Freedom of Space - A STUDY

7/23/2019 Freedom of Space - A STUDY

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/freedom-of-space-a-study 1/40

FREEDOM OF SPACE

Introduction:

A large space could be divided into small divisions to suit nature of activities and purpose.

Functional requirements of different Space Dividing Elements are different, depending on

the space and the activities required to be segregated. Fixed arrangements will give

proper privacy to individuals, but will act as physical and visual barrier. Such arrangements

will reduce human interaction and user freedom. The user is forced to live according to the

designed space.

In the case of apartments and villas which are made without considering the user and his

function, such fixed arrangements may not work properly. They only provide basic

requirements such as number of bedrooms, kitchen, living and dining space. Suchstructure can’t adapt to the changing needs of the users.

Now architects are implementing flexibility, adaptability, fluidity and open space to

provide freedom of space to the user. Thus buildings that can adapt to the changing needs

of user are designed. According Schneider and Till flexibility as accommodating change in

housing, addresses a number of issues related with the current and future needs of the

users. Firstly, it offers variety in the architectural layout of the units. Secondly, it includes

adjustability and adaptability of housing units over time. And finally, it allows buildings toaccommodate new functions. In order to provide flexibility, architects should consider the

possible future needs of users during the design process. It points to freedom of choice.

There should be a dynamic condition which offers diversity. This allows a user or

inhabitant to manipulate or control that which the designer has provided. Such a

condition allows the individual to become engaged with or a part of the architecture.



Aim:

To understand possibilities of user defined spaces using flexibility, adaptability, fluidity

and open spaces.

Objective:

• To study about the user freedom in designed spaces.

• To find the application of flexibility, adaptability, fluidity and open spaces to

improve user freedom.

Scope:

• The study is done to understand the influence of open spaces, flexibility, fluidity

and adaptability to provide freedom of space.

• To study about the structures which adapt to the changing needs of the users.

Limitation:

• Study does not look into the topic such as barrier free architecture.

• Study is only focused on the designed spaces, which adapt to the changing needs

of the users.



Literature review

Thoughts and activities of our community have been affected by increasing international

communication. As a result new dimensions of mobility and complexity in many science

and education have been made by human. While conceptual changes in Architecture are

followed slowly, mobility and flexibility can act as ideas of future architecture that would

draw more attention. On the other hand, unpredicted events (such as earthquake, floods,

etc...) have always put the residents threatened and the occurrences of such events are stillexpected. Short-term housing procedure after disasters and use of some public buildings

and places of towns and villages as settlements and Treatment place are of the issues

related administrators and operators are facing with. Public and large buildings spaces

would better to be more flexible to use in emergency situations.

When early human considered plains as hunting and agricultural purposes, he thought of

manufacturing a housing based on his own idea. Caves and trees are two main paradigms

in the nature as a human shelter. Hence trees and cave became ideas of building wooden

and hard stone shelters respectively. Human being also demonstrated considerable

progresses in living and architectural evolution in a way that gradually came up with the

idea of utilizing bones and skins of huge animals (such as mammoths) to build shelters

flexibly opening or closing. Based on abovementioned background it could be concluded

hat light weighted dynamic structures have been created and utilized by human beingssince long time ago.

Structures involving light weight and mobility have been manufactures in various forms

using different materials and system. Tents, Black Tents, Arbor, Gazebo, and Pergola … are

such structures that have widely been used by nomads and Bedouins. A house carried on

back of a four-footed animal requires simple and genius manufacturing procedure which

is in result of hundreds or thousands years of experience.



3- Flexible Spaces

The objective of flexibility in the architecture is to provide spaces with simply changing

structures respect to changes in required performance and application. Though

architectural spaces could be identified and restricted through physical elements such as

floor, ceiling, and walls and so on, it should be designed in a way that changes flexibly. For

example the space may be required to be uncovered most of the time and sometimes be

roof covered, or simply the space may be required to be shrunk or expand. Since

constructional elements identify the space, application of flexible design of such elements

are necessary for making up flexible spaces. Flexibility of constructional elements depends

on dissociation of mobility and load. Therefore it could be pointed out to more cases of

flexible design since structural systems succeeded to separate above said features (i.e.

mobility and load).

Since 18th century evolution of skeleton frame work idea in construction of structures has

eliminated load walls and replaced by cast iron pillars and supports. This point made

structure’s inner design easier.

By the end of 19th century most of the buildings constructed through abovementioned

procedure, were designed excluding inner walls. Such walls were added to the building

based on residents needs.

