Double Exposure. Lilly and Mies exhibit by Lukas Jusas

This page intentionally left blank

Double Exposure. Lilly and Mies Exhibit TUM Architecture Faculty Summersemester 2021 Master seminar “Mies Exhibits. Exhibiting Mies.” Prof. Dr. Andres Lepik and Sina Brückner-Amin M.A., Clara Pollak M.A., Dr. Laura Martinez de Guereñu 16.07.2021 presented in Neue Nationalgalerie, Berlin 52.5069515694538, 13.367666405177136

Thanks to Prof. Dr. Andres Lepik (TU Munich, History of Architecture and Curatorial Practice), Clara Teresa Pollak, Laura Martínez de Guereñu and Sina Brückner-Amin making the exhibition “Double Exposure. Lilly and Mies Exhibit” possible. They enabled us to follow our individual interests and encouraged us to go deeper into our topics. Sharpening our critical minds, we learned to think twice and never take anything for granted. We very much appreciated the well organised seminar „Mies Exhibits“ and the - long uncertain but finally permitted - excursion to Berlin where we had the possibility to be guided through the Neue Nationalgalerie Berlin.

- Exhibition curatorial statement

- Exhibition design

- Design materiality

- Exhibition chapters

- Space organisation

01. Man/woman power in architecture. Spatial dialogue between Lilly & Mies Lukas Jusas

02. The factor “Lilly Reich” Teresa Kunkel

03. Reflecting the Reflection. The missing part of Mies’ Glass Zhiwei Liu

04. Between the Visionary and the Utopian Matilde Aleixo

05. The heritage of the collage Kilian Paterson

06. The chair to exhibit Carolina de Moura

07. Exhibited - existed. The relations between Mies’s exhibition and built Architecture Maja Sket

08. Unintentional exhibition of Mies. Case study of vila tugendhat and exhhibitions Martin Bumbál

09. The dark side of Mies or what stays “unseen” Jeanine Boch

EXHIBITION STATEMENT The buildings by Mies van der Rohe have been, and still are, widely discussed, published and examined in the art and architectural world, whereas his exhibitions are rather unknown. “Double Exposure. Lilly and Mies Exhibit” uncovers the exhibition work of Mies van der Rohe and Lilly Reich from several new perspectives. The refurbishment of the Neue Nationalgalerie in Berlin, Mies’ last built work, was an impulse to take a closer look behind the intentionally constructed scenery, parallel to the real dismantling of the museum. His first displayed projects like „Glashochhaus“ or „Landhaus in Backstein“ put him in a row of early modern architects, together with le Corbusier and Walter Gropius. He broke with the traditional way of building by inventing spatial concepts based on new construction systems of glass and steel, making the name Mies van der Rohe known to a broad audience. His work was often seen as utopia - idealistic thoughts on how future building should look like. A group of architecture students from TU Munich explored the relationships and (dis)connections between Mies built works and his collaborative exhibition practice with Lilly Reich. Following up personal interests and sharpening the topics some relations between the ideas appear, others stay independent, forming a collage of perspectives. In the exhibition not only the well known idealistic views on Mies’ buildings are presented but a deeper insight into the essence of this architecture is offered. Some residential buildings might be seen, at least partial, as an exhibition of themselves. The accuracy of the separation between exhibition space and domestic building is questioned as his activity in both areas influence each other.

Collage of Lilly Reich and Mies van der Rohe

The fact that Mies van der Rohe’s exhibitions between 1926 “Glass Room” and 1934 “German People - German Work” were created in collaboration with the interior architect and designer Lilly Reich is rarely stated. „Double Exposure - Lilly and Mies Exhibit“ portrays her independent career beginning in 1911 at age 26, when she was commissioned for interior and furnishing for thirty-two rooms in the Youth Center, Berlin. From that on many orders for exhibition designs followed. On this base of knowledge the partnership with Mies was formed. Despite the key role Reich played in the design and organisation of their joint works, she went unnoticed in contracts and press releases. Many of the works are connected solely with Mies’ name, showing that the discourse about inequality and authorship in architecture is still relevant today. The critical approach in the seminar “Mies Exhibits. Exhibiting Mies.” by Professor Lepik led to a multi-layered exhibition. „Double Exposure - Lilly and Mies Exhibit“ showcases nine individual views on Mies’ exhibition work and the collaboration with Lilly Reich, raising essential questions. The Neue Nationalgalerie is half covered with a curtain made of algae leather, a recently developed natural material as an homage to Lilly’s and Mies’ openness to innovative materials. By introducing a human scale the museum loses its characteristic appearance. Enclosing the overhanging roof with the algae curtains creates a threshold space between the textile and the glass facade forming new perspectives on the exhibition as well as the building itself. Within the building the curtains zone the space and guide visitors without creating clear boundaries.

