grandeur that far exceeds our state’s meager effort. Some capitols have followed a more adventuresome path, as with Nebraska’s art deco departure from conventionality. However, Colorado’s grey granite edifice has neither style nor panache. Its labyrinthine interior looks like an explosion in a Corinthian column factory. The drear halls are dead, except for unexpected reflections due to an excessive use of polished brass. Offices are inadequate, with some legislators doubling up. Secretaries and clerks labor in miserly square footage. Over the years, the various rooms have become makeshift and make-do. Whatever is meant by state of the art, this building’s heating, air conditioning, and lighting are the opposite of.

Upper dome structure.

What could we accomplish by starting fresh? The possibilities are thrilling to contemplate. Perhaps we could have a design that retains parts of the lower structure (to commemorate the past) but replaces the existing dome and roof with a glass dome that allows visitors to peer into the chambers of government. Architect Norman Foster did exactly that with his design for the new Reichstag in Berlin. This triumph of architecture symbolizes the transparency of democracy. Another approach might draw inspiration from Frank Lloyd Wright’s 1957 proposal for a new Arizona state capitol. His design was a hexagonal tracery of trellises and atriums intended as an oasis in the desert. Colorado deserves a building as symbolic of our unique environment as Wright’s would have been for Arizona’s.

Why do we assume something is good just because it is old? Of course, we should recycle everything of intrinsic or historic value. Reuse some of the stone. Save the beautiful artwork. Reinstall the existing paneling in a creative new way. However, let’s admit this fussy old relic is simply not up to the task of serving a state whose population has increased 900 percent since it was built. Let’s build something new and fresh and important. One additional benefit of creating a new capitol: we can get all the parking underground, where it belongs. Currently, legislators’ vehicles encircle the capitol like wagons under siege. This situation is one of the most unsightly pedestrian approaches to any capitol in the country.

Rooftop of the renewed Reichstag in Berlin.

Of course, this radical idea inevitably faces a wall of economic reality. Under current conditions, this proposal does not seem feasible or possible. No doubt, most readers were raising financial objections after the first paragraph. However, this is an idea to develop over several years, not right this moment. Consider how a population of only 500,000 Coloradans was able to conceive and finance a structure that has served for over a century. We would honor their can do spirit by creating a greater state capitol for the next one hundred years. Perhaps for the next thousand. Why should it be difficult for this generation to conceive of a truly great building that is a fiting symbol for this state? We can buy some time with minimal stabilization of the dome and then consider a long-term solution.

Our state capitol has outlived its usefulness. Now we are presented with an opportunity to do better.

Credits:

Reichstag by Bjorn Laczay.
All others by Knorr.

Architecture and Virtual Reality

2010-07-24T15:44:00.000-06:00

1. Department of the Navy virtual reality training.

We cannot detach architecture from its environment and study it as an isolated object. The sounds and scents of nature contribute to the feelings we have about our buildings. The mood of the Golden Pavilion in Japan is very different from the surroundings of Villa d'Este in Italy. Neither can be removed from its setting and maintain the same meaning.

Yet there is serious talk about the idea that architecture might someday, somehow be replaced by virtual reality. Read various architectural journals like Architecture or sci-tech magazines like Wired, and the idea crops up perennially.

For readers not wired into the terminology, this is how Wikipedia defines virtual reality:

2. Golden Pavilion (Kinkaky-ji), Kyoto, Japan.

Virtual reality (VR) is a term that applies to computer-simulated environments that can simulate places in the real world as well as in imaginary worlds. Most current virtual reality environments are primarily visual experiences, displayed either on a computer screen or through special stereoscopic displays, but some simulations include additional sensory information, such as sound through speakers or headphones. Some advanced, haptic systems now include tactile information, generally known as force feedback, in medical and gaming applications.