"Le Corbusier", modern architecture, proposed his quintuple principles in the early 20th

century that one of them is known as "Plan Libre". "Domino house" was designed using

this principle in 1914. The plan included flat plates (as floor and roof), some pillar supports

(to stand against level loads) and stairs to connect levels together. No inner walls were



included except for space partitioning. So inner walls could be located wherever required

that result in absolute liberalization in form and design flexibility.

During the years of modern architecture, "Theo Van Doesburg" (founder of "De Stijll"

ideology) expresses his theories in a paper titled “toward a flexible architecture” as

follow; “Modern architecture is an open one. A unique space constitutes the whole house

that is partitioned according to required application and performance. Such partitioning

takes place through internal divider walls and external supporting ones. The former divide

the house space in accordance with performance and application which could be portable

(in contrast to traditional dividing walls), that is such walls could be designed in a way that

frames and handy plates could be replaced.”

In the residential complex of "Weissenhof", designed by "Mies van der Rohe" in 1927,

internal walls of each room were envisaged to join floor and ceiling using fastenings.

Hence each resident could arbitrarily expand or shrink the room. There is no door between

rooms and anyone would be surprised of spacious features of such 70 m2 residential

space. "Scheroder House", made by "Gerrit Rietveld" in 1924, is triggered by "Neo

Plasticism" cause. Such effects are created through decomposition of structural elements

and recombining them in another way. First floor plan is flexible and individual rooms are

evolved in glasses using solid walls and parts of ceiling protrude the structure in a way

that no support could be observed. Horizontal and vertical elements having pure colors as

well as white, black and green colors could be distinguished inside and outside of the

structure, internal architecture, and furniture.

Even though serious attempts made on space flexibility, no individual independent

method known as flexible architecture was created. Because of large constructional costs

and technical issues after usage, development of the flexibility theory halted in that time.

Most of the buildings inspired by high degree of flexibility couldn’t meet acceptability

criteria. Practical considerations revealed that residents didn’t move the portable walls of

buildings.



Multi-Purpose Spaces

Abovementioned items include adaptation of space restrictive elements against modernspace performance. Another approach to this issue is creating multi-purpose space that is

the space capable of meeting different requirements. In other words such space is

designed for multi-purpose activities and by changing furniture one could utilize the

space without any further general modification.

"Robert Venturi" in his book titled: “Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture”

states that; multi-purpose spaces could probably meet the reasonable requirements of

modern architects who attempt to get flexibility. Spaces designed or various purposes andportable equipment are utilized in them instead of moveable walls inspire the observer of

a changing space. Such flexibility could mentally be perceived and there are no physically

changes in the space. Besides such space makes us believe such perceived feeling. Multi-

attribute features of the space could lead to performance flexibility.

Background of multi-purpose space utilization goes back to foaming early records of

architectures more than thousand years ago. Because most of the issues used to be

treated in one residential place and a unique space was capable of being utilized for

various application and purposes.

The fact that creation of exclusive one-purpose spaces for short-term utilization is not cost

effective, strengthen the idea of manufacturing a multi-purpose space. Different forms of

such idea could be observed in various countries.

By the early 21st century causes concerning multi-purpose space design appeared in

Europe. "Walter Gropius" designed the comprehensive project of the city theatre of Berlinin a way that could be utilized for various musical and demonstrative theatrical programs

by introducing little changes in middle stage of the theatre that could rotate 180 degree,



without any further constructional operations.

"Herman Hertzberger" is one the prominent pioneers and supporters of creating multi-

purpose spaces in the 21st century. He believes that there is no unique design for each

individual so the space should be flexible enough to be utilized freely by each person. The

building he designed for an insurance company in Netherlands illustrates this idea clearly

and obviously. The building has comprised of square shape scaffolds located over each

other and side-separated where the light absorbents located. Such scaffolds together form

a network of spaces that could be integrated if required.

Opening-Closing Structures

Everything in the nature experiences change, evolution, and movement. Movement also

includes expansion and shrinkage of body forms. Expanding structures or simply opening-

closing structures same as other artifact manufactured by human being are inspired by the

nature. Blooming of bud or blossom is the design origin of "Fre Otto" and "Mahmood Bodo

Rosch" in forms of ceiling of Prophet Mosque in Medina that is made of canvas to be

opened and closed at ease so in hot weather of the day could provide people with shadow

and could be opened if not needed.

Fig 7: Different states of opening roof garden umbrella Prophet Mosque in Medina.

