[ ~ :J DDDDO[][5DDODD 1. TRANSUT/ON

4. INVERSION

1. Ornamlnt from lomb at GOllrna , Theoo.

Oll'lnjoneJ . PI. VII. 110. 4.

4. OI1lt1l1lem from a G rwk IWft .

Oll'mjolleJ. PI. XVI. 1/0. 15 .

DODDDDDDDDDD C (

2. Ornammta/ M{Jja;c pat-tern at Pompei;.

Oft/en j ona. Pi. xxv.

3. Ornall/tIII from tomb at GOlfmtl , Thebes.

Owen)o1JeJ, PI. VIII , lIo. 16.

5 . Tram/alion (UTd Rejlecfir-'t im'f'rJion

~ 5. String cOline Ol-'fr the Panathena;, Frieze , Parthellon, Athem . aII'm j Oller , PI, XXII. 110. 18. 6illODD 0

~ o ~ 7. Ornallltnt from Egyptian

~ !!II/mllly C(lSt. 01l .'tnjonts . PI. VIII. 110. 17. ~

9. Plaited straw from the Srl1ltill';ch IslalltlJ.

Ol/lttI j OlleJ. p. 15.

6. Slipped Refoction. or Allemafian

o d 7. A rreleration

o 8. Deceleratiofl

9 . Figllre-G rollnd

6. Ba nd ornament from Greek vase.

OllmjtmeJ, PI, XVII, no. 58.

o 8 . Ornament /rom Egyptian

mummy case. OII 'enjontJ, PI. VIII , nQ. 12.

2.

{All drau'ingJ arromprmying thiJ text are by the Author after the JQllraJ nQ/et! t1 page 111.]

THE GRAMMAR OF ORNAMENT/ORNAMENT AS GRAMMAR

Thomas H. Beeby

.ot. 8rbold 1M frut grratnm f/ Qur Il~. that it (an Iff) langrr bring forrh W, ha~'t 1'(mqujJbtd r/uoral;on and brokfllliJro{(gh illlIJall orllammtltll

Adolph UJOJ. O r lltllll t lll and Crilllt. 1908

revolut ion that occurred in l1rchite

I', i'> '>i

). ~ V "/

was the firs t conscious rejection of historicism. By insisting on renewal rather than on the assim ilation of new technological

forces, it was, however, doomed from the starr. Art Nouveau .f,"""I~ decorat ive work of Beardsley and Toorup in the early 1890S

persistent in its total obsession with applied ornament. Kerr's had proven to be: nue on one count: already, architC"Cture had architecruresque. infatuated with surface decoration as an art in tendency was can ied to extreme lengths by Horta and Van de

Belgium , Wagner and Holfman in Austria, and Louis Sullivan in

point the apocalyptic voiceof Adolph l.oos was raised suggest-that Ornament was acrually crime. 1.oos wrote:

] have evolved the fo llowing max.im. and present it to the world: The evolution of cullure marches with the elimination of orna-men! from useful objeclS .'

1 ,,08 Ux.', hysterical battle with ornament reached its climax with the of Omamenr alld Crime. In this book Laos arri ved at the

Children are amoral. and so. for us, are Papuans. If a Papuan slaughters his enemies and tats them, that doesn't make him a niminal. BUI if a modern man kill s someone and eats him, he must k t'ither a criminal or a degenerate. Papuans latlOO their skins. deconte tht'ir boalS, their oars-everything they can gt'l their hands on. But a modern man "'M ralloos himself is ei lher a criminal or a degt'nt'flre.-

" pro,,"', at least to himself, that ornament is a crime and suggested those who design ornament are perverse. H is inAuence rapidly

with the publicat ion ofO""amtnl and Crime in Germany in 1912 , in 1913. and again in l.'Esprit N()NtltaN in 1920, The end was An Nou~au was losing itS impetus and sensitive crearors like

.,"'hn,m were already searching fo r alternat ives. Ornament sc:c:med w """,h,'" some son of impasse,

Laos, however, never really ended ornament; he simply forced the end ornamented ," When 1.oos closed the door on "structure

, he un int~ntionally released the architects of the following the prohibitions regarding the other three possibilit ies of the

When applied ornament was equated with crime. the coutse to the fu ture was the manipulation of the rationally

elements of bui lding to produce the effect of ornament. After ':':;;:::,~,:,:~:;l~;'" the second possibility defined by Kerr was "struc-If' , or rendered in itself ornamental. Tha t is to say, the

structural or constructive clements are arfllnged so as to have an ."m,," effect. The most obvious approach is the application of orna-

methodology to the ent ire bui ldi ng. Uti lizing the elements re-the demands of the program, the architect establishes a basic grid

proport ioni ng system to control the manipulation of elements fo r purposes , Mies van der Rohe's work and some aspeCts of the

of both Frank Lloyd Wright and Lc: Corbusier fall into this category. third possibi lity, "ornament scructuralized ," or rendered in itself

re

14. Le CorlUlJitr, plan for A City of Three Mi llion Inhabjtants, 1922.

15. Sn't!nteen/hmIlPry (tiling Sa;tJI Peter's, ROllIe.

16. Barozzi da Vi-gnola. COff" (tiling. Fa rntst Palace, Rome.

17. Le Corblfsi", plan for A City of Three Mill ion Inhabi tants, 1922. Drawing by all/bar.

Corbusier further described his educalion: "New Section" of La Chaux-de Fonds School of Arc: L'Eplar. (enier, director and masler of Ihis very modern cla5S of inSlroc-lion. Direcl inspira lion of nalural (hings: 1900 (0 1910. Studies of rocks. planu. roots . ... Thelirbecameoneoflhebaiicsubjecu for study-that intractable Iree! In a purely ,",(idental and spon-(aneous w .. y ;( guided Ihe young Charles- Edouard jeannerel (Ihe fU lure U: Corbusier) as far ~k as 1904. to considerations of a mathemalical kind which were 10 Iud forty yC"ars later (0 Ihe Modulor.

