Set design and architecture by Mia Modig

SET DESIGN AND ARCHITECTURE -Designing a room for the stage

Mia Modig Stage 4, Dip. Arch 2013 Mackintosh School of Architecture GSA 1

ABSTRACT

To celebrate the centennial of the Rite of Spring, the GSA, RCS and BBC have decided to do a collaborative production that will be mostly student driven, but with support and supervision of teachers. It started in October with an open, public presentation in the GFT (Glasgow Film Theatre) main auditorium. Presented there was the projects outlines and collaborators (BBC, GSA and RCS). A curator from the V&A museum gave a short lecture on the history of the ballet. Me and my fellow exchange student, Kristin Nedlich, went along to this presentation and both got exited. The project however was thought to big for forth year architecture students to carry out beside their usual workload. Kristin and I both combined the project with our dissertation, hence incorporating it into our coursework, and this got approved by the school. The written part of this dissertation is an investigation into the process of set design. After that follows a portfolio that document our process designing the set for Monad, the Rite of Spring reinterpretation. The performance is not until the 18th of May, a month and a half after the deadline for this dissertation. Since the discussion throughout this work is concerning the process itself, not presenting a finalised design for the set, should not be a problem.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1- INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background.....................................................................................................4 1.2 Statement of the problem................................................................................4 1.3 Purpose...........................................................................................................5 1.4 Research question...........................................................................................5 1.5 Methodology and limitations..........................................................................5 CHAPTER 2- COMPONENTS OF SET DESIGN 2.1 Introduction.....................................................................................................7 2.2 Sight-lines.......................................................................................................7 2.3 Physical Components....................................................................................13 2.4 Combining components with forced perspective..........................................19 2.5 Movement- choreography and blocking.......................................................22 2.6 Time representation.......................................................................................28 2.7 Shifting the set...............................................................................................31 CHAPTER 3- THE DESIGNER 3.1 Introduction...................................................................................................36 3.2 The role of the designer................................................................................36 3.3 Design process..............................................................................................38 3.4 The tools of the designer...............................................................................42 CHAPTER 4- CONCLUSIONS 4.1 Introduction...................................................................................................45 4.2 Analysis.........................................................................................................45 4.3 Conclusions...................................................................................................47 4.4 Implications and future research..................................................................48 PORTFOLIO.......................................................................................................49 BIBLIOGRAPHY...............................................................................................70

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Approaching the subject of set design I felt very exited and a little bit lost. Trying to do some research, I found interviews with designers as well as studies and interpretations of different sets. Both in set design and architecture there is a lot of literature, but in this literature the process of designing is often mentioned only briefly. Comparing two closely related, but yet separate fields the difference in the process itself seem, to me, hugely important. This process, is taught at different schools all over the globe, both in set design and architecture, but the comparison between the two has not been explored in literature to my knowledge. It might be an unconventional way to compare them, the more common themes tend to be analysis of certain sets in relation to architecture, or choosing a specific architectural theory and applying it to set design. While all of this was interesting to read about, it did not make it clear to me, what I needed to do, in order to approach the design of a set.

1.2 Statement of the problem While there is much literature on both set design and architecture there is a lack of interdisciplinary texts. In addition to this most literature concerning set design are either practical guides or interviews with designers. There is little literature that tries to theorize in this field. Architecture on the other hand is the opposite, while there are many theories out there, practical guides are rare. This complicates any comparison of the two fields in an academic way.

1.3 Purpose To bridge the gap in literature and investigate where the design processes of architecture and set design overlap. The purpose of this study is not to go in depth with any particular aspects, but to give a broad overview of the subject. The two disciplines are clearly connected and it is my opinion that more interdisciplinary research would benefit architects as well as set designers, and all those who are connected to the two.

1.4 Research question What is the difference in designing a set and designing architecture? This gives the following sub questions to be answered: What tools are used to design for the stage? What are the components of set design? Do these exist in architecture as well? If so how do they compare? What are the differences and similarities? Which questions are being emphasized throughout the design process?

1.5 Methodology and limitations Having established the research question, which will be the lens through which the material is being viewed, it is necessary to reflect upon how evidence is collected to support the arguments in this dissertation. This study does not look at project managing, but is limited to look at the creative processes of set design and comparing this to architecture. There are many ways in which to approach the subject, but the limitations in source material has led me to this particular one.

First I wanted to establish a background of how set design is created both in a practical manner as well as in terms of the design process. Having done this, I then collected material to reflect similarities and differences in relation to the architectural design process. To do this I have used secondary sources in form of books, containing practical guides and written interviews. The collected material contains both text and images.

The selection of the individual set designers has been made primarily due to available material. All designers design mainly for theatre although many have also designed for opera, movies, TV and even done costume design. The number of designers looked at is fairly small, due to restrictions in length of this dissertation, and it could be argued that this sample is not large enough to be seen as representational. The time frame for the texts are also limited, spanning from 1991-2007. Even so I think that the fact that many themes reoccur may point to that these are widely spread among set designers in general.

The selection of architectural texts and designs should not be seen as representational for all architecture but will rather be those that relate to the issues that have been brought up while researching set design. All of these themes could be investigated more deeply and have been argued and counter argued before within the architectural discourse. As stated previously the point of this research is, however, not to go into detail of those themes.