EXHIBITION DESIGN

The exhibition concept was designed with regard to its content as well as to the building itself. With the curtains, never reaching the floor a new imagery of the gallery builds already from the outside. The perception of the gallery changes already from the outside. The threshold space between the outside curtain and the inside of the gallery makes a smooth transition between outside and inside.

Exhibition proposal for Neue Nationalgalerie

Once in a gallery, curtains introduce a new height level and create a human scale. The vast space gives a feeling of cheerfulness, festivity and states a juxtaposition to the sternness of the gallery. The element of the curtain draws a parallel to Lilly Reich and her work.

DESIGN MATERIALITY

With desire to retain a touch of warmth and softness, we redefine the meaning and use of the curtain. Rethinking the issue of the textile fabric in today’s overconsumption society, we propose a contemporary alternative to he common fabrics. The progressive material is made with Agar, a strongly gelatinous hydrocolloid extracted from several species of red algae. This biopolymer can be produced in different shades and dyed with natural pigments. It needs little resources and energy for its production. Curtains, that are made from red algae biopolymer will define the exhibition space and will guide one through. Where larger scale exhibits are placed curtains change in height, that gives a hint of individual chapters. The exhibition contains various media, from physical objects, images to projections and installations, that ask one to interact.

Picture of progressive natural biopolymer

EXHIBITION CHAPTERS

The exhibition touches on three main topics. To enter the world of Mies and his way of thinking a closer look at the materials and modes he used to represent his ideas in exhibitions is necessary. Space-filling images are arranged sculpturally, together with the purposefully positioned furniture they form the imagined collage through which the visitor moves like a substitute for the figurative sculpture. The radical way of thinking in walkable collages still resonates until today. These design concepts influenced his residential works. Leading to the connection between Mies’ realised works and his exhibition work, as the former not only fulfil the ostensible purpose of living, but also have a strong representative character. Rarely considered so far is the fact that Mies’ works are not his alone, but often were inspired also by his assistants and students. The factor “Lilly Reich”, with her unique position as a successful self-employed woman in the early 20th century and her impact on Mies forms a major aspect of the exhibition. On the following pages the topics will be introduced individually, in text, images and sketches.

SPACE ORGANISATION

02 05

01. Man/woman power in architecture. Spatial dialogue between Lilly & Mies Lukas Jusas 02. The factor “Lilly Reich” Teresa Kunkel 03. Reflecting the Reflection. The missing part of Mies’ Glass Zhiwei Liu 04. Between the Visionary and the Utopian Matilde Aleixo 05. The heritage of the collage Kilian Paterson

06. The chair to exhibit Carolina de Moura 07. Exhibited - existed. The relations between Mies’s exhibition and built Architecture Maja Sket 08. Unintentional exhibition of Mies Martin Bumbál 09. The dark side of Mies or what stays “unseen” Jeanine Boch

MAN/WOMAN POWER IN ARCHITECTURE. SPATIAL DIALOGUE BETWEEN LILLY AND MIES Till nowadays inequality between men and women and stereotypes about those two genders are worth and important topics for a deeper discussion. One may notice that collaborative projects of Lilly Reich and Mies van der Rohe were not perceived equally and the credits were mostly given to Mies. Some collaborative / joint designs were – until recently - not even mentioning the name of Lilly Reich. In the book “Women architects in the modern movement” spanish architect Carmen Espegel points out that in early 20th century society’s view towards female architects / designers, role was often overlooked. [1] Considering the latest research, it seems, that also in Mies van der Rohe’s oeuvre this situation can be found: In many exhibition designs, Lilly Reich was not considered as an equal colleague. Although, while cooperating both profited and learned through each other. In comparison to their individual work, their collaborative work between 1926 and 1934 show some clear features that can be assigned to either Mies or Lilly. For example, the exhibition design of some joint exhibitions - “From Fiber to Textile”, “Fashion Craft”, “Velvet and Silk Café” - clearly shows Lilly Reich’s sensitive - emotional approach through soft materiality. [2] In comparison, Mies‘ buildings and exhibitions often have a lack of softness in interior: “To me, structure is something like logic. It is the best way to do things and to express them. I am very skeptical about emotional expressions. I don’t trust them, and I don’t think they will last for long.”[3] Once they collaborated, they complemented each other’s work and reached a more sophisticated result. This rises following question: Who took the credits at the end? One may think that a project created in collaboration not just only should, but must be copyrighted equally.