Corbusier's educaT ion was parr of a general Trend TO purify arT Through STudy of naTUre.

The call was for a renewal of the decorative elements by the direCT study of plants, animals, rhe Changi ng sky. Na(u re is order and law. uni lY and diversi ly wilhoul end, subtielY, harmony and sllenglh: that is the It'$$On he lC"arnt ~IW~ Ihe agcs of lifleen and (wen(y.

Corbusier's master, l 'Eplartenier. shared The ";~h~:',:O:'~~u~,:",:'O::'~~::~ '::~: ;~;:~~ : equating nature, mathemalics, and an . The n a renewed imerest in natural phenomena. In 18'9 Darwin 's Spuits appeared : it was fo llowed by such works as Haeckel""h~:~:~~ Monograph of 1887 and Ivmllformtn dtr Nalur of 1899, D'Arcy T magnificem On Growlh and Form. Jaeger's u du!'tJ on Symmetry application in natural science, Hambridge's Dynamir Symm(iry. C,~'., TO . CUrt'll of Lift, Spe iser's Thtorit dtr Crt/ppm lion end/iehu Ordnlfng. Ghyka's Thl Gto1lltlryof A rl and Lift. All these works reflected and ;., ~::::: II the general inte rest in nature; all of them deal with the applica(ion principles of sym metry in the an s as well as in nature. T hey form a continuous invest igation that spans the schism that appeared in the ans in the begi nning of Ihis century. Corbusier was undoubtedly (amiliar with many of these works. He was in correspondence wit h Ghyka and Speiser, as well as with several notable mathematicians. The Modulor is ac tually an extension of The theori es fou nd in earl ier works, such as Hambridge'l Dynami( Symmllry and G hyka's The Glomelry 0/ Arl and lift, although Corbusier's ignorance of Schooli ng's work deprived him o( a valuable shon cut toward the d iscovery of the Modulor.

Corbusier unders tood The basis of ornament , sympathized with geometric and mathemaTical characteris t ics, and as an architect profi ted fro m its lessons. When shown a piece of Egypt ian o rnament , he said:

I am a worker in Ihe plas(ic a' (5: if you rell me fO design a botderor this kind to go on .. n ornamenl. I am bound al $Ome lime 10 hi l upon Ihis particular ornamt'll iai arrangement because il is one of the ine"ilabilities of ornamental ion; it forms pari of a very shorf series of solutions. the key (0 which is gl"Omel ry i(self. con-ditioned by Ihe spiri l of geomelry which i$ in man as it is a.I$O in Ihe very la., .. of nature. ,.

" n

h

" n

I t !S

I.e Corbusier seems [0 have needed an overall urban concept before he dtsigning individual buildings. In 1922 he completed his Plan

r.{ Thm Million Inh4hilantJ (illus. 14~ Although he warns of the fallacy of plan devices , his design is unbdievably ornamen-r:~~:: on a diagonal grid , the plan is a Study in rigid sy mmetry. c towers are clustered in a rectangle around an airport which

medallion. The entire ci ty has become an exercise in position- rtCu.ngk on a diagonal grid, a nmiliar ornam~(al preoccupation

I~ . 16. and 17). Le Corbusier's reliance on ornamental principles is further dem-

:~;::~}'::'C~:;;:}~t;:n~~o:f.;:h'~"'I,~o~n~'~'.;:n:o~o~:us buildings. The buildings display bilateral symmetry both horizontal and venica! axes (illus. 18). The buildings are in a

"",-g"".nd relation with the surroundi ng spacts, and the mult closely Greek geometric designs (ill us. 19). After an excursion into free

in the plan for Algien of 1930-34, Corhusier returned ro a more approach in his 1933 scheme for Antwerp. The continuous in this plan are arranged according to a more complex form of The configurations continue to resemble Greek border orna-

hut the spaces between the continuous buildings are no longer so conctived . The Villt raditllJt of 193~ returns to the tighter sym-

in Corbusier's firS t plan. It is reAective on both ven ical and U6.

Afttr the war, Le Corbusier designed the plan for the reconsnuction of ... -0,',(1111,,,,,) .. It is at about this time that his preoccupation with the

began. The plan includes housing , a civic center, and an industrial "'''P, n . The housing plan displays the simple translation of slab

in twO rows , each in a different rhythm . The interjection of the center interrupts this beat , hut in another sense strengthens the

and establishes a hierarchy of fo rm . Tht industrial plants are in a continuous building which displays simple translation along

.b"'''''''' axis with slipped reflection, or ahernation. This is a frequent in band ornaments and is also fou nd in nature when leaves ate

.. goh,.""",,.on a shoot. The plan for Saim- Die also comains aspiral and a spact-defining building on the (Own square based on invtrsion.

All ofLe Corbusiet 's ci ty planning schemes reveal the same kinds of ""Ipo',,',,", that ate characteristic of ornament. In a section on window

in his FoundationJ oj Mrx/trn Art, Ozenfant alludes to this chatac-Le Corhusier's work:

for a long time the Viennese, Ihrough Holfman , have cultivated thei r shop windows.

Among those who contributed to rcorganiu window-dressing, mention must ~ made of Paul Iribe (whose infiuen,e was very grNt round 1908). Fauconnel , etc NOWadays the window-dressing of small or great shops is very agreeable to see. A nne geometry derived from Purism and Uger di~c ts the compo-sition: dresses, boou. ,;useroles, all play their eager parts in the equations to which Ihey provide a $Olulion .