The Colombia Encylopedia has a similar definition. They are basicaly saying that it is possible to create the experience of riding a digitally-simulated roller coaster, for example, that is indistinguishable from riding an actual roller coaster. The two experiences would be identical.

3. Garden of Ryoanji. Kyoto, Japan.

Let's be clear about this: the environment around a work of architecture contributes to its character. Context matters. Time and space affect architecture and become part of it. For these reasons, VR will never replace architecture.

Well, I should temper that assertion: VR will never replace architecture unless and until we reach some sort of Matix-like level of experiential unreality. (To coin a phrase.) We're a long way from that event.

4. Villa d'Este. Tivoli, Italy.

There will come a time when architects will use virtual reality to make presentations of their ideas to clients. The technology is already available, but the techniques are expensive and cumbersome. Will virtual reality ever completely replace architecture? Will a virtual Notre Dame substitute for the real thing? It will only if you believe that Walt Disney’s Epcot Center is a viable substitute for a tour of Europe. The real thing contains too many layers of subtlety, nuance and detail – not to mention spontaneity and serendipity - to faithfully be replicated. The muscular movement of negotiating steps, the feel of ambient sunlight on a wooden porch, the temperature of filtered light through a carved screen. These ways of experiencing architecture have nothing to do with vision alone or any form of virtual reality now possible. Architecture is a total immersion experience. A computerized substitute will be a great presentation or teaching tool. However, there will be no Star Trek-like holideck for architecture in the foreseeable future.

5. Vekomaboomerang steel roller coaster.

If a building does not evoke some sort of emotional or intellectual response it probably isn’t architecture. Architecture has meaning. That is what distinguishes architecture from mere structure and simple shelter. And it will be what distinguishes real architecture from a virtual fake.

6. Trekkie Borg.

So, to all you trekkies, avatars, and simulacra out there: fasten your seatbelts; you'll be riding the real architecture roller coaster for a long time.

Credits:

1. Interior Dept.
2. David Monniaux
3. S. Fujioka
4. Mmxbass
5. Will McC
6. Bruno Girin

Architecture, Symbolism, and Signs

2010-07-18T18:37:00.000-06:00

1. Las Vegas welcomes you to a land of illusions.

Architecture has meaning. To say that is to say that architecture conveys information and is a means of communication. Communication can be overt or subtle. Literal or symbolic. The first, overt communication, is the most recognizable. In this category are ordinary conversation, print media, and graphic communications such as television and movies. The second category, symbolic communication, includes the arts: poetry, music, paintings, architecture. Subtle communications may include empathy, sympathy, mental telepathy, and body language. Obviously, these categories overlap and the boundaries between them are somewhat arbitrary. Movies, for example, often contain a lot of symbolism.

Architecture overlaps categories as well. A building sends overt messages by being -- sometimes very literally -- a sign. A steeple communicates church and golden arches say hamburgers. The 1972 book, Learning from Las Vegas, explored this idea. The authors (Robert Venturi, Denise Scott Brown, Steven Izenour) contend that, in Las Vegas, entire buildings are really nothing more than signs. Driving up Interstate 15 at sixty miles an hour, the Excalibur Hotel, among others, acts as a billboard. It is an improbable fantasy of King Arthur's court. Its disproportioned towers and turrets are bright with color and impossible to ignore. The entire structure screams, STOP! We can entertain the kids and the parents! Go no further! One can easily imagine a family with children immediately persuaded to spend the night. Other Las Vegas structures beckon with exotic facades promising a night in Venice or a romantic stay in Paris. Most of these venues took shape long after Learning from Las Vegas was published. However, it is more true today than ever: Las Vegas hotels are not architecture; they are signs. The most honest assessment of this is contained in the name of one of the hotels: Mirage. These buildings are illusory. The over-scaled pinnacles and turrets of Excalibur have no interior resolution. There is no place inside the Excalibur where you are actually in a turret. It is an illusion. A mirage. A big sign. The Venetian hotel has indoor canals (astonishingly, flowing above the casino through a second floor shopping mall). The Paris hotel offers a one-fifth-scale Eiffel Tower. There is a pyramid down the street at Luxor. None of this is architecture. It is a collection of signs. Or, perhaps more charitably, grand theater.