CHAPTER 2 COMPONENTS OF SET DESIGN

2.1 Introduction This chapter investigates what components are used in the creation of a set design. While floors, walls, ceilings, doors and windows might be a common thought on what parts are used to create a traditional room I here try to define the commonly used parts of a set.1 Some of these can be grouped together and they do not necessarily need to be addressed one by one. It is equally important to compare the composition of the parts and the way they interact as it is to review the parts themselves. I chose to divide them into the following categories; sight-lines, physical components, forced perspective, movement, time representation and shifting the set.

2.2 Sight-lines When constructing a design for the stage one must always keep in mind that the sight-lines are vital. It is a question of showing some things, while hiding others, in order to create an illusion. “When the artist works out the problems of good sight lines for the various positions in the auditorium, he considers not only how he may bring into view all that the audience should see but also how he may hide all that they should not see- that is, the nonscenic part of backstage.”2 “...every feature that is important dramatically and pictorially should be well in view from every seat in the first row, the last row, and at the extreme side (if the theater is reasonably constructed) of the balcony, as well as the seat in the ideal center of the auditorium.”3

1 For a more thorough explanation of stage terminology see; Holt, Stage Design and Properties, 20–21. 2 Selden and Rezzuto, Essentials of Stage Scenery, 27–28. 3 Ibid., 26.

Fig. 1: Sight line checking in the theatre. Making sure that all essential features and the acting area are fully visible from all seats, while lighting, stage machinery and backstage is masked off. Selden and Rezzuto, 27.

The shape of the theatre plays a big role here due too the placement of seats in relation to the stage. Making a scenery for a theatre in the round might be considered the opposite of the proscenic arch as this means having no back wall at all, forcing the design to be built up on the floor and by props. Between these two extremities there are several different shapes of theatres which all provides different difficulties and possibilities for the set design. No matter the type of stage you are on (or the amount of scenery) the goal of the set designer is nearly always to hide away the back stage area and to present an alternate reality for the performance to take place in.

Designing a theatre or an auditorium requires the architect to check the sight lines, but this can be important in a number of other situations as well. It could be anything from the need to hide a direct view into a changing room, to check what can be seen through a window or which part of a city that is more visible than others.

Then what about the scenographic goal of masking the backstage area, hiding away what we are not supposed to see? With the emergence of the modern movement in architecture the ornament was criticised and questions of authentic and artificial developed within the architectural discourse.4 The aim of complete truthfulness climaxed with the emergence of brutalism where in some cases nothing is hidden away. This has later been criticised in turn. Since then thoughts about poetics and narratives has again grown more important for many architects. Barragán said in his acceptance speech for the Pritzker Prize in 1980: It is alarming that publications devoted to architecture have banished from their pages the words Beauty, Inspiration, Magic, Spellbound, Enchantment, as well as the concepts of Serenity, Silence, Intimacy and Amazement. All these have nestled in my soul, and though 1 am fully aware that I have not done them complete justice in my work, they have never ceased to be my guiding lights.5 4 Wigley, White Walls, Designer Dresses; Loos and Opel, Ornament and Crime; Banham and Banham, A Critic Writes; Parnell, ”Ethics VS Aesthetics Architectural Design 1965-1972”. 5 ”Barragán Acceptance Speech”.

Fig. 3

Fig. 4

Fig. 5

Isovists are a development of sigh- line analysis and show the volume of space visible from a given point. They naturally are three dimensional but can be represented in 2-d as well and are useful for a number of different reasons on a number of different scales. Fig. 3: Using isovists to investigate how the placement of a room effects its connection to the adjacent spaces. Hillier, 37. Fig. 4: A faรงade isovist explains the buildings visibility in the urban fabric. Hillier, 237. Fig. 5: Isovistic map of Rome's open spaces. Hillier, 155.

Fig. 6. A new-brutalist building showing structure and services. General purpose room on first floor in Aliston and Seter Smithston's Hunstanton Secondary School 1949-54. Banham, New Brutalism, 39.

2.3 Physical Components While we are all aware of the common components of architecture, the parts that build up a set might not be common knowledge. Having the sight-lines in mind there are a number of different components to use in order to build up the set, create the screen that shields the audience from the backstage and that become the pallet with which the designer can tell their story. Selden and Rezzuto make a quite good list of these components (here slightly modified)6:

Standing units Flat: Plain or irregular with or without apertures (such as doors, windows and fireplaces). Jog: A narrow flat. Two-fold: Two flats hinged together to fold inward, face to face. Three-fold: Three flats hinged the same way. Return: Two flats hinged to fold outward, back to back. Archway: A flat with an arched opening, usually constructed with a detachable thickness. Backings: Added to any aperture to mask the off stage area when seeing through the opening.

Hanging units Ceiling: A large, horizontal, canvas-covered frame, suspended by a set of lines from the grid, used to close up the top of an interior scene. Drop: A large sheet of canvas, partly or fully framed, suspended vertically on a set of lines from the grid, commonly used to represent the sky. Tab: similar to a drop, but smaller and used for a number of purposes. Border: An abbreviated drop, occasionally used to represent foliage or mask the flies. Cyclorama: A large curtain of canvas, or other material, hung from a horizontal u-shaped pipe 6 Selden and Rezzuto, Essentials of Stage Scenery.

batten suspended by a set of lines from the grid, commonly used to represent the sky in exterior scenes, and for a number of other purposes.