Walking Houses



Early construction of walking houses could be seen in first generation of automobile

manufacturing and travels using mobile-motor vehicles. Most of such tiny units were

inspired by trailers and travelling vehicles that utilized as camping facilities. Larger

dwelling units of such system used for months of living or more. In fact such housing unitsare made in manufactories and usually moved by big trucks to the right place. Focus and

main objective of constructing such dwelling place is mobility. Hence such houses were

utilized primarily by the people who couldn’t live in one place for a long time.

Fig 9: Dymaxion house.

"Dymaxion" is the house name made by "Buckminister Fuller" in 1927. The title is a

combination of two words: Dynamism and Maximum, which means maximum dynamism

and differs from aesthetic art proposed by "Le Corbusier" in "Villa Savaii". "Fuller" put

forward a machine for living purposes included individual separated and prefabricated

spaces attached together to make a whole living house. Foundation and central basis of

the house were located on installation part. Inner facilities could be easily expand andshrink. Even the furniture was pneumatic and none of the equipment was weight more

than 4.5 kg.

In 1963 the idea of international walking house was proposed by "Marlette Homes". He

believed that needs of the people who demand for such dwelling places differs from

common individual. So design type and structure should be different. The title of“walking house” was replaced by “Prefabricated house” since 1970, because

“mobility” was less important as “space expansion”. Considering recent increase in

population growth and lack of dwelling place as well as high living costs of house

construction & maintenance in cities make utilization of walking houses feasible and cost

effective. One of the main advantages of such houses is their application at the time of

disasters such as earthquake, flood, and son on until proper housing units could be rebuild

for those displaced homeless because such houses could be settled and set up so quickly.



Walking house of "Loftcube" made by "Werner Aisslinger" that could be easily and quickly

set up on the roofs having plain area. The size of the space is 36 m2 and 3 meters height

having wooden walls and network plastic plates. Louvered form of the windows facilitates

air conditioning required for the space. Such house is made for an individual and could be

set up during 2 to 4 days. In addition to the house performance it could be utilized as an

official work station. Besides it could be easily mobilized from one place to another

location after assembly. The designer also suggests using helicopter for displacement of

the housing unit to other roofs.

"Oskar Leo Kaufmann" designed a house know as "Su-Si" as a walking structure. Such

design plan could be moved by a truck to the desired location and would be installed on a

wooden network above concrete foundation. If basic supplies such as electricity, swage,

and water could be achieved, installation of the project approximate as 5 hours. Such plan

is same as a modern apartment based on architectural and aesthetic viewpoints. Internal

space is spacious and transparent that could be easily fitted to different taste and plates if

required.

Aghil Emamgholi

Department of Architecture, Abhar BranchIslamic Azad University, Abhar, Iran



upper floor interior view with partitions partially closed

1920’s

Schroder House

Utrecht

Gerrit Rietveld

“The concept of flexibility creates a building which is not a fixed entity,

but a palimpsest on which can be inscribed any life style and any life view.” - GerritRietveld, De Stijl

upper floor interior view with partitions open



interior view with partitions closed (above) and open (below)

1990’s

Fukuoka Housing Japan

Steven Holl

Steven Holl’s concept of “hinged space” gives modern application to the

versatility of the traditional Japanese fusuma sliding panel. Light, colorfulwooden walls turn on pivotal hinges, making it possible to combine or

isolate spaces according to hour, season and family make-up.



interior view with partitions closed (above) and open (below)

when order meets flexibility



1300’s

Daikakuji

Palace of Emperor Saga

Kyoto City

The origin of movable interior partitions can be traced to the Japanese fusuma. These

sliding panels were constructed with a wooden frame strengthened by cross battens to

which several layers of paper were glued. A layer of decorative paper was then fixed over

the whole and the faces were typically painted to depict a story. The fusuma allowed the

house to change with the day and season. Their dynamic nature was sharply contrasted by

the static condition of the heavy timber posts and beams which brought order to the

whole.

interior view with fusuma open

Order and Flexibility:

Their Coexistence as Architectural Principle

Michael Malofiy

This thesis submitted to the faculty

of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State

University in partial fulfillment of the

requirement for the degree



Case study

Sendai Mediatheque

Architect - Toyo ito

Toyo Ito’s Sendai Mediatheque is an example of a building that embraces the

“multidimensionality, diversity, and uncertainty of living in a computerized world”

(Witte, 2002) by acting as a nodal link that enables an oscillating relationship between

people and information. Ito describes his idea of architecture as a type of fluidity, an

expression of the general instability of the universe and of the transient nature of beings

and things (Witte, 2002). This perception of the universe as transitory, is one of the cultural



factors of Japan’s affinity for the virtual world with its floating and ephemeral entities