2. Excalibur promises Camelot with a riot
of turrets, pinnacles, and battlements.

2. Gondoliers serenade tourists in a
fake canal beneath a fake sky at the Venetian.

In architecture, more impressive messages fall into symbolic and subtle categories. If a message is too obvious it is kitsch. A hot dog stand in the shape of a hot dog is kitsch. Most of Las Vegas is kitsch, along with much of roadside America. However, if a message is too subtle -- “in jokes” that only architects might understand or obscure historical references that are lost to time -- then meaning is lost as well. The most enjoyable and most enduring meaning in architecture is in the subtle nuances of space, texture, shadows, scale, rhythm, etc. These things convey information about how we might feel and provide spaces that encourage reflection. Really good architecture offers depth to the experience. One fine example of this is Bernard Maybeck's Palace of Fine Arts in San Francisco. It conveys strength in its structure and a sense of melancholy in its colors and siting. This information is conveyed in the architecture through subtle signs.

3. The giant hot dog in Bailey, Colorado.

It is obvious to most people that architecture has meaning in pedigreed structures that are sanctified by history and authority. It may be less obvious in more humble architecture, such as the buildings we live in. But residential architecture is also capable of highly personal and rewarding meaning. If this concept holds for the great architecture of the world, then why not also in our homes — the buildings where we spend most of our time? Consider Frank Lloyd Wright’s Taliesin. Hearth and home could hardly be expressed in any more meaningful way. It is a celebration of home. The warm colors, rich textures, and central weight of the fireplace all beckon in a primeval way to experience the comforts of home.

Residential architecture can enhance experience with meaning in varying degrees of subtlety and nuance. Among the possibilities: architecture can create a sense of arrival at the front door. It can convey charm and grace in our living spaces, relaxation where we sleep and communion with nature as it extends outward to terraces and gardens. Kitchens and breakfast areas can be bright and cheery; dining rooms can be romantic or or grand, depending on personal preferences and the weight of the occasion. Perhaps above all, architecture of all types can provide a sense of shelter and protection beyond the practical needs of keeping out bad weather or bad people. Architecture can offer a deep-seated assurance that all is well in our environment.

Interior decorating can augment these environments, but it is a failure of architecture if surface treatments and furniture arrangements are the only means to convey meaning. Architecture is meaningful in a powerful three-dimensional sense. It is accomplished by manipulating interior volume, controlling color and light, and arranging structure to support the intents of the design.

5. Bernard Maybeck's Palace of Fine Art.

Architecture can be appreciated at face value (façade literally means face) with a great deal of enjoyment. However, like any art, the more we understand how it works the deeper and more profound is our appreciation. When we realize that architecture has meaning it becomes obvious that it is created by following principles of design to transmit its meaning, just as the principals of grammar are used to convey meaning in language. The grammar of architecture is a search for meaning in the spaces we create and inhabit.

Credits:

1. Madcoverboy.
2. Excel.
3. Urban 2004.
4. John Perry.
5. Roger 469.

A Visit With Lloyd Wright

2010-07-02T14:07:00.000-06:00

1. Lloyd Wright's home -- almost unphotographable
behind the thick vegetation.

2. Sowden residence from the same period.

Architecture feeds the brain and is sustenance for the soul. When I was just out of architectural school, I took a road trip with my friend, Greg Walke, to find some of that nourishment. We traveled west in Greg's tan MG convertible to see iconic examples of mid-century modern architecture. One afternoon we stopped to visit Lloyd Wright, the talented, but overshadowed, son of Frank Lloyd Wright. He was an old man at the time and looked just like his father. (But a full twelve inches taller!) He graciously received us in his Doheny Drive home, on the boundary between Los Angeles and Beverly Hills. Despite the August heat, Lloyd Wright lit the living room fireplace to demonstrate how his design employed natural convection to coax warm air out of the house. He opened a glass wall onto a patio shaded by the branches of an enormous ginkgo tree. The ginkgo sheltered the entire house and the fireplace drew in this cooler air to exhaust it up the flue. No artificial air conditioning. Wright was very proud of the organic qualities of the room. His home was like an enchanted cave, designed and built in the in the 1920s. And we were entranced by his stories.