The art of window-dressing is an imporlant (actor in thai town-planning to which Le Corbusier broughl so mu,h dear vision and power. "

photograph a((ompanying Ozenfant's comment shows athle t ic '1"',""',,, displayed on the diagonal g rid of a suetched tennis net.

u CorbuJier, plan for tM rtrorutruc-tion oj St .-Die, 1945.

o o

/8. Le CorbllJier, plan for A City of Three Million InhabitantS , 1922. Drawing by author.

19. Ruipyocaring Gfflk Jret patterns.

o o o o o

21. 11 CorPIIJier, elnlttlion ttndplttn ofllH SUrflarial, ChnndigariJ, 19)2.

mdJO I , , Rtjlection

Unit

Rtflttlh't Immion

fmrersi(ir/

Slipptd Rtflectit't Immion

Refkaht lmmion

o 00 0

,

~. Rotation

/ /

Ro/alion

22. 11 CorbllJiw, plan lor 1m Carptnrer Ctmer. Han.'ard Unit,"!iry. arnted into six intervals by balconies stretching across its entire width. Within thesC' intervals, and pai red balconies alternate in an intricate pattern of reRective i through the ccontral vertical axis of the bui lding. The third unit from bottOm is differentiated to express a functiona l change from ,,,;d,,,,;"" commercial space. This facade ofthe building is balanced about its vertical axis, which is expressed by an unbroken vert ical line o:i:~~~:~ \'(Iith its complex manipulation of a single functional element, thco south facade is a beautiful coxample of the richness of composition.

~ , 1-n

o

< h c

c

,

If f

,

r:;'::;::~:'~"~d,,': ,"~'::',;p~'::'::h~"open lO the arch itecturesque as defined by ~ .. T his possibi lity is completely d ismissed "Construction should be decorated. Dfi:oradon should

r.~::;;* conS[ruC(cd . "'~ Museums have consistently displayed a charac((:r in modern architeCture. The demand fo r a circulation pattern has resulted in spiral configuratio ns in of Wright and Le Corbusier. The modified pinwheel con figura-finally chosen by Corhusier for m useu ms in Tokyo and

All these build ings are extremely ornamental, but not so the strunutes found spri nkled around Corbusier's museums, in the building finally constructed in Zurich fo r Heidi Weber 2~).

This peculiar building devt:loped out of Le Corbusier's earli er exhibi-i which were always large- scale canti levered structures. T he

originally designed as a house, but it is now used as a d isplay the work of Corbusier. It usc:s twO building systems: a steel

which suaddlc:s the prefabricated housing system (226/ 2261 was develOped earlier by Corbusier. The steel screen consists

"'.'M" pl""join('

Frank Lloyd Wright's career encompassed all phases of rhe Modern Movement. Through his apprenticeship to louis Sullivan , W right was involved in [he last frenzied phase of applied decoration . louis Sull ivan was a master builder and a g en ius of ornamentation, especially the latter. In the words of Wright ,

Where before, I IUk. in surroundings so pe

'f of og

, d

h,

" ro

0 ' Id

o

y

UlIiJ SIIJ/ivan, design jor ornament. 1924.

27. Frank Uoyd Wright . plan ojtbt /l1artin HOlIJt, BllffalQ, 1904.

Nrw YQrk.

The first buildings produced by Wrig ht , such as the Winslow maintain the basic character of Sullivan's work . but a new quality began to emerge. Wright was attempting co command technology, incorporate prefabricated elements and exploit their repetitive qual ity. was concerned about the nalUre of materials and thei r clear expression. 1902 Wrig hl's deep concern for the systematic visual aspects of his ings led to a general meshing of ornamental moldings and structure. In drive for unity. he blurred the line which had separated ornament strUCture. Wrighl's design process seems to have started with a configurati on. the void, and followed with a general interest in 'h" "'U,;" of volumetric containers . After integrating these tWO aspects. he then determine the appropriate construction. This process would directly inco the category of "ornament structuralized" as offered by Kerr.

The great houses of this period. particularly the Coonley. Wall;",. Mart in. and Robie houses, share some interesting characterist ics. Fi rst. plan is determined on a square grid system and the window division proportions derive from this grid . With this device. the framework COnStruction and ornament are established in one stroke. Next , the mass of the fi replace is firmly rooted in rhe center of the '''''''"'' ;" . Wright envisioned rhis as the hearc of the house. " It comforted me the fire burning deep in the solid masonry of the house itself. "II masonry mass serves as the parent stem . All lines Row out from ,h;",;,,,r radial ac t ivity to the furthest line of construction. To accomplish i Wright eliminated the room as a box and allowed the cei li ng , walls. aAd Roors to Row together in one continuous surface. At the perimeter, he removed the enclosing walls and replaced them with "light screens," thus destroying the house as a closed volume. The roof planes intersect the central spine . \'(Iindows are voids between necessary cons truct ion; art never punched into walls. The t rim is tWO Rat horizontal bands of I i one runn ing continuously at the top of all the windows and doors and other at the ROOf. These di rectrixes of energy radiate from the central ro the furthest extremity. Vertical bands are introduced between these continuous horizontal bands, subdividing the wall surfaces geometriCil lly and com plet ing the window and door openings. The ceili ngs are brought down onto the walls by positioning the tOp tr im pic

)use, ~n

" to H, By tild-1 his .nd

arial sing

~Id fall

err.

ins, , the ,nd for :reat ion . , see

Th, is of his , ,nd o h' :hus 'h,

.re .ng , ,h,

) ine =0

~Iy .ght 'h, 'h'

d. "d irs

I,n Ili-

"

"a1 ' u

~ ."