(Witte, 2002). It is in the Sendai Mediatheque, where Ito concentrates on three specific

elements of plates (floors), tubes (columns), and skin (facade and exterior) to bring forth

his cultural and architectural ideals. It is important to state Ito’s criticism towards the

assumption of architecture as the formation of boundaries from the outside and inside

world. As noted in Reyner Banham’s “Space and Power” (1975), architecture has

evolved to blend interior and exterior spaces as a joint relationship rather than separating

the two. In conjunction with Banham, is Theo van Doesburg’s “Towards a plastic

architecture” (1970), where he stresses the necessity of architecture to be open with the

elimination of interior and exterior boundaries. The Sendai Mediatheque reflects this

blurring by recognizing that the “phenomenon of architecture must be conditioned by

the unstable, fluctuating society of the information age.” (Witte, 2002). In physicality, the

facade is comprised of a double-paned glass screen with horizontalstripes, which create a subtle visual effect between the exterior and interior spaces

(Sakamoto et al., 2003). The roof and west wall are covered in metal-louvered screens,

while the north and east walls are covered with varying transparent materials of glass and

metal on each floor (Sakamoto et al, 2003). This allows for an exposure of the inside to the

outside and visibility from the outside to the inside. Since the building faces Jozenji-dori

avenue, the transparency of the facade allows for viewers to recall the tubes within the

building as a homage to the Zelkova trees, which line the avenue (Sakamoto et al. 2003).



The oscillating effect of visuals, people, and information is exactly what Ito desires for this

building to do: To dismantle the organization principles of traditional facilities that usually

constitute for conclusive

functions (Sakamoto et al., 2003). For example, the act of reading books would simulate a

library, and the act of appreciating art would simulate a museum (Sakamoto et al., 2003).

The Sendai Mediatheque has four distinct working zones, the public gallery, library, film

and media center, and an information center. Ito eliminates the barriers

which culturally and physically encase these four activities by firstly acknowledging thatinformation is, and cannot be contained, therefore it is impossible to place it within a

spatial barriers. Thus, Ito developed an ABABA rhythm within each floor, using the circular

nature of the tubes, A, as forces of energy that repel and the suspended zones of space

between the tubes, B, as pressure spaces to move towards other tubes that are further

away (Witte, 2002). Thus, the relationships between the role of the structure, materials,

surfaces, programs, and spaces allow for an interchangeability and migration of people

(Witte 2002). There is no prescribed path or series of experiences. Rather, each person’s

path of experiences is strictly dependent on their desire or need.



diagram | each tube projects a

circular energy outwards and at their

outer rings of energy, it propels the

interstitial energy towards opposing

tubes of energy creating dynamic

movement and space energies



made places to live within the flux of nature.” (Sakamoto et al., 2003).



To further the discussion of space, the idea of smooth and striated space brought forth

byGilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari and their “1400: The Smooth and the Striated”

discussion, is an interesting concept to use for a comparison to the Sendai Mediatheque. In

order to

successfully discuss the Sendai Mediatheque, two explanations must be made. Firstly, the

building is 50m x 50m x 30m, a large cube where each floor is held up by differing sized

tubes. Their placement and size is dependent on the need to transfer loads into irregularly

placed

columns (Sakamoto et al, 2003). In a sectional view, the volume of the building is exposed

with its tubes and seven floors. Secondly, the notion of smooth and striated space is based

upon the notion of duality, where smooth and striated spaces are not in opposition, but

rather

in a mixture or blending, where one space can revert, create, or render the other space. To

understand this concept in motion in the Sendai Mediatheque, the starting point would

be the initial conception of the building. As noted before, information is not contained,

therefore, it is impossible to place it within spaces of specific activities. Thus, this notion of

information is a smooth space idea, where it advances in concordance to the nature of

research and scientific discovery. Rather than to compartmentalize information, the

Sendai Mediatheque acts as a node or conduit of information. This act of electing to be the

node

within information begins to construct a particular location and specified physical space

for this trafficking of information to take place, thus it acts as a striated space. Also, thefour programs designated to this building become a type of boundary or set condition for



the building. However, as mentioned above, the four programs become an integrated

experience when people are introduced into the building. The desire to learn and share

information

governs the internal workings of a people driven body in the building. Thus, the

continuous duality of striated and smooth space can be understood by the idea, structure,

and people.

diagram | while the Sendai

Mediatheque allows for the blurred

distinction between interior and

exterior spaces, its physical transparent

qualities raises a discussion about the

militarization of space when all actions

done by the inhabitants of the building

are easily seen and monitored.