Built units Platform: A collapsible or rigid frame platform constructed in unite sections. Steps: A light, portable run of steps constructed in unit sections. Ramp: A light, portable ramp constructed in unit sections. Column: A light frame or canvas column. Tree: A light frame or canvas trunk. Rock: A light, irregular frame-and-canvas imitation of a rock, made in unite sections. Built-up ground: A similar imitation of a bank of earth.

Set units Groundrow: A flat profile of a bank of earth, or distant mountain, painted on thin three-ply veneer board, cut out, framed behind, and made to stand up independently on the floor. Fence/Wall: A frame imitation of a fence or wall, designed to stand up independently of other units on the floor. Set house: Various frame units, designed, like the fence, to stand up independently.

Texture, paint and light In addition to this I feel that a couple of other components should be mentioned. These are paint and light. Although they are not physical in the same sense as the above, they do have their own distinguished characters and definitely play a part in creating and defining different spaces.

Fig. 7 Design with one main unit building up the set. A set of soft scenery. Selden and Rezzuto, 143.

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Fig. 8 and 9: Set for Sophocles' King Oedipus, designed by Michael David, using platforms to define spaces on stage. Welker, 180, 181.

Fig. 10: Painting in a model for the Broadway production of Big River, by Heidi Landesman. Smith, 72.

Fig. 11: Using light to define space. Klara Berge's installation â&#x20AC;&#x153;I want to remember your memoriesâ&#x20AC;? (jag vill minnas dina minnen) is playing with light and shadow in relation to textiles. Exhibited at Two Little Birds.

Fig. 12

Fig. 13

Fig. 14

Fig 12 and 13: Different lighting changes the setting from a beach to under water. Ariadne auf Naxos, Los Angeles Opera. Set design: Edwin Chan. Lighting design: Mark Jonathan. Allen, 51.Fig. 14: Light as an object is an important part of set design. The Emperor of Jones, Gate Theatre, London. Set design: Richard Hudson, Lighting design: Phil Haldane. Allen, 181.

2.4 Combining components with forced perspective If we have previously been talking about the individual components we must also take care to view some of the effects they can create when combined. In a scenery forced or altered perspectives can be very useful for a number of reasons. The most obvious reason is to allow the audience to see the side walls in an enclosed set, thus creating a more realistic view.7 Another reason for wanting to do this is to create a sense of greater depth (something limited by the nature of the stage). There is however a limit of acceptable use of forced perspectives, which has to do with the consistent size of the actors. If the forced perspective is pushed too far, the up stage area becomes unusable (at least in interior scenes) since actors would suddenly appear to be giants compared to the objects in this area.

The art of forced perspective is common in architecture both as an expression of shape and with the use of painted trompe l'oeil, which came to be during the renaissance. Martin Battersby describes this as an opportunity for artists to make the building deceive the eye in a mastery of trickster and illusion8. He also goes on to say that those rooms which are successful in this deception are the ones where in the deception itself, the human figure play a minimal role and that has a connection with everyday life. Battersby points out that the passing of the eighteenth century, followed by the industrial revolution brought a decline to the trompe l'oeil. However the sculptural form of trompe l'oeil is still in active use amongst many architects, even if it has become more rare than in its heyday.

7 Welker, Theatrical Set Design. 8 Battersby, Trompe Lâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Oeil.

Fig 15: Reality and theatricality. The top and centre pictures have the same floor plan but different viewing distances; the centre and bottom pictures have the same viewing distance, but different floor plans. To make comparisons easier, the position of the picture plane has been varied to produce pictures of the same width. Top: a living room, viewed by someone sitting in a chair with her back to the wall. Centre: the same section of the room, placed on stage without alteration and viewed from the auditorium's centre. The most important alteration is in the loss of depth. Bottom: a stage set, in which all of the objects have been redesigned. Welker, 188, 189.

Fig. 17

Fig. 16

Fig. 18

Fig. 16: Painted ceiling by Andrea Pozzo 1691-94. S. Ignazio, Rome. Battersby, 68. Fig. 17: Perspective colonnade designed by Francesco Borromini in 1638, Villa Spada, Rome. Depth 28 feet, hight at entrance 19 feet, hight at far end 8 feet, width at entrance 10 feet, width at far end 3.5 feet. Battersby, 14. Fig. 18: The Potemkin Stairs, Odessa, Ukraine. The top step is 12.5 metres wide, and the lowest step is 21.7 metres wide. The staircase is 27 metres high, and extends for 142 metres but it gives the illusion of greater length. Looking up the stairs the forced perspective makes them look longer than they are, looking down they seem shorter. Looking up one can only see the steps while looking down only the landings are visible.

2.5 Movement- choreography and blocking Another effect of the combined components is the space they create in between them. They do not only shield the view of the audience from the back stage area, but they can divide the stage into separate spaces and thus restricting, redirecting and/or focusing the movement of the actors. This in theatre is called blocking. It enables or enforces the different positions on stage, the strongest positions being centre stage followed by downstage corners.9 Other factors also play a part here, the higher up and the more facing the audience the actor is, the stronger the position.