'h' 0 " .n's

tn 's

,,.al ! is ,n,

" "' 0

Nrc [0 the square. maki ng it a cube-four columns placed sy mmeu lcaliy in the corners but free-stand ing. T his divides rhe room into a central area with a band of space around the perimeter in a manner similar [0 Sullivans. Four balconies arc slung between the columns and the exterior wall , and the (flter fl oor is ra ised to d ilferent iate it from the enclosi ng volume. This step in the process closely resembles Sullivan's further elaborat ion of the area at the pentagon's perimeter. Next , Sullivan's corners become centers of radial lCtivity. Sim ilarly. Wright places the stairs at the corners, concentrating tbe activity of vertical access at these points. Next, Sulli van subdivides the eenter of his figure according to the innate geometry of the pentagon . Wright similarly divides the ceiling into a grid of open beams, agai n based on one plane. a square. of his chosen geometric figure, the cube, At this point , Sullivan introduces the free-flowing organic luxuriance of his srems and foli age. Wright, havi ng subdivided the basic volume with the St ruc-rural elements called for by the program, applies his ornament in the form ofstrips of wood t har run from column to wall to ceil ing. This ornament has the same visual qualit ies as Sull ivan's foliage. It creates a contrapuntal rhythm that recogn izes, yet contradicts, t he origi nal geometries al ready established . In a sense, the ornamental strips a re in di reCt contrast to the structure since they fl ow freely throughout t he space. independent of the 108ie of the St ructure. They create a continuity of surface and space which is directly opposed to the rigid placement of colum ns, walis, and platforms. These lines, someti mes sing ly, sometimes in g reat batteries racing through dlle space continuously, now horizontally, now vcrtically, turn ing corners at bttakneck speed, racing toward the enclosure, create a dynamism lack-in8 in theStruCtuu. "The rigid pentagon has vanished in a mobi le medium ,"lf1 aid Sullivan. Wright has accomplished the same in three dimensions. It is an atounding performance by Wrigh t. yet qui te predictable.

Wright productod few multistOry buildi ngs, although he co mpleted Dumerous stud ies fo r them . Sai nt Mark's Tower of 1929 in New York's Bowery and the Johnson Wax Tower of t936 both have a central st ructural spine from which the horizontal floors radia te. This central spine, first seen in his earlier houses. again meetS Owen Jones's requi rement of a parent stem from which all parts rad iate. Wright could nC\'er bring himself to use the Dlicago Frame even when the program would seem 10 call for it.

The early work of Frank Lloyd Wrig ht had an extensive influence on architects. especially in Europe. where there seemed no escape from histori -aI style. His influence was particularly strong in Holland and Germany. where his phi losophical concepts and plast ic fo rm became the cornerstones ofa new way of bui lding. One of those influencl-d mOSt by Wright's work _ Mics van det Rohe, who was reaching matur ity when t he impottanceof Wri8ht became apparent.

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe was born in 1886 in Aachen , Germany. He was the son of a master mason and tt'Ceived his ed ucat ion and technical train ing at a local trade school. He had no fo rmal architectu ral education . Instead, he gained experience through apprent iceships on building sites. There followed a period as a d raftsman and designer of StuCCO ornament . In 1905 he left Aachen fo r Berl in, t he Center of architectural experiment in Gtrmany at tha t ti me. In Berl in he was apprenticed to Bruno Paul as a furn itu re designer.

Mies van def Rohe's first independent design was begun in 1907 for Or. Riehl. a philosopher. who insisted that Mies visi t Italy before com-mcocing the design for his house. Thanks 10 this commission , Mies was tt~ directly to Rome and t he build ings of the lralian Renaissance , He W:I$ parr icularly interested in the work of Brune lJeschi and Palladio. In 1909 Mics wem to work for Peter Behrens. one year before the arr ival of 1.e Corbusier at rhat same office. Behrens 's interest in industrial building and in ShinkeJ's architecture both had a profound influe nce on Mies. T he untC$(llved confliCt between classical forms and the new lC(hnology was the paradoxical basis fo r M it'S 's search for a truly modern architC(t ure. W hile mlployed by Behrens , Mies ex(-cu[cd the Peds House in the manner of Shinkel.

At this momtnt. so crilical for us. [Mits wrote), the exhibition of the work ofFrnnk Lloyd Wright came to Berlin. This comprchen-5ivedisplay and theexhauslive public~lion of his worksenablcd uS 10 bome really acquaimcd with the ~chit-\"I.'mems of this ar-chitect . The encounter was de$1in~'

29. Pitl Mond,.ian. Composition: Light Color Field with Grey Lines , 1919. RijleJmllst,,,,, Kriilltr-/I1"lIer. Omr!Q. Nt/her!ands.

richness of form . Here, finally , was a master-builder dnwing upon the veritable fountainhead of architecture; who with true originality lifte

ti, ..

y.

'n l' Y Ie

" ,

>,

,

,

I !

Th~ Concrete Office Bui lding projttt fo llowed in 1922. T his ti me rhe solidiry of the sifuctural system by sett ing back the glass

[0 reveal rhe structure. As in rhe preceding [Ower projectS , the I system appears unadorned , and [he en t ire buildi og existS as pure

","""'00 The columns and beams (aJl on a g rid , and the wi ndows are by the structure , producing an even d is tribut ion of fenesuarion. building is evenly divided in plan and section into structural seg-

with a raised ground-floor level co allow light into Ihe basement. a distortion of the system at the ent rance, a bonus of a higher

[hat poi nt . and a ra ised ent ry $lai r. As in all of Mies's work , the structure and usage goes hand in hand with formal solut ions of sensitivi ty.