Finally, the physical openess of the Sendai Mediatheque brings up a conversation about

the militarization of space. From Michel Foucault’s “Means of Correct Training +

Panopticism” (1975), Paul Virilio’s “Total Accident” (2002),

and “Endocolonization and the State-as-Destiny” (1997), the problems of surveillance,

discipline, and control were in any part, related to the original intention of the Sendai

Mediatheque. However, it is quite clear that the ability

to see exterior to interior, interior to exterior, and interior to interior, the fashion of

surveillance is quite apparent. Ito’s intention to make the building spacious and



enable users to move through the space as they wish, becomes surveillance from person

to person, and person to information. From this action, information can

be learned from the people who enter the Sendai Mediatheque for information. However,

the Sendai Mediatheque is a building that offers a space that encourages the exchange of

information. It may be a site that can be easily

pinned as a space for surveillance and security, but its original intention cannot be

overlooked. Toyo Ito’s desire for a fluidity between human interaction and architecture

becomes a blur when it is manifested in the Sendai Mediatheque.

A good community facility is a place where public and private space harmonizes well,

which has abundant Human Interactive Elements that foster the interaction

among people, and draws various kind of people because it has various programs and

purposes. Hence, a good community facility is a facility which can be shared with the

residents of the area, which forms a space where people gather together and interact,

which forms official ? non-official warm relationship each other, and maintain the order of

neighborhood as a social organization of the community within the spatial affordance. Toafford these spaces, Human Interactive Elements play an important role. Human

Interactive Elements is every architectural elements and facilities that facilitates the

interaction between people which makes people to gather and to bond. The studies about

the Human Interactive Elements of the existing museums and libraries that foster the

interaction between people, concluded that Human Interactive Elements are composed of

two elements. The ''''Material Human

Interactive Elements'''' and the ''''Immaterial Human Interactive Elements'''' that explain

the ''''Material Human Interactive Elements'''' conceptually. 12 Material Human InteractiveElements were found in the existing museums and



libraries, which were composed of square(where openness is maximized), balcony, pocket

space, bridge, stairs, nude elevator, window(transparency), core(penetration), continuous

floor(continuity), seminar room, hallway, and

furniture. And 6 Immaterial Human Interactive Elements were found which were, Multi-

centerness, continuity, mixture, mutual-penetration, immaterialization, and transparency.

Sendai Mediatheque had all those Material Human Interactive Elements except bridge,

continuous floor and hallway.

Sendai Mediatheque adopted the open plan(square) where various programs are mixed

which is non-hierarchy. These elements increased the interactions between people.

People especially rely on their sense of sight in the interactions. So while the element

''''square'''' which is one of Human Interactive Elements maintains the openness, itmaximizes the communication by having characters such as mixture, mutual-penetration,

immaterialization, multi-centerness. By these characters synergy occur between spaces

and people''''s interactions.

Hence at this study regarded the ''''open plan'''' as one of the most important Human

Interactive Elements because a lot of interactions happens because of the various Human

Interactive Elements that it has. So this study researched about how Sendai Mediatheque

deals this ''''open plan''''(architectural method, the skill of dividing the plan), to judge the

way how the new mediatheque should bebuilt.

Having various Human Interactive Elements and at same time to function

architecturally well, the space needed several architectural method.

First to maximize the openness that ables the communication ? interaction while

it maintain the function, at Sendai Mediatheque it maximized the permeability

and adjusted the accessibility. For this at Sendai Mediatheque it tried to get

rid of visual obstacles by using ''''tube structure'''' in non-hierarchy open

plan, while it still functions as a structure. It controlled the accessibility



References:

Banham, R. (1975). Space and Power. Age of the Masters, 49-62.

Deleuze, G.; Guattari, F. (1987). 1440: The Smooth and the Striated. A Thousand Plateaus, 474-500.

Doesburg, T. (1970). Towards a plastic architecture. Programs and manifestoes on 20th-century

architecure, 78-80.

Foucault, M. (1975). Means of Correct Training + Panopticism. Discipline and Punish, 1975.

Heidegger, M. (1992). Building Dwelling Thinking. Martin Heidegger Basic Writings, 344-363.

Lefebvre, H. (1968). The Production of Space. Architecture Theory since 1968, 178-188.

McDonough, T. (2004). Situationist Space. Guy Debord and the Situationist International, 241-265.

