1 It Looks Like Architecture:ART 1600 – The Aesthetics of Architecture, Interiors, and Design Matthew Ziff, Associate Professor, Interior Architecture Area Chair Spring Semester 2017 It Looks Like Architecture: But it isn’t!

2 ART 1600, The Aesthetics of Architecture, Interiors and Design Ohio University Matthew Ziff, Associate Professor, M.Arch Buildings, interiors, furniture, industrial and consumer products exist in vastly greater numbers than ever before. The Anthropocene is here, and with it come an increasingly overwhelming array of choices: what to buy, what to build, what to create.

3 Human beings love to classify, categorize and rankHuman beings love to classify, categorize and rank. We love to evaluate and compare. We set up standards, criteria and qualities that are met or not met, that are long lasting or ephemeral. At least in the western world, ‘architecture’ and the smaller scale objects and products of the consumer realm that are ‘designed’ are evaluated and critiqued, with a possible result being called ‘good.’

4 Architecture & Design are Human Cultural CreationsWhat is ‘architecture’? What is ‘design’? Is it reasonable to talk about ‘good’ architecture vs. ‘bad’ architecture? ‘real’ architecture vs. ‘fake’ architecture? What might be meant by these terms and these characterizations?

5 Architecture & Design are Human Cultural CreationsAs human constructions, the definitions, elements, characteristics and interpretations of these terms are created by those people who dedicate their time, knowledge, energy and thought to these issues. Most of us encounter, experience, observe and use buildings every day. So what is ‘architecture’?

6 Nikolaus Pevsner requires that ‘aesthetic appeal’ be an element of a building’s character for it to be considered ‘architecture.’ “A bicycle shed is a building; Lincoln Cathedral is a piece of architecture. Nearly everything that encloses space on a scale sufficient for a human being to move in is a building; the term architecture applies only to buildings designed with a view to aesthetic appeal.” An Outline of European Architecture, by Nikolaus Pevsner (Harmondsworth: Penguin, [1942] 1957), p. 23.

7 If we accept Nikolaus Pevsner’s view, then not all buildings are ‘architecture.’He mentioned a bicycle shed. What about a large expensive house? He said ‘aesthetic appeal’ is the needed ingredient for a building to be considered ‘architecture.’ What is ‘aesthetic appeal’? This is a big and long discussion.

8 Within the realm of architects, designers, critics and historians of these disciplines, there are some criteria that are widely agreed upon that are used to evaluate whether or not a building achieves, reaches, is, ‘architecture’ or not. Aesthetic appeal is one. Another is the ‘contemporaneity’, or lack thereof, of the building in question.

9 I would like to propose that this is the fundamental, and keystone, criterion: contemporaneity.Now recognize, that my proposal of this as the main criterion is due to my Neo-Modernist sensibility. What is that? Well, that’s for another presentation. What does ‘contemporaneity’ mean? Contemporary is commonly defined as: Belonging to or occurring in the present. Conforming to modern or current ideas in style, fashion, design, etc. Something that is contemporary

10 A building, or a product, such as a piece of furniture or a toaster oven, should reflect, take part in and represent the current moment, the issues and properties of today. If this condition is not met, I, along with a great many others interested in architecture and design, will say that the work in question is not legitimate as a work of design.

11 Taking this position to a bit of an extreme we could say that any work that does not meet this condition could be said to be ‘fake’.

12 Galbreath Chapel, Ohio University Athens, Ohio, 1957

13 My own experience of this building:I came to Ohio University in 1998, as a newly hired Assistant Professor in the Interior Design program. I took some time to walk around the beautiful campus and become familiar with the overall layout of the campus, the landscape, and the buildings.

14 I looked at Cutler Hall, Wilson Hall, and McGuffey Hall, on the College Green, I was taken with the authentic qualities of these early 1800’s buildings. They were nice examples of Georgian architecture of this time in the early United States. Brick bearing wall construction, small windows, pitched roof to shed snow.

15 Then I walked over to the Galbreath ChapelThen I walked over to the Galbreath Chapel. I looked at it and thought about how much personality it expressed, and how different it was from Cutler Hall. I imagined that it was designed and built a bit later than Cutler Hall. I have not been able to find a reference for the 1956 architect of this building. When I saw the stone plaque announcing the construction date as 1957 I felt totally disappointed, tricked and irritated. Fake!

16 When I worked in architectural practice in Philadelphia, my architect friends and I used to say that most of the work we did in the office was ‘building documentation’, not actual architecture. On rare occasions we got to work on projects that rose to the level of ‘bad architecture’. These projects had some merit as architecture, some effort was being made toward ‘aesthetic appeal’ (I could hear Nikolaus Pevsner in the distance) but it was not really successful in that attempt.

17 Very, very rarely, one of us, in one office or another, would be fortunate enough to actually work on a project that rose to the level of ‘architecture’. This was a very, very rare occurrence. The level above this was ‘good architecture’, which most of us never got to participate in. It is rare. It requires a good client, a good budget, a good contractor, and a good designer/architect.

18 Galbreath Chapel at Ohio University and the MIT Chapel at MIT University, in Boston, MA.This presentation is a somewhat unfair contrasting of two university chapel buildings. Why is it an unfair comparison? Because the back story, the pre-conditions, were not equivalent; the deck was stacked in favor of MIT, and at Ohio University an alternative was never considered. Nevertheless, let us proceed to compare these two small, university chapel buildings. First let’s look at them.