“Lilly Reich’s interiors keep order and calm because the given grid is strict, and the cosiness is maintained through textiles.“[4] “The Dwelling of Our Time”. Berlin 1931

“Form is not the goal but the result of our work” Lilly Reich

01 Process of collaboration is interactive. It is always changing. It is dynamic. It is unpredictable. This installation will simulate process of collaboration and give a WOW moment experience. Gigantic swings may help you to understand the gorgeous gallery space through a spatial experience. It will let one free from “passive” spectator experience giving a space to interact, to observe and also to question. Once two persons are swinging, one of them has greater power and weight than other. Depending how the performer wants to collaborate – swings can stand still in balance or always keep changing. Communication and collaboration between two is necessary to establish balance. This work illustrates that the process of swinging is the process of collaboration.

“Lilly Reich always gives the room a strict order that is enlivened by bright colors. Black wooden furniture is brightened up with blue and orange.”[5] “The Dwelling of Our Time”. Berlin 1931

“I see performance and architecture as intrinsically connected. It’s not about doing something radical, it’s about helping to change people’s perspectives on how things occur in the everyday.” [6] Alex Schweder

THE FACTOR “LILLY REICH”

The work of Mies van der Rohe continues to be recognised as a permanent manifestation of his sole authorship. However, throughout his career he has always been able to draw on a system of assistants, collaborators and students - mostly male - whose ideas influenced his thoughts and were incorporated into his work. Also his exhibition design can’t be attributed solely to him. All exhibitions Mies van der Rohe realised between 1926 and 1934 were designed and organised in cooperation with Lilly Reich. She is the special case of a woman whose creative potential Mies knew how to use very cleverly. Despite clear evidence about Reich’s participation in the exhibitions and her key role in the design process, she is rarely mentioned as an equal colleague of Mies van der Rohe. [1] Lilly Reich’s display of exhibition materials as exhibits and constructive elements at the same time, as well as the depiction of the materials in their entirety, are reflected in the joint works. The German Building Exhibition in Berlin 1931 can be named here as a famous example in this regard. Her use of fabrics formed a counterpart with Mies’ preferred materials metal and glass. The installation of floor-to-ceiling glass elements and fabric panels created a fusion between exhibition object and exhibition architecture. The exhibitions „Glasraum“ (Glass Room) along with „Café Samt und Seide“ (Café Velvet and Silk) are regarded as pioneers for the German Pavilion at the 1929 World’s Fair in Barcelona. Together Reich and Mies understood how to radically depict the modernity of the 20th century in the exhibition halls of the 19th century. [2]

Who knows how the path to a new form will be found? Lilly Reich

In order to present the joint exhibition work from today’s perspective, a reinterpretation of their joint work will be exhibited. For this, the Neue Nationalgalerie serves as an exhibition hall for the material of the next century - “Fungal Mycelium“ - the root structure of mushrooms. The built aesthetic is determined by the hard, solid steel construction and the surrounding straight glass walls. In contrast, similar to Lilly Reich’s work with flowing soft fabrics, objects made from mushroom cultures are installed in the industrial gallery to complement the hall with an organic material.