Norberg-Schulz, C. (1996). The Phenomenon of Place. Theorizing a

New Agenda for Architecure, 414-428.

Orr, D. (2007). Architecture, Ecological Design, and Human Ecology. The Green Braid, 15-33.

Sakamoto, T.; Ferre, A. (2003). Toyo Ito Sendai Mediatheque. Barcelona, Actar.

Virilio, P. (2002). Total Accident. Crepuscular Dawn, 153-155.

Virilio, P. (1997). Endocolonization and the Sate-as-Destiny. Pure War, 91-101.

Witte, R. (2002). Toyo Ito Sendai Mediatheque. Germany, Prestel Verlag.



The Glass House

Architect: Philip Johnson

1. The Glass House, New Canaan, CT. This image would later appear on the cover of Philip Johnson:

The Glass House .(Courtesy of Norman McGrath. All rights reserved. Used with permission.)



Philip Johnson’s 1986 bequest of his Glass House in New

Canaan, CT (Figure 1), to the National Trust for Historic

Preservation would seem to represent an unqualified preservation

success story, one in which an enlightened benefactor

effectively assured the survival of an iconic work of 20th century

Modern architecture for future generations. Yet while a

fight to preserve the material artifact may have been avoided,

the struggle over its meaning, and the interpretive narrative

that will convey it, has yet to begin. Serving as Johnson’s personal

residence for more than 50 years, the estate has grown

to include almost a dozen structures, each new addition

reflecting Johnson’s appropriation of the latest architectural

“style.” Thus the estate constitutes not only a distinctively

personal collection of objects, but a more general narrative of

the evolving formal and theoretical preoccupations of

American architectural production, a narrative in which

Johnson himself as played a significant role.1

However significant either the Glass House or its architect

may be, Johnson’s bequest raises problematic issues regarding

the preservation of the estate as a national historic site, not

the least of which concerns the nature and content of the

interpretive narrative for a future public audience, an essential

part of the National Trust’s mission.2 Given the impending

transformation of the Glass House from a private dwelling to a



public monument, this alteration will correspondingly necessitate

the creation of a new interpretation of the site. In The

Birth of the Museum , Australian sociologist Tony Bennett’s

1996 work, the author notes the crucial distinction that takes

place at this moment of transition:

For the simple act of extracting a site from a continuing

history of use and development means that a

frame is put around it, separating that site from what

it was prior to the moment of its preservation.

Dedicated to a new use as, precisely, a historic site, it

becomes a facsimile of what it once was by virtue of

the frame—which may be as simple as a notice or as

elaborate as a piece of legislation—which encloses itand separates it off from the present...They announce

a distance between what they are and what they

were through their very function, once placed in a

museum, of representing their own past-ness and,

thereby, a set of past social relations.3

This shift in context is a critical one, for it will require a corresponding

re-evaluation of the history and significance of both

the Glass House and Philip Johnson, and it is precisely at this

moment of transition that the conflicting interests of architectural

history, preservation ethics, and personal intentions are

destined to clash.

In order to construct a new narrative, the Trust will first

have to consider the existing interpretive framework, a narrative

established at the very beginning of the Glass House’s history,

and which has served as the basis for much of the critical

discourse that followed. The principal source of this narrative

is Johnson’s own critical interpretation, an unprecedented

essay he first published as “House at New Canaan” in the

British journal Architectural Review in September of 1950, less

than a year after the house’s completion. Here, Johnson cites a

diverse assemblage of historical and contemporary sources for

the design, offering both his formal and theoretical inspirations,

thereby creating a critical framework that would inform

later interpretations by such notable architects and historiansas Kenneth Frampton, Peter Eisenman, Robert Stern, Francesco



Dal Co, and Vincent Scully. In fact, over time the discourse

came to constitute another “artifact” of the site, later to be

“preserved” by Johnson in the form of a book entitled, appropriately,

Philip Johnson: The Glass House .4

By reprising his previous roles as historian and critic,

Johnson skillfully promoted the Glass House and, through

association, himself. Johnson’s merging of his own identity

with that of the house allowed both subject and object to be

intimately linked in the minds of his audience. This, combined

with Johnson’s repeated efforts to keep the house alive in the

critical and popular imagination, served to situate the house

within a framework that simultaneously “framed” Johnson as

well. Through this close association of subject and objectJohnson ultimately pursued his own immortality, conflating the

concept of the domestic house with that of the historic monument.