The arrangement of building parts in order to control movement through the space is widely used in architecture. Whether it is intended to force one to strictly move in a certain way or to allow for a free flow throughout the structure, it is an important and conscious decision for all architects. The ability to move through spaces and how that affects us is explored by Hillier, not only on a building level but at an urban scale as well.10 Hillier states that “In a sense, architecture is abstract thought applied to building, even therefore in a sense theory applied to building. This is why, in the end, architecture must have analytic theories.”11 He then maps out some of the sociological implications of built space. Unfortunately I cannot in this text go into more detail in this area, but the connection between the studies of movement, space and place syntax, in architecture strongly correlates with what happens on a stage and more in-depth research in this area would be interesting.

Hillier points out the importance of the shape of the space and how different spaces are connected. Holt, writing about the set, lines up the following questions; “how many entrances do I need?” “where should the entrances be placed?” “which way does a door open?” “can I have steps leading up to a door?”.12 It is, of course, a matter of function, but as Hillier points out, that would be an over-simplification of the matter. Since the entrances are not put there in order for the audience to 9 This is furthert explained in Holt, Stage Design and Properties and; Welker, Theatrical Set Design. 10 Hillier, Space is the Machine. 11 Ibid., 11. 12 Holt, Stage Design and Properties, 46.

experience a sequence of rooms in space, the effect of the placement of entrances are slightly different than in architecture. Entrances as well as actors can be placed in strong or weak positions on stage, allowing for a range of emotions. Actors can enter splendidly or sneakingly, storm out or fade away.

Another part of blocking, maybe the most important one, is the purpose to focus the attention of the audience on the actor carrying the story forward at that particular moment. This focus can be helped by; contrast, speech, movement, height, stage area, scenic pointing and lighting.13 Most of these tools to help the focus are not part of the set per say. This shows that the collaboration between set designer and director is elementary in order to create a set that can handle blocking sufficiently.

Fig. 17: Stage geography. Welker, 174.

13 This is further discussed in Welker, Theatrical Set Design.

Fig. 18: Strong and weak positions. Positioning the actors in relation to each other and at different angles towards the audience. Holt 43, 44, 49.

Fig. 19: An exploration of room configurations and their effect on movement. Hillier, 30.

Fig. 20

Fig. 21

Fig. 20: Circulation diagram by Kadawittfeldarchitektur exploring the movement through the Centre for European Culture. Miyoung, 421. Fig. 21: Program distribution and access in Vestbanen by Spacegroup. The diagram shows the routes for different users with dots representing their potential stops. Miyoung, 527.

Fig. 21: One of hundreds of blocking diagrams prepared by the director for a production of Shakespeare's Antony and Cleopatra. Three characters appear; Caesar is represented by circles and a solid line, Leupidus by squares and a dashed line, and a messenger by triangles and a dotted line. Each line segment indicates a movement; each symbol indicates where a character pauses. Welker draws some conclusions from this diagram: “Caesar clearly dominates the scene, although the other characters play significant parts in it. Caesar's movements are broader; he acts on three major levels, yet he does not move away from the centre area.” Welker also draws a conclusion about the mood: “The ziggzagg pattern of [Caesar's] movements suggests agitation but the directness implies firmness. His dominant emotion is extreme anger.” Welker, 179.

Fig. 22: One of the blocking diagrams prepared for the production of Oedipus at Colonus using a set by Michael David. The chorus´ starting positions are indicated by open circles; their final positions by solid circles. The actors moved in numerical order along the paths shown. Welker, 183.

2.6 Time representation In set design it is up to the designer to set the time both historically, seasonally and daily. This can be done with a number of different techniques. One can use props, setting and costume to represent the historical time in which the play is set. Seasons can be represented by coloured lighting, natural elements such as leaves or snow (painted or physical) and/or costume. The time of day can simply be shown by a big watch if the exact time is important or by using lighting from different directions that represent the suns hight.

In architecture time is also a factor to be dealt with. The most obvious example of this might be how the rooms are oriented within a building to always provide natural light to the room being used at that point of day, or the hight and strength of the sun at different points of the year. Time at a larger scale is also something that is to be dealt with, both seasonally as well as slow changes over time.

Fig. 23

Fig. 24

Fig. 23: Walter Schwagenscheidt, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Anordnung der RĂ¤ume nach der Sonnenbahnâ&#x20AC;? (Arrangment of rooms according to the course of the sun), diagram 1930. Corrodi and Spectenhauser, 60. Fig. 24: A.H. Steiner, Residential high-rises at the Letzigraben, Zurich, 1950-56. The floor plans are mirrored so that all apartments get balconies facing South/South-East. Corrodi and Spectenhauser, 66.

Fig. 26

Fig. 25

Fig. 27

Fig 25 and 26: The colour of the light and sky tell us the time. Ariadne auf Naxos, Los Angeles Opera. Allen, 50. Fig 27: The music theatre group production of Martha Clarke's The Hunger Artist. Smith, 54.

Fig. 28: The sun entering the main space of the Scottish Storytelling Centre in Edinburgh.

Fig. 29: Changing over time, the scar of a fire, School of Architecture, Stockholm. After the fire in May 2011 a large part of the faรงade was replaced with new copper cladding. In this picture the cladding has been up for a year and the colour is slowly fading to match the older copper.

2.7 Shifting the set How to shift the setting can be approached in a number of different ways. The first question to be asked is if the whole set needs to change, or just parts of it? If the character can be changed without moving a great number of parts this might be preferred since the transition is much quicker and easier. If bigger changes need to be made different ways have been thought out to shift the setting smoothly. Shifts can be made with a system of wagons that can be swung or shuttled, or with a revolving stage, having one or more circular floor areas that can rotate. This allows for setting up multiple sets beforehand, and then, just rotate the desired part towards the audience. It allows for big, rapid changes without the interruption of stage workers. The number of times flipping between different settings is only limited by the story. The downside of this is that the machinery of a revolving stage is quite complex and only a few theatres have this feature.