For whom does this industry labor? Lilly Reich

To display the organic material in its entirety, a second layer of glass will be applied to the façade of Neue Nationalgalerie. In the resulting interstice, fungal mycelium transforms plant residues from agriculture into a compact new material over the course of the exhibition, showcasing the organic production work. [3] The abilities of fungal mycelium are inconspicuous, similar to the undervalued influence Lilly Reich had on Mies. It is an attempt to incorporate Lilly Reich’s design concept into Mies van der Rohe’s Neue Nationalgalerie in order to emphasise her substantial impact in their joint works. It will be essential that the spirit of the woman comes to the fore: the spirit of she who wants to be what she is — and does not want to appear as what she is not. Lilly Reich

REFLECTING THE REFLECTION THE MISSING PART OF MIES’ GLASS Glass, as an core material, plays an important role in modern architecture. From the beginning of 20 century, facing the rapid change of the society, most architects had tried to develop a new architecture from this intriguing material. Due to technical limitations and economic considerations, even nowadays reflection still happens on most buildings' facade. But in the exhibition "Große Berliner Kunstausstellung" in 1921, Mies van der Rohe was showing a photomontage of his Friedrichstrasse skyscraper project, in which there was almost none reflection on the facade. At the same time, in a statement on the Friedrichstrasse project, Mies had written: "My experiments with a glass model helped me along the way and I soon recognised that by employing glass, it is not an effect of light and shadow one wants to achieve but a rich interplay of light reflections."[1] Seems the photomontage and the statement were not consistent. It raises a question that, how was Mies' attitude to the materialtiy of glass? Most people learned about Mies from certain amount of photos. It's important to break the solid impressions given by these media. In this section of the exhibition, several groups of comparison between old and new images of three projects will be exhibited, Friedrichstrasse skyscraper, "Glasraum" in "Werkbundausstellung Stuttgart" and Barcelona Pavillion. There is a chance for us to look back at Mies and Lilly's works in 1920s again from a slightly different angle, with the keyword of "reflection".

Reflection or non-Reflection?

1921

2021

"My experiments with a glass model helped me along the way and I soon recognized that by employing glass, it is not an effect of light and shadow one wants to achieve but a rich interplay of light reflections."[1]

"It was no coincidence that Mies and Reich chose the home interior as the place to exhibit glass as a material. The glass wall, with minimal profiles, was ideally capable of giving form to the spatial and material ideas about the new style of living."[2]

Robert Venturi described the pavillion as a "montage" of different parts and of materials of different linguistic qualities, as a "labyrinth of signs".[3]

How was Mies' attitude to the materiality of glass? Reflection? Transmittance? Color?

BETWEEN THE VISIONARY AND THE UTOPIAN

Mies van der Rohe made an impact in the architect community of his time with the Friedrichstrasse Skyscraper Project in 1921. This project represented the beginning of a series of designs that was to include the Glass Skyscraper, the Concrete Country House and the Brick Country House. They were the first exhibit projects of Mies Van der Rohe and the origin of both his avant-garde career and international success. But what seems to be a normal skyscraper project today, was visionary at this time. Some considered it to be an “utopian joke” [1] and others celebrated his visionary ideas as “going beyond times” and being the “cathedral of the future” [2]. In this chapter the concept of Utopia is explored, by analysing the production of Utopian ideas of the 20th century and comparing it with the Visionary work of Mies Van der Rohe. Although the high-rise buildings were firstly developed in the United States in the end of the 19th century, this movement only arrived to Europe in the 1920’s with the monumental and utopian German skyscrapers designs and with the radical and innovative designs of some European architects in the Chicago Tribune Tower competition. The innovation brought by Mies’ visionary works was crucial for the development of architecture. The Lever House is one example, since it is considered to be the built version of the early modernist Utopias and Mies’s glass skyscrapers. Mies’ influence can also be seen in utopian designs of cities and high-rise buildings developed by Frank Lloyd Wright, like the One Mile Skyscraper.

But the focus of searching for the new and progressive has been lost, since the skyscrapers built nowadays only aim to demonstrate the economic power and superiority of those who commission them, without questioning the true necessity of these high buildings and their sustainability. By reflecting on the architecture that was designed and built after Mies, it’s possible to understand that the creation of Utopian and Visionary ideas is still relevant for today, since not only it raises new concerns and questions what we now see as rules but it has always been a way of developing and pushing architecture forward towards a better design.