19 Galbreath Chapel, Ohio University Athens, Ohio, 1957

20 Galbreath Chapel, Ohio University Athens, Ohio, 1957

21 Galbreath Chapel interior

22 Galbreath Chapel interior

23 Galbreath Chapel under construction in 1957 Notice the steel structural framework

24 Galbreath Chapel, Ohio University Athens, OhioBuilt in 1957, the Modern Colonial Revival chapel has an unusual shape that was imposed by its location on the green. The spire, topped with a brass weather vane, is modeled after that of the portico of Nash's All Souls Church in London. This is the official university description of the chapel.

25

26 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: http://www

27 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero SaarinenEero Saarinen is one of the most respected architects of the 20th Century, often regarded as a master of his craft.  Known for his dynamic and fluid forms, his design for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s chapel takes on a different typology than his previous works.  Completed in 1955, the MIT Chapel is a simple cylindrical volume that has a complex and mystical quality within.  Saarinen’s simple design is overshadowed by the interior form and light that were meant to awaken spirituality in the visitor.

28 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero SaarinenThe non-denominational chapel is intended to be more than just a religious building, rather it’s meant to be a place of solitude and escape that induces a process of reflections.  Located at the heart of MITs campus, the chapel’s cylindrical form breaks the rigidity of the campus’s orthogonal grid.

29 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero SaarinenUpon approaching the chapel, one encounters a shallow concrete moat that surrounds the chapel that seeps into the interior around a series of low arches that provide the structure for the chapel.  Once inside, the visitor is transported to a completely unexpected interior space that is unknown from the exterior façade.  The interior is inundated with a high level of detail and atmospheric qualities that are enhanced by filtered natural light.

30 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen: under construction

31 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen: Floor Plan & Vertical Section drawings

32 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: Copyright © Liao Yusheng.

33 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: Copyright © Liao Yusheng.

34 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: Copyright © Liao Yusheng.

35 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: Copyright © Liao Yusheng.

36 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen sculpture by Harry Bertoia

37 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero Saarinen Photography: Copyright © Liao Yusheng.

38 MIT Chapel, 1955 designed by Eero SaarinenThe MIT Chapel (dedicated 1955) is a non-denominational chapel designed by noted architect Eero Saarinen. Located on the campus of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts, next to Kresge Auditorium and Kresge Oval, which Saarinen also designed. The Chapel is often noted as a successful example of mid-Century modern architecture in the US. Saarinen also designed the landscaping surrounding all three. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIT_Chapel

39 MIT Chapel vs Galbreath ChapelHow do these two chapel buildings compare? They were both built in the mid-1950’s, in eastern North America, on university campuses. They are both relatively small in size. Beyond that the comparisons quickly diverge.

40 Galbreath Chapel is built ‘in a style’: it was created, drawn up by an architect, to look Colonial. The official university descriptions of the chapel say that it is ‘Modern Colonial Revival.’ This description is jibberish: it doesn’t mean anything.

41 ‘Modern’ is the holy grail of contemporary western architecture and design.‘Modern’ means the rejection of what came before it, an embracing of technology and an expression of material and construction methods and systems. To call the design of a building ‘Modern Colonial Revival’ is to completely garble the meaning of any of those descriptive terms.

42 The MIT chapel was designed by Eero Saarinen, an internationally admired architect with an impressive portfolio of work. The MIT chapel is a building that employs contemporary architectural and design ideas, such as using the materials of the structure as ornament, and as finished surfaces.

43 Modernism was the driving cultural and technological force of the day in The world was effectively in the grip of Modern ideas and pursuits. Social change, technological change, economic change and cultural change was driving a new world order.

44 The MIT chapel expresses through its design a response to the contemporary condition of 1956: abstraction and pure form, simplicity of detail, emphasis upon material and structure and a play of light that celebrates the passing of time. Le Corbusier’s famous definition of architecture:

45 “Architecture is the masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light.Our eyes are made to see forms in light; light and shade reveal these forms; cubes, cones, spheres, cylinders or pyramids are the great primary forms which light reveals to advantage; the image of these is distinct and tangible within us without ambiguity. It is for this reason that these are beautiful forms, the most beautiful forms. Everybody is agreed to that, the child, the savage and the metaphysician.” Vers une architecture [Towards an Architecture] (1923) by Le Corbusier

46 The Galbreath Chapel ignores, side steps, retreats.It represents ideas that were significant in 1820. The conditions that existed in 1820 in the United States: slavery was in full force women could not vote no public education requirement for children machines and technology were just beginning to impact the production of goods and services.

47 The MIT chapel presents form, material and an experience that is connected to the milieu of 1956.The Galbreath Chapel presents those of 1820. The Galbreath Chapel does not take part in any of the modernist, 1956 era, gestures: the actual structure of the building is a steel framework, but that framework is completely hidden and is made to look as if the weight bearing is being done by the brick walls, which is a deception in Modernist terms. the form of the building is derivative from a long gone historic style.

48 In conclusion: The Galbreath Chapel is not architecture: it is a tourist attraction. The M.I.T chapel by Eero Saarinen is high level architecture.