World's Most Beautiful Architecture (Part 2)

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)

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!

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

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

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

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

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.