“Why are you boys here?” he asked. We told him we were in California to see some of the great works of twentieth century architecture. (Much of it authored by him.)

3. Sowden house today. (Extensively remodeled.)

Of course, Wright had already pegged us as eager neophytes, seeking wisdom from one of the masters.

“Ah, yes,” he said. “You’re here to eat architecture.” We knew immediately what he meant, sharing a mutual understanding. Great architecture provides sustenance; it nourishes the spirit as food does the body.

4. Another Wright design from the same period. (Derby house, 1926.)

I learned years later that we were not the first guests charmed by Wright in this manner. It was practiced theater for him. The novelist Anais Nin wrote of meeting Lloyd Wright for the first time in his Doheny Drive home. He lit the same fireplace and talked about the natural ventilation through the house, filtered by the cool of the prized Gingko tree. He expostulated about organic architecture in the same way. At least he was consistent. The lesson I took with me was the importance of architectural input in everyday life. It is healthy to “eat” good architecture.

5. Ramon Navarro house, from the 1920s.

Note: Since it is almost impossible to get a good picture of the Doheny Drive house, the accompanying pictures show Hollywood-area projects by Lloyd Wright from the same decade. His architecture during this period was monolithic, closed, and fortress-like. They are all located on busy streets, which partially explains this. However, he was also supervising his father's local projects during the 1920s: among them, the Ennis house and the Barnsdall house. They all had similar characteristics. This was a brief period in the elder Wright's career when his projects -- mostly located in the Hollywood Hills -- resemble Mayan temples. Lloyd Wright's later work became much looser and more transparent, including his famous "Glass Chapel" in Palos Verdes from 1951. (See blog entry March 4, 2010.)

Credits:

1. Minnaert

2. U.S. Dept. of the Interior, Historic American Buildings Survey

3. Los Angeles

4. la photo

5. la photo

This Is Your Brain on Architecture

2010-06-28T16:23:00.000-06:00

The German philosopher Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (1749-1832) famously described architecture as “frozen music.” Though evocative, this description is wrong. Architecture is anything but frozen. Architecture is a full-immersion experience. Architecture is a matrix of sensory information that stimulates the brain in ways that make the experience interesting, enjoyable, and intellectually challenging. We experience architecture over time (it takes time to walk through any building) employing our sense of hearing (fountains bubbling in a courtyard, a breeze wafting through a colonnade), our sense of smell (wood burning in a fireplace, flowers blooming in a garden), touch (the grasp of door hardware and the texture of materials), and -- most obviously -- our sense of vision. Of the five physical senses, even taste becomes a part of the experience: we may enjoy a meal in a beautiful architectural setting or surround ourselves with architecture while lingering over a cup of coffee.

1. This is your brain on architecture.

The experience of architecture is also mutable. It inevitably changes over time. The hour of the day and changing seasons alter our perception of architecture. Lighting conditions and seasonal variations affect how we respond. A building looks and feels different under a blanket of snow than under the saturated light of summer. Years add patina to materials and changing times alter the meaning of architecture. A musty, old building has qualities that are different from those of a bright, new building. Our perception of architecture is affected by subtleties. A musty building affects our sense of taste, smell, and touch. An old building affects our thoughts about its history and, perhaps, safety. It takes time to learn the secrets of great architecture and we employ all of our senses and mental acuity to do this.