Although a thorough account of Johnson’s efforts in this

regard lies beyond the scope of this article, one consequence



of these efforts was the development of a narrative that relied

as much on myth as it did on fact.6 In his later interviews, for

example, Johnson described his inspiration for the cylindrical,

brick fireplace as arising from Frank Lloyd Wright’s notion of

the central hearth and the distinctly American image of the traditional

New England brick fireplace (Figure 2).7 These sources

emphasize Johnson’s American roots and link him, through

association, with Frank Lloyd Wright, arguably America’s greatest

architect, yet not one usually associated with Johnson’s

work.8 However, Johnson initially cited very different inspirations

for this element, two of which appear in his 1950 essay

for Architectural Review : a painting by the Russian avant-garde

artist Kasimir Malevitch entitled “Suprematist Element Circle—1913,” and Johnson’s own memories of burnt-out houses in

which all that remained standing was the brick chimney. The

validity of even these two references can be called into question,

9 for it is more than likely that Johnson appropriated this

form from two of Mies van der Rohe’s earlier projects, both of

which Johnson was intimately familiar with at the time he was

designing the Glass House.10 Nowhere, however, does Johnson

acknowledge these works as having influenced his design

despite his repeated acknowledgement that Mies served as a

prime, and literally unmistakable, source for the Glass House.

Similar efforts by Johnson to frame his own history can be

seen in his film Diary of an Eccentric Architect , first broadcast

on television in 1986, and later intended to serve as an introduction

to the site for future visitors.11 By casting the narrative

as a “diary” Johnson reinforces the autobiographical nature of

the project, while the format of a personally guided tour led

by the artist allows Johnson to act as the mediator of the site’s

history and significance. Johnson’s chatty and informal guided

tour, however, is certainly not innocent, due to the inherently

high level of control involved in the interpretation of a site,

including the paths, destinations and duration of a visitors’

stay.12 Similarly, narratives can restrict the visitor’s access to

direct and uncensored knowledge of the subject. By situating

the Glass House within an autobiographical framework,

Johnson suggests that he alone has access to the “truth” ofhis own sources of inspiration and intentions, and that he



alone can accurately relate his own history.

In fact, Johnson makes a similar claim in an

the Museum of Modern Art’s Terence Riley, in which Riley’s

attempt to correct the historical record concerning the genesis

of Johnson’s and Henry-Russell Hitchcock’s canonical

“International Style” MoMA exhibition of 1932. In his article

Riley wrote:

Previously unexamined correspondence shows that

Hitchcock and Johnson conceived the International

Style project first as a book and some time later asan exhibition, despite their respective recollections to

the contrary. These and other issues surrounding the

chronology of the exhibition’s inception and planning…

seem to have slipped, not surprisingly, from the

memories of those involved.13

To which Johnson, in a foreword to Riley’s piece, nevertheless

maintained that:

Since I am the only living member of the triumvirate[of Barr, Hitchcock and Johnson], my memory should



be the determining factor in any discussion of the

revival of the show … Terence Riley, almost 50 years

my junior has supplanted in this document my memories

as the ‘true’ story of the early days at the

Museum.14

In fact, Johnson’s continual re-framing of history is evident in

the numerous forewords, afterwords, introductions, and postscripts

he has authored, underscoring his desire to cast the

historical record in accordance with his own perceptions, as

well as for his own ends. In what might constitute a partial

explanation, Johnson has noted that history is the product of

the “victors.”15

Despite his attention to the propagandistic aspects of hisefforts, Johnson never ignored the importance of the actual

physical artifact; for Johnson painstakingly maintained his

Glass House, including all its contents, according to its original

appearance. In fact, it can be argued that the house has

already been “preserved,” essentially functioning as a permanent

exhibition since its completion in 1949, when its carefully

designed interior was situated within its transparent glass display

case and thereafter meticulously maintained in situ. Thus

Johnson, as “curator” of this permanent “exhibition,” has created

a work that seamlessly incorporates both the house and

its occupant within the context of a single visual display, one

that serves to frame both the subject and object simultaneously.

The house thus showcases Johnson’s mastery of the art

of display even as it functions as a vehicle for the production

of a carefully manufactured, and tightly controlled, personal

and public identity.

The imposition of an autobiographical frame of reference

has another problematic consequence, specifically in Johnson’s

claim of authority based on his personal memory. Indeed, historian

Eric Hobsbawm has cited the general unreliability of

personal memory, particularly the general bias towards selective

and constantly shifting memories inherent to oral histories.

17 While outside sources might be able to verify historical

information, “The crucial problem,” Hobsbawn argues, “is toknow what we can believe when there is nothing to check it



against.”18 In other words, in cases where no corroborating

evidence exists, how do we determine when memory has, in

fact, become supplanted by myth?