THE HERITAGE OF THE COLLAGE

Mies’s representations of ideas in collages, as well as his built work, are characterized by layered spaces. His exhibition designs could be seen as a bridge between the built and the representation, offering a space for experimenting in reality, but without its limitations. Via the collage Mies reflected on the future representation of works of art and the bourgeoise life in the modern city. When Mies started to design exhibitions the style of his collages changed. Contrary to the avantgardes cubist or dada collages - which usually contained cutouts from popular illustrated press, newspaper headlines and materials of everyday life - Mies cuts out carefully selected works of modern art and self treated, coloured pieces of paper. These objects were placed in his own perspectival, ghost like, black and white drawings, which questioned the architectonic space and stood in direct opposition to the avant-gardes collages, which celebrated the collapse of space through dissonance. At the same moment Mies architecture changed too. Window openings in walls were replaced by ambiguous planes of glass, rectangular planes of material or shiny chrome columns, reaching from floor to ceiling. All elements seem to have lost their need for a constructive joint and where introduced in that specific way for the first time inside the barcelona pavillion. The collage way of thinking, representing and making space can be seen as a heritage by Mies, which is echoing in a lot of contemporary architectures of today.

bridge between the built and the representation

THE CHAIR TO EXHIBIT

First of all, Mies van der Rohe was an architect, that, together with Lilly Reich, designed architecture but also the furniture suitable for it. Their exhibitions and constructed projects are endowed with a great deal of body spatial experience. Scale, proportions, and position are as important as the pieces displayed. This experience can be perceived in different ways; however, it is fundamental to understand how and when the visitor takes part on it. The chair is the moment where our bodies take part in architecture and so their position in space is essential. Its positioning conditions the way that the exhibition is perceived since it offers a place to seat, to look, to reflect and to be looked. To understand its role, it is crucial to understand it not only for its physical appearance but also for the intellectual significance that it represents. These designs reflected the famous phrase by Mies —”the methods of our time.” and were clearly perceived as so. For instance, in an exhibition by the Werkbund in Paris, in 1930, where Mies’s - and Breuer’s - tubular steel chairs hung side by side from floor to ceiling across a wall, was acclaimed in the press as presenting the “skeleton of a new life.”[1] However, as Ludwig Glaeser stated, at a certain point, “[Mies] saw no need to involve himself again in the design of furniture, as he regarded the existing pieces as definitive statements which he felt would serve all purposes in his future work.”[2]. Clearly, the chairs were not only statements of Mies’ design but also large sources of income, which also justify in part their central position in the exhibitions. The questions lay in where they are in the exhibitions, which chairs were chosen and why were they chosen.

A series of carefully chosen photos and original chairs aim to establish the central role of Mies and Lily Reich’s designs in the exhibitions but also to challenged it. Nonetheless, the iconic chairs have been removed from the original photographs. These will be replaced with others, that contrary luxurious and elitist character from the Barcelona Chair, are representative of sense of banality and otherness.

“It was in the Pavilion that the king and queen of Spain took part in the Exposition’s opening ceremony. In this context the Barcelona Chair could not be just a chair – it had to be a monumental object as well, but a monumental object which would not block the special flow of the building.” Mies van der Rohe [3]

In the other hand, the original chairs will be placed physically in the exhibition, however, they cannot be found in their normal central and monumental position. Instead, the famous monobloc plastic chair will be placed in the centre of exhibition, looking at the pieces, while, far from the spotlight, next to the glass of Neue Nationalgallarie, some of Mies and Lilly’s finest design chairs will be placed together with the ones present in the collages, forming a space away from the exhibition, where the impression of monumentality is taken away and everyone is welcome to seat. Both the collages and the exhibited chairs aim to question how much a space is affected by their furniture and how the display of these furniture also affects our perception of it. Is the experience of Barcelona Pavilion the same without the famous Barcelona Chair? Are the chairs perceived as iconic design pieces when mixed with ordinary objects instead of being monumentally placed? 36

“A chair is a very difficult object. A skyscraper is almost easier. That is why Chippendale is famous.” Mies van der Rohe [4]

06 “For you I have installed a bench next to the pool outside.” Mies van der Rohe [5]