Brick Country House of 1923 ut ilizes the revolutio nary spacial 1-'",'0"'" found in Wright 's last Prai rie Houses. Agai n t hesolution is to a part icular material and exploits t he method of constroction it

Brick , the most mu ndane of bu ilding materials, unchanged in hundrtds of years , here becomes somet hing quite unexpected . The

is developed on the module of a brick and therefore allows its ~:r::~::~":";: ,in suin geometric relation to all buildi ng elements. T he L always interested Mit'S. Stronural bonding insures oma-in an absolute and ordered fas hion. The fe nestration is

for the necessity of entrances. The balance of vert ical 1 fl oor and roof construnion and the enclosed

reflect the influence of De Sri j], as well as of Wright. The last of Mies's early projects, the Concrete Count ry House , com-

1924 , utilizes concrete bearing wal ls to provide blocks of space ~;':' }~::of~ree arrangement arou nd exterior cou rtyards-an extension of ~ in the Brick Country House. T he structural sys tem permits to be cut in the walls where lig ht is needed . The solut ion is

ra ther than planar. It expresses the continuity of the material by the corners fro m the volumes, wh ile the flow of space is freely Ioi;:'::~:'h A colum n g rid is introduced in the large spaces to avoid long ~ are d ifficult to ach ieve in concrete. Again, the fenest ration is except at the entrances and vertical access elements .

The consistency of thought in these projects is countered by the of form developed . Through his concentration on materials and

of construct ion , Mies d is.covered a new architectural lang uage. ~~;~:,~~~:~~inventiOn of these pro jens has its roots in a seeming ly By always insist ing on structural integ rity and good Mies was forctd ro work by an inductive rather than a proces.o;. By start ing with the construct ive elements and then

""""'08 to larger elements and massing, Mies could ensure absolute the fi nal geometr ic relat ions among all the partS. Th is ~"""ol'>8' is exactly the procedure used in designing a classical build-

In a i by Pallad io, the geometry of inte rlocking parts forced the to know the relation of the ornament ro the whole as he planned

the villa. Onl y then could he ensure that the constituen t elementS would be pmetrically related . The realiution of Mies's first bui ldings in the modem id iom illus trates this procedure, as well as the inherent confl ict between Constructivist space and classical detail ing.

The Barcelona Pavi ll ion ( illus. 30) was designtd in 1928. The fact that it was a structure with no part icular program allowed Mies to exh ibit httl)' his vision of archi tecture. T he roof of the Structure is supported by a rtgular column syStem based on a g rid , with a cantilever in bolh direct ions. The walls are clearly separated from the columns to express their non-"Ib, .. ", ' ! capacity: they defin e space. The build ing sits on a base which

in square t ravert ine plates. The continuous flow of horizontal space the planes of the roof and floo r is modulated by the apparently free t~~7.:,~; Of vertical screen wall s. The balance of the partS, t he suict and the freedom of arrangement clearly follow Constructivist ,

The similarity in plan to the great Prairie Houses of Wright is clearly , bu t a second system of com pos it ion is at work , at another scale, in low do,," plan (i llus. 31). The placement and detailing of elemems con-the freedom of the overall ar rangement . The columns are cruciform , thus expressing t heir construction from fo ur steel angles (i ll us . 32)

are clad with chromi um -platt-d sheet metal; the attachmen t screws visible, cemered, and evenly spaced . The window frames are detailed in

manner; they arc also reg ularly spaced within each glazed panel. the mullions are al ig ned with the paving joints , some are nOt , but

1-'-I

~ 11\

30. Alit; Win tkr ROM, plan O/ Iht Baret/ona PaviliOll , 1929.

3 1. Alit; l'O'1 der Roht, dtlail plan of Iht Bamlona Pavilion, 1929.

f- .

\( , ! , If , , , , ,

, ,

fl : , 8 , .. .

-. ..

- . . . ..

l':::::' ~ 32 . iUits 1'011 der Robe, (olimw delail O/ lht Bamlona Pavilion, 1929,

33.

35.

Mies van der Robe, plan and fle//alion of liT classroom Jtructllral grid, /938-58. (Drawing by fllllh()Y.)

Vinyl aJbtJtOl fIcor tiff

Brick u'alls

i--I I I

r-'-"-

l-- --I

l I

~. -

-I I I \

--'-1

: I f-----j I

'--- .-Bii

34 . Alies van de, Robe. plan and eit>valioll Q! liT dtlSsroom modular grid, 1938-58. (Drawing by tluthor.)

AcoNstic (filing file

FllIOrtSfflIt lighling

Mit! van der Rohe, modlliar relationship of elements in liT riaJJrOOIll. 1938-58. (Drawing by flllthor.)

in all cases the g lass-screen walls are C('ntered on the floor pattern and randomly placed. The solid walls are made up from figured scones bookmatdlCd vertically and horizontally, varied in color, incredibly panern, and highly ornamental. The benches are stone. their supports evenly spaced blocks, agai n centeroo on the Hoor joints. The furniture, specially designed for rhe exhibit, is as meticulously' ~,:;;':~~ the building. The chai rs have chromium-steel supportS and i; white leather cushions. and their detailing is precise, with evenly leather suppon snaps and a gridded upholstered seat and back. furniture is evenly spaced within any grouping and is alwa~;,~~;:::~~ the floor grid . The proportions of all elements are carefully their arrangement in a consciously ordered system of planes is studied.