Similarly, even when we detect that myth has overtaken

fact we are unable, in most cases, to determine its origins, for

this information remains inaccessible to the outside historian,

its sources located within the human mind rather than in

archival documents. Thus Johnson’s “gift” raises critical questions

regarding the extent to which Johnson, as author/donor,

should be the one providing the interpretive framework for the

future narrative. The situation also raises the question of autobiographical

narratives as interpretive strategies, and compels

us to consider how the Trust might attempt a re-interpretationin which the autobiographical subject is not the only, or even

the primary, source for the construction of a new critical

framework.

The Trust can, of course, consult other sources in gathering

their material, and almost certainly will assemble a panel

of experts to guide them in their construction of any future

narrative. Again, however, the Glass House poses a particular

dilemma, for the group of individuals generally regarded as

among the most knowledgeable about Johnson and his career

are the same individuals who are themselves most personally

and professionally connected, and even indebted, to him; a



group Johnson has come to refer to as his “kids,” including

such luminaries as Peter Eisenman, Robert Stern, and Frank

Gehry. Thus, while these individuals possess an undeniable

wealth of information and insight that would be invaluable to

any interpretive effort, objectivity would be difficult since they

themselves are inextricably bound up with Johnson’s legacy. In

addition, since both Eisenman and Stern have already published

their own interpretations of the house it is unlikely that

they would significantly alter their earlier contributions, or reinterpret

the site in a radically different way. In fact, asking

them to do so would in essence be asking them to re-interpret

their own critical history.

Perhaps most troubling, however, is what Johnson’s existingframework would omit were it to be adopted as the scaffolding

for future interpretations. It needs to be recognized

that Johnson has constructed his narrative from the materials

on visual display, thus creating an “autobiography” that officially

begins in 1949 with the construction of the Glass House

and ends in 1986 with the completion of the Visitor’s Center

(Figure 3), the two structures providing bookends for

Johnson’s narrative. Yet by doing so, Johnson has managed to

exclude important portions of his life, initiating his narrative at

the age of 43, and thereby conveniently editing out some of

the most controversial and, for Johnson, undoubtedly the

most uncomfortable aspects of his personal history. For

instance, while the Glass House might be said to recall

Johnson’s early promotion of the International Style and the

designs of Mies, and thus predate his career as an architect,

nowhere does Johnson’s current interpretation of the GlassHouse make reference to the period between 1934 and 1940,

when Johnson left his influential position as Director of the

Department of Architecture and Design at MoMA in order to

pursue a disastrous career in right-wing politics while publicly

supporting the Fascists in Germany.21

The consequences of these actions, however, contributed

to Johnson’s decision in 1940 to enter Harvard’s Graduate

School of Design in an attempt to resurrect his career and his



the other and even the director’s room is just a zone of

the ring, as visibile as the others are. Separations are

only up to three thousand wooden boxes which are at

disposal to be freely placed in the space.

The old building used to have a garden with three big

zelkowa trees. The new one keeps the trees. Not in the

playground, that is deliberately empty, but in the body of

the building. The structure is sospended for not damaging

the roots, the trees go through the classrooms

perforating the roof. Over the roof around the tree a

rope net saves children from falling down.



Wooden boxes for classroom separation

are placed in pile with children’s help, the

chaos of the communicating rooms is

an exercise for their power of concentration,

the fountains are the places where

children assemble for playing, the lights

are suspended bulbs, each to be lighten

up by pulling a lace, the roof edge is a

place where to seat hanging the feet

beyond the railing, skylights are cubs to

be climbed and the whole roof ring is a

track where to run for many rounds. If

kindergarten educational method is tomultiply the experiences, this is its direct

translation into arcitecture. And Fuji

Kindergarten more generally reflects the

objectives of Tezuka architecture, where

people come first

After studying in Englad for a while and

practising in Richard Rogers office,

it’s about ten years that Tezuka work

in Tokyo, revising in the light of their

european experience the japanese

tradition. In a place where architecture

temporariness is the rule, they build for

permanence and they search for beauty

in the sense of things. Their research

lies rather in extracting the meaning from

architectural elements, making it evident,

than in the form. Architecture works

with people, and if people cannot catch

its meaning, it fails its mission. At the

kindergarten vernissage five hundreds

pupils sitting on the roof where interpreting

the meaning of tis architecture.

-Fabrizia Ippolito

Freedom of Space - A STUDY

Documents

Transcript of Freedom of Space - A STUDY