EXHIBITED - EXISTED THE RELATIONS BETWEEN MIES’S EXHIBITION AND BUILT ARCHITECTURE The importance of Mies’s exhibition practice was - and still is largerly underestimated in comparison to his architectural and built work. In addition, little attention was given to the influence of exhibition architecture on his built architecture. The act of displaying his ideas in exhibitions was the major way to enforce his pioneering ideas and concepts. For Mies exhibitions were tool for expressing his vision of architecture. Moreover it reveals his perception of the role of the architect and his view on the architecture itself.“Architecture should be looked at” clearly shows his attitude towards the design of architecture. But how did his »pure« and idealised exhibition designs influence his built work? And can a parallel be drawn from his approach of designing architecture for exhibitions and its approach of designing commissioned architecture? In most of his exhibitions as well as in his built works progressive building concepts can be seen. Already in his early exhibition work of Weissenhof Estate (1927) the experimental and pioneering approach can be seen in the construction, organization of space and neglect of the engineering capabilities of the time. Similar is also strongly expressed in The New National Gallery of Berlin (1968) in its clear, pure forms and proportions. In Farnsworth House (1957) the use of columns as load-bearing elements frees the façade from this function. The concept about the flow of space and the movement of the body throughout the building is implemented in the exhibition works The Experimental House (exhibition The Dwelling of Our Time, 1931) and German Pavilion (Barcelona world exhibition, 1929).

“Architecture should be looked at.” Mies van der Rohe

Mies’s Generator Feeling inventive? EXPERIMENTAL DEPARTMENT

Want to realize a project? BUILDING DEPARTMENT

Your Miesian design New Design

Layout

Typology RESIDENTIAL

Library Collection

PUBLIC

House 50x50 Museum for Schweifurt New National QallerC ...

Shape

arcelona Payilio¢ Experimental Hose House Tugendhat ... Afrikanische Strasse Housing eissenho Lake Shore Diye Appartment ...

Elements

Illionis Institute acardi Offce uildinn Farnsworth House ... DESIGN ! Put to the collection

SAVE

Min. 40% glas surfaces Max. 3 doors / 100m2 inside-outside lfow of space

REALIZE

Choose location Little adaptatio¢ to the context Name it ! - 15% of glass + 30% of doors

READú öù BUILD! 3D prin

t Users create the “exhibition”

Although Mies tried to apply most of his radical moves in built projects, he also sometimes had to comply with building law, regulations and social structure. The Afrikanische Straße (1927) in Berlin is an example of this. In other commissioned projects like Villa Tugendhat (1930) and Farnsworth House (1957) he had all freedom in designing, bringing his ideal concepts to reality. The exhibition is the response to the research and analyses about the relationships and (dis) connections between Mies’s exhibition practice and his built works. Through comparing his exhibition works and built architecture it shows parallels and differences between them. After classifying them based on characteristics of works, patterns in Mies’s designs can be seen.

Generate Design

The exhibition tries to summarize the complexity of Mies’s approach to architectural practice.

Exhibit

Rethinking Mies’s architecture to provoke a critical thought and a reflection on his practice.

The outcome is an ironic “programme” It tries to summarize the complexity of Mies’s approach to architectural practice. Visitors can make their own (Miesian) design and create a collection of newly generated “Miesian” works. With a participatory touch, it wants the visitor to understand Mies’s concepts and at the same time questions the uniqueness and perfection of his projects. Finally it wants to provoke a critical thought and a reflection about Mies’s architecture.

UNINTENTIONAL EXHIBITION OF MIES. CASE STUDY OF VILA TUGENDHAT AND EXHHIBITIONS Mies, apart from being an important architect of 20th century, was also the author and co-author of a number of exhibitions. In this part of our project, we examine the unintended exhibition of Mies - buildings, which primary function was not that of an exhibition. Villa Tugendhat was chosen as a case study and its relationship to exhibitions were examined.

The villa is presented using a model and each of the relationships to the exhibitions is presented in the form of a photo printed on a glass plate. Glass plates are arranged around the model so that it is possible to perceive the villa through the eyes of the exhibition.