In the Barcelona Pavillion it is obvious thai great care and time have been spent on the detailing and that every effort has been relate all elements to the general plan. Mies did nOt actually design until he had located an onyx block that satisfied him. H,,,,,bli>h rhe ceiling height by doubling the dimension of that particular that all clements could be matched. It is also evident that what is referred to as architectural detailing is actually a process of decoration i hands of Mies. The visual characteristics of materials and their application arc conceived in ornamental terms. Also the use of a establish relations among elements is a process associated with The floor plane is gridded by the joints in the stone-a CQ,,"ru,", necessity. The grid is directly related to the structure; the corner fall precisely on the intersection of the module lines. T he screen walls, although fteely displayed, are all centered on this '~~,~,~;;~,i ,~,:;:: of the furniture groupings and benches. All the elements . related to the grid; it is a geomenic ordering device importance in the plan. section, and elevation of the building. of developing this scheme is exacdy the same as the one used in the of ornament. Only here. the constructive elements SUPPlY~~~~';~~i:5 previously derived from applied ornament. Mies has succ~ed i seemingly impossible problem. He has attained classical within a structure that satisfies the ideological program of rational srruction, while maintaining a freedom of arrangement specified rigorous Constructivist aesthetic. Other buildings of this same Mies's career usc the same approach, but few achieve the resolution found ' the Barcelona Pavillion.

In 1937 Mies vander Roheemigrated to the United States ro the director, in 1938, of the Department of Architecture of the

[nstitu[(~ of Technology. He was offered the comm ission to plan campus of the newly formed university. [n the planning for the campus, methodology rt'Sulu-d in a building type appatently quite different from previous work. Ir was obvious that the program for a total university not be solved through open planning. The buildings would be more one story in height and classrooms would necessarily be closed I :;"~,;:_~~ space. In addition, the bui ldings were to be constructed over a t' period. The budget was low enough to necessitate the use of clements of construction. Therefore . Mies set about d:,~';O~:~'~~~~':;: that was as flexible as possible and capable of solving all i problems while utilizing a rational structure and prefabricated parts.

Mies's concern for the ornamental resolution of the b"iI'!d""g d,em,. again forced him to begin inductively. Ht, had to fit each element proportioning system that would guarantee its systematic integ rity combined with all the other clements in the building. The modular that appears in rudimentary form in Mies's European work became an clement of prime organizational and visual importance. building is interlaced ..... ith a three-dimensional latticeworkoflines that the position of every item. This armature is essentially '::;~~:d:','~:;,:,: is found in a classical building . Classical pilasters become columns. coffers are replaced by acoustical tile and fluorescent lights. the moldings become reveals. In one brilliant suokk,:,', :':h~;':j'~~~;;:i;;:,~: found in classical ornament and the modular grid il by fused into an integrated system.

The design of the campus at [IT began with the placement modular grid over the entire area of the site. T he size of a classroom determined rhe structural grid (illus. 33). T his was then divided to form the grid for the planning module (ill us. 34). All partitions f.1.11 on this modular planning grid. The columns and

" .

'8

n-,

In

I, I, d n

, ,

coincide with the planning grid. so partition loads are carried The next SICP was to place all those elements thar did nOt i and sr rucrure, such as lighrs. diffu~rs, and doors, module. This g uarantees rhat regular grid spacings can

thus avoiding visual co nRicrs between systems. Next , the make up rhe su rfaces, both vertically and horizontally, were

to rhe basic planning mod ule, as were rhe bricks rhemsdves (i ll u$. ","h, '",,(,h, planning module, their joints would not directly alig n. For

, rhe tites were held back from the perimeter of each room sou to ", . F"~'" band to separate the two g rids that do not directly coincide.

are a perfect rectang ular fi eld in the center of each room. Thto)' the columns. which project into the space at the corners. Great

for detail heightens the ornamental perfect ion of these buildings 36),

The exteriors of the l iT bu ildings are logical extensions of the plan-The armatUre of regulating lines projects to the eXferior face

StOl({Ures. Each bui ld ing could be thought of as a fragment of a that could continue endlessly. At every module line there appears a

to catch the partit ions as chey hit the exterior wall. There is a '::~~:~::' ,~:,:every floor that receives a slab. These elementS form a grid ~ is a d irect expression of lhe modular planning g rid . Th is

filled with either b ri ck or g lass, depending on the use im mediately the panel (i llus. 37), At the corner. however, the colum n apprars,

~~':~~:~:,1'~h~'i'!P~P~':"::in::'~:':i':~'~":",:;":,:':;',:' ~q::"::':Ii:;:ty of Ihe steel grid covering the reveals the steel . brick, and glass facade to . Similarly the steel stanchions of the ground , insuring their non-stOlclural expression and ~"~'~~It:'~h~,~m from wealhering. The Sleel g rid is a metaphor for the

I It is an ornamental device of the utmost sophistication. code requires a prou.'(tive cover for the steel frame in a building of

SO dirC("t expression of the steel frame is impossible. The .." ,,;,','~ makes the frame appear quite heavy. Mies expresses the steel

and controls the proportioning of the members through reiteration of its materials and forms in the skin of the building . The earlier buildings at liT wert a disappointmenl to many. They

the spatial inventiveness and high style of Mies's work in Germany. are not a cont rad iction of his earl ier buildings, however, for they

a synthesis of tendencies which were unresolved in his previous , The early liT build ings resolve the paradox of classical ornamental and Construct ivist aesthetic demands in a manner suggested by

COmp(JJilioll (illus. 29) of t9t9 , T hey represent a continuing which makes the later work possible, for it is here that the

is established . slructures designl-d by Mi es van der Rohe are his most

In these towers. the system developed at liT was i to its maximum dtect . The high- rise program . especially for buildings, requires a Rexible divis ion of area ..... ithin a volume of

wntaintd space. In an office buildi ng. the configuration of the partitioni ng is not even contemplated unt il the construction of the building's shell is