Another way to shift the set is to have folds that are simply swung over. This cannot be mechanically done and require people to get on stage. Unfortunately this means that no action can be going on in front of the fold while the shift is in progress. However it is quite a quick and easy way to do it. Shifts can also be made by changing hangings from the grid by a large crew, or smaller draperies by a single actor. This can be quite dramatic. It is to be remembered in all the above scenarios that the movement on stage created by shifting the set will attract attention (remember the focusing factors of blocking).

Yet another way to make big shifts is to simply let down the front curtain, hiding the sudden buzz of workers from the audience. When the curtain goes up again the setting has â&#x20AC;&#x153;magicallyâ&#x20AC;? changed. This is probably the most common way to make changes in between acts.

In architecture we might see a counterpart at this scale, the scale of interior design; convertible houses where walls and furniture move to allow for different functions within the same space. 31

However, architecture is a discipline that spans over a large number of scales. Looking on a larger physical scale we have to adjust the time required accordingly. Whole buildings or cities do not completely shift their appearance over night but stand for decades and sometimes even centuries or millennia. That said, we might find some connections in refurbishing and demolition and the following rise of new buildings. This however takes a lot of time and planning on a much grander scale than that used in set designing.

Fig. 30: Simple ways to change a setting using curtains and flats. Holt, 54.

Fig. 31: The illustration shows the system of one large and three smaller revolving stages. Selden and Rezzuto, 216.

Fig. 32: Jackknife stage and shuttle stage using wagons. Selden and Rezzuto, 217.

Fig. 33

Fig. 34

Fig. 35

The residential functions of the Drawer House, by Oki Sato, are condensed into one side of the wall and can be pulled out when necessary, like drawers. The house is set in Tokyo and living quarters encompass three stories, 162 square meters and 18 habitable drawers. Lam and Thomas, 44, 46.

CHAPTER 3 THE DESIGNER

3.1 Introduction This far we have talked about the set itself. In this chapter the focus instead lies on the designer. Different designers and their views on the design process are compared, starting with a quick look at the designers role, then looking at texts about the design process and interviews with different designers. Finally the chapter is finished off by looking at the tools used to create and communicate the designs.

3.2 The role of the designer Without going into detail I feel it is necessary to quickly compare and put into context the setting in which the designer is working. The diagrams show the relationships within the different fields. They show the traditional roles of the designers but to say that this is how it always works would be too great a simplification. The relationships in both fields may vary as one person can handle two or more assignments. There could also be more specialists involved resulting in different teams or the project could be focused on certain aspects, requiring greater collaboration between certain parties.

Fig. 36: Diagram based on illustration by David Welker.

Fig. 37: Diagram based on lecture notes from Professional Practice lecture series 2013 by Gordon Gibb.

3.3 Design process Having looked at the external factors of the design process, it is now time to have a look at the internal factors. How do designers approach their projects? Which questions are being emphasized throughout the process? What tools do they use?

Site analysis is the foundation for most architectural projects and it is listed by Andrew Pressman as one of two components to which the architectural concept must respond, or even spring from.14 The site contains given factors and it changes our design accordingly. It can be due to vegetation, climate, wind, views, landscape, connectivity, the list can be made long. The importance of the site has been stressed by many designers:

The site is the point of departure, the most basic issue in architecture. -Yoshio Taniguchi15

When I get a new building job, a new location, I go there and look round and in my mind begin to set out possible materials for possible anatomies. And I look to see what energies start to flow there. -Peter Zumthor16

[Architects must] sit on site, put their butts on the ground, feeling and sensing the spirit of the place. -Antoine Predock17

Eliel Saarinen points out that one should â&#x20AC;&#x153;always design a thing by considering it in its next larger context- a chair in a room, a room in a house, a house in an environment, an environment in a city

14 15 16 17

Pressman, Designing Architecture. Ibid., 46. Rauterberg, Talking Architecture, 152. Pressman, Designing Architecture, 47.

plan”.18 Following this logic, set designers should also make their “site analysis”. It is not of an external environment but of the enclosed room of the theatre. David Gropman talks about this in his interview. “The first thing I do is sit in the theatre in which I'm going to work. I look for what is dynamically and emotionally there in the architecture of the space that might lend itself to the production.”19 He also explains how his work often becomes site specific and tells us about the time the producers tried to move the set for Buried Child from Theatre for the New City to Theatre de Lys. They soon got into trouble, for in fact, there was nothing to take, the whole set was built around the architecture of the theatre. David Gropman is not the only set designer approaching a new project this way. Reading through the interviews in American Set Design 2 and the essays in Collaborators it becomes evident that the consideration of the locale is more common than not. It appears that Saarinens statement is indeed very true.

The other of Pressman's two components to which the architectural concept must respond, or spring from, is the program.20 It is a document often given in the brief that describes the functions and sometimes areas required for the building. In a way one might say that the architect is presented with the story of the building. The program is often worked out by making bubble diagrams and volume studies. This might be compared with the first reading and analysis of the script in set design. Although the script only briefly describes the different spaces, it, like the architectural program, reveals both functions needed and the story to be contained within the space. David Gropman does something in set design that almost all architects do as well: “I read the script , and think it through until something clicks. Then I'll quickly put together a rough model and see what it looks like in three dimensions.”21 The program and the script are both to be questioned by the designer and will grow from discussions with the client or the director.