Karel Teige claims that the villa as such came from the Barcelona pavilion from the 1929 International Exhibition and is not a real dwelling.[1] The villa had its own exhibition part: the social part, which was an exhibition of the status of its inhabitants.[2] Only a year and a half after its completion, the villa became the object of the Modern Architecture: International Exhibition in 1932 at MoMA, not only with its prominent position next to Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye, with which they formed the main objects of the exhibition, but even got on the cover of the exhibition catalogue.[3]

“...the house designed by Mies van der Rohe is not even a genuine villa but more or less irrational adaptation of his German Barcelona Pavilion transformed into a dwelling: all he did in this adaptation of his pavilion... is to add a toilet and a bathroom...” Karel Teige 1932

After the Second World War, the Tugendhats did not return to the villa and it became property of the socialist state. Just in the year 1992, the villa became an exhibition scenery for the signing of an agreement on the division of Czechoslovakia. Since 1994 is the villa open to the public and has become a venue for exhibitions. In the years 2010 - 2012, the villa undergoes another major reconstruction, where it reaches its final stage of development in relation to exhibitions and becomes, in addition to a place for exhibitions, also an exhibition of itself. It is therefore a perfect exhibition of architecture, where it is possible to perceive the building and all of its context in situ. In the times of coronavirus pandemic, our homes become an exhibition of our life in matter of seconds. How would Mies take this aspect into account when designing Villa Tugendhat?

Villa Tugendhat as to be seen through perspectives of exhibitions

THE DARK SIDE OF MIES OR WHAT STAYS “UNSEEN” Architecture and artwork show familiarities. Both have individual expectations towards the artistic value. Buildings shape the perceivable environment and always stand in relation with the surrounding. But also host different types of use within the spatial concept and, in order to meet the requirements of the time, include building technology. Ludwig Mies van der Rohes work is characterised by undisturbed spaces and surfaces free from visible elements of installation and construction. The bright side, those carefully arranged spaces still fascinate visitors until today, documented by countless photographs. This diverts from what stays behind the surfaces. What Mies put so much effort in keeping out of sight now becomes the center of attention.

Driven by the unseen the concept of visibility is inverted on illustrative base of one of the most extreme examples for the separation of open and enclosed space, the Farnsworth House, in Plano, Illinois. Issues arise, like extreme inner temperatures throughout different seasons or exposure of the inhabitant are caused by the same qualities, which make the building so exceptional. Making it an architectural icon, challenging in use for permanent living.

My display is contrary to stylistic photographs. A mirrored box is placed in the exhibition space, while the rest of the building is reduced to outlines on the floor. This channels the attention to what I called dark side. The box first evades the view, but once entered it exposes the heart. The normally hidden, but essential installations are highlighted. Only both sides together make the building understandable as one and indicate the endeavour it took, to achieve its clarity.

The relation of the Farnsworth House and the exhibition space New National Gallery Berlin lie obviously in open spaces and transparent character. But, just like in the former example, technology, necessary offices and other secondary uses have to be concentrated out of focus, to achieve free spaces and still be functional. With this new perspective the perception of the buildings changes.

exhibiting the unexhibited

Seeing the world through Mies’ eyes.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CHAPTER 1: Man/woman power in architecture. Spatial dialogue between Lilly & Mies

CHAPTER 6: The chair to exhibit

[1] Carmen Espegel, "Women architects in the modern movement", Lilly Reich: Beginnings in the Werkbund, (Taylor and Francis,2018), p.141 [2] McQuaid, Matilda, and Magdalena Droste. "Lilly Reich, designer and architect", (New York: Museum of Modern Art: Distributed by H.N. Abrams, 1996), p. 22 [3] Günther, Sonja, und Lilly Reich. "Lilly Reich, 1885-1947: Innenarchitektin, Designerin, Ausstellungsgestalterin", Die Arbeit, "(Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1988), p. 20-24 [4] Ibid, p. 28

[1] Ludwig Glaeser, “Ludwig Mies van der Rohe: Furniture and Furniture Drawings from the Design Collection and the Mies van der Rohe Archive“, 1977, The Museum of Modern Art, New York., p. 14 [2] Ibid, p. 14 [3] Mies, letter to I.D. Higgins, January 2, 1964; box 28, Papers of Ludwig Mies van der Rohe [4] Ludwig Mies van der Rohe in a February 1957 article in Time magazine about furniture designed by architects. [5] In Tegethoff, “The Pavilion Chair: the Furnishings of the 1929 German Pavilion in Barcelona and Their Significance,” in Mies and Modern Living: Interiors, Furniture, Photography, ed. Helmut Reuter and Birgit Schulte (Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz, 2008), p. 147