1.,ml,I,,,, The solution devdopcd by Mies uses Sullivan's functional ex-of a lobby Roor, followed by a regular block of repetitive Roors fo r

or apartmentS, and, fina ll y. a mechanical Roor at the top. The plan for a high- rise apartment or office tower is extremely rational. The peri me-ttf is enti rely of glass. All the occupied space fa lls in this area, the most desi rable for human use. The center. which has no natural light, contains tht service elements and the vertical shafts. Th is center. or core area, contains all the space that is non-typical or does nOt fa ll into the visual pat tern of the open space , Since the core ne\'er hits the exterior of the building. the regularity of the facade is assurt-d. The grou nd Roor is o presscd as a sc:parate enti ty by raising the building to form a higher klbby. The glass is pulled back . exposing the structure. and the core shafu drop from the cei ling in regular rows. In the office build ings. the top Roor. housing the mechanical system , is enclosed in louvers. which arc placed in

fe nestration system of the ..... indow wall. The percentage of active louvers is very low, but the entire mechanical Roor is expressed in this

SO as nor ro destroy the regulari ty of surface expression. In the 'l'm,",mho"", .. the mcrhanical penthouse is set back and articulated as a

volume.

36. A1irs I'diI drr Robe, pla11 01 liT da.uroom, 1938-58, (Drawing by alllhor. )

37, Alies t'llN drr Rolx, rlrt'll/ioll of lI T dassr(J(Jl1I, 1938-58. (Drawing by author, )

38. Mies f'an tier RolN, nllllliOll dttai! of 860 Lah Short Drivt, Chicago. 1948-51.

'::f;; ',;:L.

.1

I

liT (1938-58).

860 Lakt Short Drit't (1948-51).

Stagram Bllilding (1954-58).

40. Alia l'all tier Roht. corntr tktaib.

39. Alies 1'1111 tier RolN. !!JIII/ion tkfai! from tIN SeagralJl Building. NlW 1954-58.

The structun.l frame is a regular bay syStem. Its d imensions determi ned by the requi rements of the program. subdivided intO a planning g rid. which is reflected on the ex terior by mullion spacing. By specify ing a system requi ring all-glass infill , bu ilding approaches in appearance a diagram of the inherent system. The expression of the exterior of the high-rLseb:~:~';~~'o::~:; slowly in Mies's hands. At the 860 Lake Shore Drive Mies expressed the structural frame exactly on the exterior of the Rather than using glass in an infill system. he applied a vertical each mullion line. This very sophis ticated ornamental device forms unbroken vert ical line the enti re height of the building. defining windows and eliminating them as d istinct elements . and is, at the time. a visual metaphor fo r the struct ure behind. The thin fl anges I-sections change the scale of the facade while exemplirying the hidden construction (i !ius. 38). It is clear that the mullions are only attacht'

,n

"

"

" ,d

'. j .

" ,n

"

"

" , I

"

"

h

" .,

n

"

n ,

n ,

d , ,

, ,

"~~:'~;:~[dll n Crown Hal! of [954 or the Mannheim T heater pro ject of ~: i have employed his earlier Constructivist spacial schemes.

of developing a flow of space, however, he uses rhe formula in his hig h- rise structu res. He buries alJ the spaces that are

The main space has the same inert guality found in rhe I space" of commercial developments. Although not program-required , the ornamental, modular-consrruccion techniques are

The structure is removed from the interior of the space and to the exterior. The ornamental qualities inherent in long-span

I are evident here. Perhaps these g reat halls represent Mies's greatest triumph in the

of construction and ornament. The Convention Hall projen for of (illus. 41) is an ornamental [Our de fo rce egual to

. It has the same geometric perfeerion, except the ... ,,' ,,,,If perfo rms the dual tasks performed by structure and applied

Unity Temple. Here Mies employed a structure of great "" " " q"Ii". The fo rces are displayed on the exterior and the interior

and combine at the suppons. The resemblance to the ",hoI"" ,I', Gothic cathedral (iUus 42) is immediately apparent. The

quality of open-truss construerion was employed during the . ,,",h "n,u,,; ,'n "',g' "h",',',n buildi ngs such as the Crystal Palace.

the ecstasies of open struCture have been transformed through the reasoning of Mies. The richness of the square enclosure grids, by the diagonal truss members, is both rational and visually

.w',, 'ng. The building is a perfeer square. the columns lying on the are divided inm five regular bays wi th a cantilever at each corner.

exterior wall is a giam trUSS, distributing the roof loads down m the . This walJ is divided by the diagonals of the major truss, which is

subdivided to form the diagonals of the roof Structure. The two-way at the roof forms an even visual panern of support in both

. T he decking spans in alternate di rections. from ttuSS to truSS , in ornamental fashion governed by the necessi t ies of even-load ~:~;~~:~~~::t. 43) The exterior trusses have an in fill of figurt-d marble . III the color of the intill alternates across the facade, reflecting

changes in StrUCtural fo rces. This building marks the culmination of experimentation. The space is undivided and perfectly uniform; the

is rational in its arrangement. and yet, the resulting patterns are ornamental as well as eXtremely ordered. Everything is perfectly

yet dynamic in its srructural expression. This building is I the masterpiece ofstruCture ornamentaliztd," as Unity Temple

the masterpiece of ornament struCturalizoo.

Mit! t'an der Rohe. partinl del'atioll of Collt'l!lItirJn Hall project. Chicago. 1953-54.

It 1 \ 11 -

= ==

== -

r =

II U II 41. Alier t'd1l dtr Robe, eler.wtion and plan of COllwlllion Hall projtct,

Chicago, 1953-54.