2. Architecture changes with the seasons.
Kinkaku pavilion, Kyoto, Japan.

Architecture is anything but frozen because it engages every aspect of our brain in a continuous sequence of sensory information. An art that requires movement through space can hardly be called frozen. We feel good in the company of good architecture because sensory input to our brain reminds us we are truly alive. There is even evidence that good architecture may make us smarter. Researchers at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies have demonstrated that mice in interesting cages with opportunities for stimulating challenges do better than mice in plain cages. Mice housed in interesting environments actually experienced measurable brain growth over those in boring environments. Transferring mice from the boring cages to the stimulating environments nearly doubled the dividing cells in their hippocampus regions. (Reported in Nature Neuroscience, March 1999.) One can only imagine what stimulating architecture does to the human brain.

Sometimes input into the brain during an architectural experience can be overwhelming. This is not necessarily a bad thing. It is the feeling of grandeur and awe we might experience in a great cathedral or in a vast hall of commerce like Grand Central station.

3. Grandeur in architecture.
Grand Central station, New York City.

These experiences are “overwhelming” in a deeply satisfying way. It is an indication of activated brains and, like the smart mice, maybe we benefit physically as well as emotionally. There is no doubt we need this kind of stimulation. When our basic needs are satisfied (being well fed and sheltered) we start to look for more. Author Daniel H. Pink writes in A Whole New Mind (2009): “The paradox of prosperity is that while living standards have risen steadily decade after decade, personal, family, and life satisfaction haven’t budged. That’s why more people – liberated by prosperity but not fulfilled by it – are resolving the paradox by searching for meaning.” This search may be spiritual or esthetic or both. Clearly, though, architecture is not important to a starving, homeless individual. Architecture is only meaningful when other needs have been satisfied. You might call it a luxury. Or – a definition I prefer -- you might call it a necessity in a successful life. The existence of architecture is a sign that something has gone right for someone. In his 1968 book Toward a Psychology of Being, psychologist Abraham Maslov famously theorized a hierarchy of five levels of basic needs. Once these needs are satisfied, higher needs become like necessities. These higher needs include aesthetic appreciation and spiritual quests. Robert S. de Ropp in The Master Game, (1989) also popularized these ideas. Architecture is a powerful way to address the need for fulfilling experience. That is why we seek it out in our travels and in our lives.

Your mind on architecture can also enrich quiet emotional experiences. It can nurture meditation in monasteries or private sanctuaries. It can enhance recreational and entertainment venues with an injection of theatricality. It can establish warmth in a domestic environment. It is no accident that we link “hearth” and “home” as emblems of domestic tranquility. Every successful work of architecture provides a degree of emotional and mental stimulation. It can happen in endless combinations and variations. Architecture can be as richly varied as human experience itself.

4. Music contained in architecture.
Organ loft, Zweifalten Monstary Church.

Back to Goethe: Describing architecture as “frozen music” actually diminishes it and confuses its real purpose. It makes it seem to be something less than music when, in fact, the opposite is true. Architecture is more than music because it subsumes it. Architecture is a reflexive art. You are not only looking at it, you are in it. It is a mirror; you see and feel what is important personally. It is not a spectator sport; you are in the game. Music doesn’t do this. (Though stereo headphones can create the illusion that music is in your head.) Music can be a part of architecture, contained in concert halls or ambient sound in a home. Architecture often contains music, but music can never contain architecture. (Music critics sometimes describe music as "architectonic." They are playing with words and grasping for analogies, just as architects often use musical analogies to describe architecture.)

Architecture is not frozen music. Nor is it frozen snapshots in magazines. When done right (and that is a significant qualifier) architecture is an ever-changing experience that enriches life. All senses are engaged, providing stimulation, information, and delight. This is your brain on architecture.

Credits:

1. Adapted from Gray's Anatomy
2. Frank Gualtieri
3. Adam Jones
4. Effi Zweifalten