18 19 20 21

Ibid., 46. Smith, American Set Design 2, 38. Pressman, Designing Architecture. Smith, American Set Design 2, 39.

These two factors, site (or locale) and program (or script), might be considered given constants, varying between different projects, but always a part of the design. But what other factors influence the process?

-I'm curious about how you approach a project. You talk about intuition and instincts, but you also have to do your homework? -Oh yes. I always like to surround myself with an exhaustive amount of research. Then I pour over it. Part of the process is trying to get an intellectual framework for the play. This background material becomes the fabric on which I embroider the ideas for the design. -John Arnone interviewed by Ronn Smith22

Many designers do a great amount of research as part of their process. It can be studies of precedents and historical perspectives, construction technology and materials or looking at codes ordinances, regulations and budget. Even though set designers tend to do more historical research and architects focus more on construction technology, all of these fields, and more, are researched in both set design and architecture. Set designer Penny Saunders, for example, studied sailing technology for the production of The India Rubber Zoom Lens and Lydia Soo, Ph.D., associate Proffessor at the Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Michigan, suggests that â&#x20AC;&#x153;by understanding past building in terms of typological lessons of form, space, light, circulation, structure, material, and so forth, architects can create a repertory of ideas that they can draw from during design. When understood as a lesson of design, the most bygone and dusty building can have immediate relevance.â&#x20AC;?

There is however a difference in the use of historical research between the two disciplines. The aim of historical research in set design is to replicate the atmosphere of a specific point in history, it is 22 Ibid., 27.

meant to be an imitation, the closer to the past, the better. Pressman states that using precedents in architecture can be risky, and cites Emerson saying: “The imitator dooms himself to hopeless mediocrity.”23 While set designers are praised for their ability to mimic the past, the architect who does the same, without reinterpreting what he learned, is considered outdated.

Having thought about the site analysis, the text review (be it programme or script) and research there is still the question remaining of how one mentally go through the process of creating the design. Many set designers and architects alike talk about the mental development of the project.

[The living soul of the play] is what the artistic investigation is all about. That is, going into the deep inner recesses of the text, assimilating it in such a way that it echoes within your experience, and then bringing it back to life in a physical sort of way. That journey is a very complex one, a scary one, a deep one...and it's a very psychological one. I suppose you could be guided, but ultimately you can't get it from someone else. You are the teacher and the student and the way. -John Arnone24

John Arnone also talks about the need of time.25 He tells us about when he and JoAnne Akalaitis were working on The Voyage of the Beagle one summer. They went to Nova Scotia and worked mornings, then they went away to go running, playing on the beach or take mud-baths. “The process that had taken place between the morning and the afternoon sessions was remarkable.” Other designers tell similar stories.

I listen to my inner ear and see what experiences I can call on to tackle a new building job. I often experience that- as writers say- the book writes itself. You make a start and 23 Pressman, Designing Architecture, 68. 24 Smith, American Set Design 2, 19–20. 25 Smith, American Set Design 2.

then have to let go to find out where the material is taking you. I find it quite surprising how the images come up in my mind- sometimes it's like in the cinema. It's in moments like that where I'm not in control that the design emerges. But also as the design progress, it occurs that I wake up and find myself somewhere in the building and think to myself, that wall or this door's not quite right. I don't have to do anything, it just comes. -Peter Zumthor26

When it comes to what is being emphasized throughout the process, the importance of the mood and atmosphere is important not only in set design, but in architecture as well.

...I'd stick to that- good architecture never just follows a principle but offers us a great variety of quite different atmospheres. A building can have its light and its dark sides, it can oppress us and uplift us. And the more diverse it is, the better. -Cecil Balmond27

3.4 The tools of the designer During this process of creation, what are the means available for designers to explore and document their design? These tools will later become the way to communicate the design to others, before it is built, and after it is taken apart. The number of tools is limited, and although different designers rely more heavily on certain tools, most designers use these; sketches, plans, elevations, perspective drawings, models, detailed drawings and diagrams. Set designers seldom seem to create sections, something which is crucial to an architect, but apart from that the tools appear to be the same. That said, the manor of the execution tends to differ as well as the content and proportion between the different methods. The models tend to be the most important tool for the set designer while most architects rely more on drawings in the final phase. However this is not always true and there are architects that work mainly in model and set designers working mainly with drawings. 26 Rauterberg, Talking Architecture, 153. 27 Ibid., 22.

Sketches appear to be the way most designers start out. They are a quick way to test things, but many designers don't trust them due to their imprecise nature.

-What kind of tools do you use to get that initial idea down on paper? -It varies...I'll usually do a rough sketch on a piece of paper, but I like to get to the model as soon as possible. It helps me and it's more honest. You can modify a sketch. You can romanticize it, you can cheat, you can lie, you can do almost anything to a sketch to either sell it or not sell it. Sketches are a real tool, and certainly helpful given the situation, but I like to go right to a model. -John Arnone interviewed by Ronn Smith28

David Gropman, John Arnone, Robert Israel and Patrycja Doniewski all express the idea of models being more truthful and honest representations and Frank Gehry and Zaha Hadid, although both sketching frantically, admits to producing a vast number of models for each project.29 Both Peter Zumthor and Frei Otto talks about the importance to use your mind to imagine things threedimensionally and they are critical of how many architects seem unable to do this. Frei Otto explains that his eye-sight has become very bad but that this has rather strengthened his ability to create spaces.