CHAPTER 2: The factor “Lilly Reich” [1] Günther, Sonja, und Lilly Reich. 1988. Lilly Reich, 1885-1947: Innenarchitektin, Designerin, Ausstellungsgestalterin. Stuttgart: Deutsche VerlagsAnstalt. [2] McQuaid, Matilda, und Magdalena Droste. 1996. Lilly Reich, designer and architect. New York: Museum of Modern Art : Distributed by H.N. Abrams. [3] Jones, Mitchell, Andreas Mautner, Stefano Luenco, Alexander Bismarck, and Sabu John. 2020. "Engineered Mycelium Composite Construction Materials from Fungal Biorefineries: A Critical Review". Materials & Design. doi: 10.1016/j.matdes.2019.108397 CHAPTER 3: Reflecting the Reflection. The missing part of Mies’ Glass [1] L. Mies van der Rohe, Hochhäuser. Frühlicht, 1/4, 1922, p. 124. Translation: F. Neumeyer, The Artless Word, Cambridge, 1991, p. 240. [2] Jurjen Zeinstra, “Glasraum Stuttgart”, Delft Architectural Studies on Housing, No. 11 (2015): Interiors on Display, p. 100-103. [3] Manfredo Tafuri and Francesco Dal Co, Modern Architecture, trans. Robert Erich Wolf (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1979), p. 155. CHAPTER 4: Between the Visionary and the Utopian [1] LEPIK, Andreas – “Skyscrapers”, 2004 [2] NEUMANN, Dietrich – “Three Early Designs by Mies van der Rohe”, 1992 [2] JOHNSON, Philip C – “Mies van der Rohe”, 1947, published by MoMA [3] NEUMEYER, Fritz – “The Artless World”, 1991, published by MIT [4] “Conversations with Mies van der Rohe”, 2008, edited by Moisés Puente CHAPTER 5: The heritage of the collage [1] Mies van der Rohe: Das Kunstlose Wort, Fritz Neumeyer, 2016, DOM publishers [2] Mies van der Rohe. Montage. Collage: Ausstellungskat. Ludwigforum, 2017, Walter König [3] Mies in Berlin: Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Die Berliner Jahre 1907 - 1938, 2002, Prestel

CHAPTER 7: Exhibited - existed. The relations between Mies’s exhibition and built Architecture [1] Bergdoll, Barry, „Walk-in Collage: Mies van der Rohe’s Design of his 1947 Exhibition at MoMA“ in Beitin, Andres, Mies van der Rohe. Collage. Monage. (London: Koenig Books, 2017): 172-187. [2] Eiermann, Wolf, „The Museum Design for Schweinfurt“ in Beitin, Andres, Mies van der .Rohe. Collage. Monage. (London: Koenig Books, 2017): 254 [3] Miller, Wallis, „Mies and Exhibitions“ in Riley, Terence und Bergdoll, Barry, Mies in Berlin. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Die Berliner Jahre 1907 – 1938. (New York, The Museum of Modern Art: 2001): 338 – 349 [4] Bergdoll, Barry, „The Nature of Mies’s Space“ in Riley, Terence und Bergdoll, Barry, Mies in Berlin. Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Die Berliner Jahre 1907 – 1938. (New York, The Museum of Modern Art: 2001): 66 – 106. CHAPTER 8: Unintentional exhibition of Mies [1] TEIGE, Karel. The minimum dwelling. Cambridge, Mass : MIT press, 2002. ISBN 9780262201360. [2] ČERNÁ, Iveta – ČERNOUŠKOVÁ, Dagmar – ŽIDLICKÝ, David et al. Mies v Brně: Vila Tugendhat. Brno : Muzeum města Brna, 2012. ISBN 978-80-86549-22-4. [3] BARR, Alfred H., – HITCHCOCK, Henry-Russell, – JOHNSON, Philip – MUMFORD, Lewis. Modern Architecture: International Exhibition [online]. Exhibition catalogue, 10 February – 23 March, 1932. Museum of Modern Art, New York. [accessed 3 June 2021]. Retrieved from: https://www.moma.org/ documents/moma_catalogue_2044_300061855.pdf CHAPTER 9: The dark side of Mies or what stays “unseen” [1] Columbia University, The Farnsworth House, online: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/gsapp/BT/GATEWAY/ FARNSWTH/farnswth.html (08.07.2021) [2] MoMA, online archive: https://www.moma.org/ search/?query=farnsworth+house (08.07.2021)