43. Mit'S I /(m det" Robe. roof IImClllrt plall of COllwl/lioll Hall projut, Chicago, /953-54 .

Modern arch i [ ectu~ evolved as a violent reaction to nin~eenthcentury architectural stra tegies and appearances. The conceptual thruSt of Wrig ht , Le Corbusier, and Mies van der Rohe preceded the im plementa-tion of their ideas. When confronted with actual construction, they had to develop a methodology which would accomplish what had already been theoretically proposed. At this point they relied heavily on their training in ornament. Here was a complete system of abstract geometricconsrruction. As they proceeded into the actual design process, the forms and methods of ornamentat ion appeared in new architectural applications. The ornamental aspect of their work was always thoroughly integrated into the conceptual framework of modern architectuCC". Ornament resumed its position in the contextual base of architecrure , avoiding the d isassociation occasioned by ed eClicism .

Construction today reveals a general apathy to ..... ard qualities once thoug ht to comprise the essence of the Modern Movement. One wonders whether this apathy is the result of recent unforeseen, external forces or si mply the dissipation of the revolutionary energy that produced a new way of building at the begi nning of this century. Perhaps a rei terat ion of the origins and historic context of the Modern Movement could explain its apparent demise. The beginning of the nineteenth century sa ..... a wave of stylistic revivals. Thei r relative visual and moral qualities were argued at great length , to no particular condusion. Si multaneously, nC\\' techniques and materials appeared in the hands of civil engineers. This technology was never fully integrated into what was then considered architecture. At that moment , attemptS were made to rev italize architecture by reducing build-ings to their component partS and extracting from those parts visual and stosuous phenomena ..... hich could be formalized into a sYStem of composi-t ion . The apparent value of historical precept was maintained , bu t the principle of stylistic integrity was lost. This freedom heightened the d ichotomy between nC\\' bui lding techniques and the nrbirrary doak of tradi tional forms unt il the serious architect was fo rced to seek out a new approach.

Modern architecture was considert-d an apocalyptic spli t ..... ith the past. Rational planning and machi ne- made parts were finally accepted by the archi tect . A variety of convi ncing and often beaut iful sol utions re-sulted. The early work of Wright, Mies van der Rohe, Le Corbusier, and others is a uni 6ed body of work , yet each displays d iffering sensibi lities. Obviously, the work of these early masters did not follow the exact course each originally outlined, but t hat does not necessari ly negate the modern program enti rely. In reality, modern architect ure offers a richer conceptual, visual, and envi ronmemal experience than the avowed imencs of itS major proponents. Ornamental manipulation and historical architenure were carried into the Modern Movement in vei led form. T he architen raised with the intricacies and invemion of ornament had a grammar of form which has been denied those t rai ned in Modernism.

T he work of those follo ..... ing Le Corbusier seems tied to ecleeric recombinations of geometries conceived by the master. There is no thrust into new formal solutions based on the conceptions of Corbusier. Attempts [Q revive nintteenth-century models as a basis for anything greater in size than a house seem doomed from the outset. Meanwhile, the follo ..... ers of Mies van der Rohe seem to be caught in an end less cycle of arr iving at the ~e overall solutions by inductively proceed ing from the familia r details.

{l8}

A most valuable system of design has been str ipped from the ,.,hi"" training, leaving him mired in an eclectic predicament no better than existing just before the emergence of the Modern Movement . before we completely dismiss modern architecture-or revive it historical style-we should examine the derivation of itS fo rms and more carefully.

NOTES I . O ..... enJoncs. Tht Gm1llll/ar olOrna1lltn' (London: Day and Sons,

p . 2. 2. Ibid. , p. 156. 3. Ibid., p, 2. 4. As quoted by Peter Collins, "Aspects of Ornament," A"hi" n, ..

R fl'itll' 129 (J une 1961): 375-76. 5. As qUOted by Reyner Banham , " Ornament and Crime," A,,h.i''''m

Rer-itw 121 (February (957): 86. 6. Ibid. 7. Le Corbusier. Cr(aliOll 11 a Palintl Starch (New York: Frede rick

Praeger, 1963), p. 24. 8. Ibid., p. 22 . 9. le Corbusier, Mwlu/Qr I (Cambridge: Hnrvard University Press.

p.25 10. Ibid. , p . 30. I!. Amedee Ozenrone, Foundations 01 Mot/tm Art. trans. john (New York: Dover Publications, 195 2), p. 16z. 12. Jones, Grammar, p.5 . 13. Frank lloyd Wright , Gmiul and tht Mo&xracy (New York:

Press, 1971). p . 71. 14. For a study of the relation bet ..... een Owen Jones and Frank Furness,

James F. O'Gorman , Tht Arrhituulrr0I Frank FNrlltJJ I I Philadelphia Museum of Arc, 1973), p. 37.

15. Frank lloyd Wright, An ANtobiography (New York: Duell, Sloan Pearce, (943). P75

t6. Frank lloyd Wright. A T~t((nlmt (New York: Horizon Press, p . 19

17. Wright, Gtllill$ arid tIN AlobomlfY. pp.70-71. 18. Ibid., p. 74. 19 Ibid., p. 75. 20. Ibid., p . 8z. 2 1. Ibid., p. 80. Z2 . Wright. Alllobiography, p. 141. z3 Ibid ., p. 147. z4 j ones , Gr((!!IIII((r. P.5. Z5 louis H. Sullivan. A 5ysttnl of Ar(hilt(lIml/ Ornamtnf (New York:

Eakins Press . 1963). pI. 4. 26. Ibid., pI. 4. 27. Philip C . j ohnson, Min t'an d" Roht (New York: Museum ""u"" .

Art. 1947), p. 196.

c's

thar haps '" , rent

rlral

rlral

A.

lOl

P()tllpeillll on/riff/mI. OU't !/ J ()!lel. The G rammar or Ornament (umd()!I: Btr!l~/rd Qllflritrh. 1868), Platt xxv.