More than ever, my experience is that buildings evolve mainly in the head, and as an architect you have to see them in your mind's eye and wander through them internally before they are built. Otherwise they're buildings that have only been calculated but never felt. -Frei Otto30

28 Smith, American Set Design 2, 28. 29 Smith, American Set Design 2; Rauterberg, Talking Architecture. 30 Rauterberg, Talking Architecture, 131.

Fig. 38

Fig. 39 Typically architectural models tend to be abstracted, or simplified, to a greater extent than set models. Fig. 38: East Kilbride Art Centre, 2010- Picture Interior Layout Model in White. ”The architects favourite, white models show a scheme in its purest form, with emphasis on form and composition. This can also be very effective used in contrast with another material, such as timber, to highlight a specific feature of a model.” -Finch & Fouracre.31 Fig. 39: Set model for Painting Churches.“I think white models are confusing, deceptive. The purity of a white model has such presence that the director is always surprised when that pure, sculptural space receives whatever treatment it's going to receive. Very few directors can leap from what the white space looks like in colour. I'll do a white model for myself.... but I've found that it's not very helpful for the director to go through that part of the process with me.” -Heidi Landesman32 31 “White models,” Finch & Fouracre, accessed April 1, 2013, http://www.finchandfouracre.co.uk/architectural/white.html 32 Smith, American Set Design 2, 66.

CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSIONS

4.1 Introduction Before jumping straight into the conclusions, let us review the purpose and research questions again. This dissertation is an attempt to shorten the literary gap between set design and architecture by comparing both general texts about set design and architecture as well as the thoughts of a few designers. The purpose of this study is not to go in depth with any specific aspects, but to give a broad overview of the subject. In order to achieve this I asked the questions: What is the difference in designing a set and designing architecture? What tools are used to design for the stage? What are the components of set design? Do these exist in architecture as well? If so how do they compare? What are the differences and similarities? Which questions are being emphasized throughout the design process?

4.2 Analysis Starting from the beginning, with the components reviewed in chapter two, there are a few things to consider. While the components of architecture tend to have a certain thickness and solidity, the components of set design tend to be mere surfaces. Although of course all components of architecture do have a surface, they have a tactility that differs from the flats on set.

So why the thin surface in set design? Is it due to construction? This might be true in many cases since the components of the set only need to support their own weight, while building parts need to support all the elements above them, as well as handle wind and shear forces. The set is in fact an interior design, even if it pictures an exterior scene, and it does not have to shield us from the elements the same way as architecture does. However when Dody Nash needed the help of structural engineers to build a set, the thinness of the components remained. 45

Frank Gehry got on the subject of surfaces in his interview: “Isn't good architecture actually notable for the art of space rather than the art of surfaces?” “Yes of course you're right. Everything begins with the spatial experience. But you have to wrap this space up, you have to get hold of it. So you can't get round the question of surfaces.”

Perhaps this provides another clue. The audience is stationary, only viewing the scene from certain predetermined angles. This means that only those surfaces that they will be able to see are important. Surfaces are enough to define the enclosed space on stage. Thickness (where needed) can be faked, and no-one will ever go up on stage to feel the tactility of the “brick” wall. While moving around in architecture you immediately discover the fake thickness of a hollow wall or plastic moulds made to look like brick.

There is however a reason why Frank Ghery was asked the question about the surface. The surface treatment of the façade in contemporary architecture has grown to be widely discussed.33 It is by many architects considered enormously important, while others critique this “obsession” with the façade. If we consider the stationary audience in theatre as the main factor to the space on stage being enveloped not by objects but surfaces, we might find one contributor to the obsession with the façade surface. Most architecture is widely spread by magazines and photos, often exterior pictures showing the façade, and in the same way as in the theatre the viewer become stationary, unable to move through the space in question.

The way to treat the surface however differs widely between set design and architecture. The treatment in architecture is abstract and tactile, while the surface of the set often tries to imitate something else. Even architecture that is very picturesque is often honest about the picture being added, it can be very stylized, it does not try to fool you like trompe l'oeil. In theatre on the other 33 Kipnis, ”The Cunning of Cosmetics”; Moussavi and Kubo, The Function of Ornament.

hand we cherish the imitation, and we like the suggestion of something being what it is not. We use our imagination to complete the story and its alternate universe. The discussions of authenticity, in architecture was never as complicated in set design. The set and the play is already a fabricated story, and we like this. The question here is rather that of the level of abstraction. In fact the set might even have to lie in order to make things seem more realistic, as in the case of the forced perspective.

When it comes to the design process, the creation of the space, it seams that architects and set designers use very much the same methodology. Perhaps this is not very strange, they are both about the creation of space and rooms, and when Robert Venturi said: â&#x20AC;&#x153;For us, architecture is above all an art in the background.â&#x20AC;? it could not have been more true for set design as well. Even so there are a few differences. These differences tend to be variations not in the way the designer works but rather in the given parameters of the different projects. The most obvious difference might be that of the theatricality and drama of the set. Going to the theatre you only experience these intense environments for a short while. Architecture on the other hand is something we live our ordinary, most of the time not very dramatic lives in. It exists on a different time scale and therefore require a more toned down finish.

4.3 Conclusions Working with this dissertation confusion stopped me several times. I lost the idea of what I was reading about, was it architecture or set design? Stopping to think I still could not wrap my head around the difference between the two. However as it all started to come together a pattern emerged, and differences and similarities, their underlying causes and effects, have now become clearer.

Some of the output varies, be it the building parts, the design as such or the communicative tools, due to the different natures of the disciplines. With different external factors to consider, the end 47

product will vary even with the same internal processes. When it comes to approaching the project the differences seem to vary more from designer to designer than between the disciplines themselves.

4.4 Implications and future research This is, as mentioned several times, not an in depth study of neither set design nor architecture. Almost every point where the disciplines overlap could be studied more thoroughly. It is my hope that research in this field will be conducted in further extent than what has been done up to this point. For me personally I feel that I have gained a lot of knowledge and understanding that will help me practice as an architect. I think that it would be beneficial for many designers with further studies of the interdisciplinary field of set design and architecture.

BIBLIOGRAPHY Printed material Allen, Keith (editor), Collaborators- UK Design For Performance 2003-2007, (London: The Society of British Theatre Design, 2007) Armando Salas, Portugal and Barragán, Luis, Armando Salas Portugal Photographs of the Architecture of Luis Barragán, (New York: Rizzoli, 1992) Banham, Reyner, The New Brutalism: Ethic Or Aesthetic, (London: The Architectural Press, 1966) Banham, Reyner and Banham Mary, A Critic Writes: Essays by Reyner Banham, (London: University of California Press, 1996) “Barragán Acceptance Speech,” The Pritzker Architecture prize, accessed March 28, 2013, http://www.pritzkerprize.com, Bellman, Willard F., Scene Design, Stage Lighting, Sound, Costume & Makeup- A Scenographic Approach, (New York: Harper & Row, 1983) Battersby, Martin, Trompe L'Oeil : The Eye Deceived, (London: Academy Editions, 1974) Collins, Jane and Nisbet, Andrew, Theatre and Performance Design, A reader in Scenography, (Oxon: Routledge, 2010) Corrodi, Michelle and Spectenhauser, Klaus, Illuminating: Natural Light in Residential Architecture, (Berlin: Birkhäuser Verlag, 2008) Hillier, Bill, Space is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996) Holt, Michael, Stage Design and Properties, (Singapore: Phaidon, 1988) Kipnis, Jeff, ”The Cunning of Cosmetics”, Herzog & de Meuron: El Croquis, (Madrid: 1997) Kubo, Michael (editor) and Moussavi, Farshid (editor), The function of ornament, (Barcelona: Actar, 2006) Lam, Amanda and Thomas, Amy, Convertible Houses, (Layton: Gibbs Smith, 2007) Parnell, Steve, “Ethics VS Aesthetics Architectural Design 1965-1972”, Field Journal vol. 4 (1) (2010): 49-66. Accessed March 28, 2013, http://www.field-journal.org/uploads/file/2011%20Volume%204/field-journal_Ecology.pdf Pressman, Andrew, Designing Architecture: The Elements of Process, (New York: Routledge, 2012) Pyo, Miyoung (editor), Construction and Design Manual- Architectural Diagrams, (Berlin: DOM 70

publishers, 2011) Rauterberg, Hanno, Talking Architecture: Interviews with Architects, (Prestel Publishing, 2008) Rezzuto, Tom and Selden, Samuel, Essentials of Stage Scenery, (Englewood Cliffs: AppletonCentury-Crofts, 1972) Smith, Ronn, American Set Design 2, (New York: Theatre Communications Group Inc., 1991) Welker, David, Theatrical Set Design- The basic techniques (2nd ed.), (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1979) Wigley, Mark, White walls, designer dresses: the fashioning of modern architecture, (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2001)

Internet sources “Arena Stage Pictures – Washington DC, Fichandler Stage,” About.com, accessed March 27, 2013, http://dc.about.com/od/photos/ss/Arena-Stage-Pictures_4.htm “Avalon (New Regal) Theatre,” After The Final Curtain, accessed March 27, 2013, http://afterthefinalcurtain.net/2012/08/23/avalon-new-regal-theatre-2/ “Barragán Acceptance Speech,” The Pritzker Architecture prize, accessed March 28, 2013, http://www.pritzkerprize.com “Jag vill minnas dina minnen,” Two Little Birds Café, accessed March 30, 2013, http://www.twolittlebirds.se/two/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/klaraberge_-3001.jpg “Mountainside Theatre Seats Cherokee, NC Postcard,” Playle, accessed March 27, 2013, http://www.playle.com/listing.php?i=JOHNSELLERPAPER710 “Ny arkitekturskola (School of Architecture),” Stockholmprojekt at Blogspot, accessed March 29, 2013, http://stockholmprojekt.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/ny-arkitekturskola.html “Potemkin Stairs”, Wikipedia, accessed March 28, 2013, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pot%C4%9Bmkinovy_schody.jpg “White models,” Finch & Fouracre, accessed April 1, 2013, http://www.finchandfouracre.co.uk/architectural/white.html “York Theatre, Seymour Centre,” Sydneyfringe, accessed March 27, 2013, http://2012.sydneyfringe.com/venue/york-theatre-seymour-centre