“L. Kahn and L. Mies Van Der Rohe In Search For Timeless Architecture”
“The art of writing consists of making Sensible and palpable what is abstract. To make abstract what is palpable is…vice.” -Joseph Joubert
Time is the fourth dimension, the biggest of measures and for some people perhaps it is life itself. Time is just and time is cruel. Time consumes everything and everyone. Debates on time appear in ancient world as much as in modern one. Therefore, to speculate on timeless substances I would like to give a quick glimpse of what is encyclopedic definition of time and then introduce two major visions on how it is perceived. “Time is a part of the measuring system used to sequence events, to compare the durations of events and the intervals between them, and to quantify rates of change such as the motions of objects. The temporal position of events with respect to the transitory present is continually changing; future events become present, and then pass further and further into the past. Time is one of the seven fundamental physical quantities in the International System of Units. Time is used to define other quantities — such as velocity — so defining time in terms of such quantities would result in circularity of definition. An operational definition of time, wherein one says that observing a certain number of repetitions of one or another standard cyclical event constitutes one standard unit such as the second, is highly useful in the conduct of both advanced experiments and everyday affairs of life. The operational definition leaves aside the question whether there is something called time, apart from the counting activity just mentioned, that flows and that could be measured. Investigations of a single continuum called space-time bring questions about space into questions about time, questions that have their roots in philosophy.” Two contrasting viewpoints on time divide many prominent philosophers and scientists. One view is that time is part of the fundamental structure of the universe, a dimension in which events occur in sequence and this view was greatly elaborated by Sir Isaac Newton and refers to the realist view where time travel becomes a possibility as other “times” persist like frames of a film strip, spread out across the time line. In opposition to that “realist” view exists somewhat “romantic” or “surrealist” one which was concretized by G. Leibniz and Immanuel Kant. In their works they refer to time as neither an event nor a thing, and thus not measurable. In their philosophy time does not refer to any kind of “container” that events and objects “move through”, nor to any entity that “flows”, but that it is instead part of a fundamental intellectual structure within which humans sequence and compare events. Thereby time in terms of understanding this phenomenon could be perceived either in “realist” form or in “romantic” form, however it could as well be a mixture of both visions to some extent.
I may believe that time is phenomenon which lies in between afore-mentioned visions, where the only reasonable question to me is how do I perceive universal relationships in regards to human existence, are they clearly physical or they extend into something metaphysical. In terms of metaphysical perception of the universe single human unit loses its primordial character of something measurable by any means and time becomes parallel to it. Single lifetime could be perceived and understood as timeless event happening to be a detail in tremendous puzzle of the eternal universe. In this case our participation could be considered either individually or common as constructive or destructive. This brings us to careful consideration of essential means of life, here I would stress on mixture of rational and sensual, the boundaries of logic and rather animalistic instincts. Simultaneously I would like to shape my thoughts in terms of time as further on I would attempt to explore and identify specific approaches towards eternal existence. Therefore, I came up with my own theory of what is time in relation to architecture. Firstly, as I mentioned far above time could be perceived in “realistic” manner, which in architectural terms could be interpreted as materials and their composure having more or less defined lifespan, but on the other it could be “romantic” perception of time where it has nothing to do with materiality of the subject, but has meaning and sense far beyond physical boundaries. Secondly, generic understanding of time seems slightly irrelevant whereas I would stress on context, function and materiality as definition of time in architecture. Context, function and materiality could change but the essence behind the physical form could stay the same. In other words I would mathematically describe function as relation of validity to time, I intentionally purified this certain equation excluding context and materiality, as they seem relative to function in this case. To bring the subject of my thoughts closer to Mies and Kahn I intend to introduce both of them as ones of the most influential architects of 20th century and therefore I would consider clarifying their era as probably the most progressive and provocative. The century when technology started to walk hand in hand with the creator’s minds and the era which gave us the most intriguing sequence of events either constructive or destructive. All of the facts and theories mentioned above give the initial background to build my analysis on Mies and Kahn’s notion to be timeless. Saying timeless for me means being essential, being pure, rational and sensible, not being framed by any measure. Mies and Kahn at the first glance look very different, but I would say that things often are not what they seem. They both have very distinct and clear signature, one is minimalistic purist and another one is brutal fundamentalist if we would use specific terms for descriptions, however it feels that they both try to reach out for the essence, for the eternity if you like. In further exploration I would try to avoid irregular usage of prescribed terminology, as I believe sometimes they might be misleading and rather vague. I would attempt to narrow down the leitmotif of my thoughts by looking at educational institutions designed by either of them: Illinois Institute of Technology (1952-1956;left image) by Mies and Salk Institute for Biological Studies (1959-1966;right image) by Kahn. Firstly, it could be relevant to mention that those two institutions were built in more or less same time frame, in after war period, when mankind attempted to revitalize and continue its way in constructive manner. Moreover I intend to give general overview on those two campuses.
Mies was asked to reorganize the entire academic campus of Chicago. It seems obvious to me that the dynamic context of this industrial metropolis was more attractive for the German architect than the old continent, and the intervention scale reflected this drive to modernization. The 1940 city master plan erased the rectangular urban perimeter adjacent to the old core of the institution, bordered by State Street, La Salle Street, 31st Street and 35th Street, thus generating an urban gap mathematically regularized by a unique module of 7.3 x 7.3 x 3.6 m. The buildings implanted in this "motherboard" both symmetrically and asymmetrically (there are only few unaccountable exceptions) could further reproduce in their own scale, the idea of strict modulation that could be enhanced through extreme standardization of constructive elements. The campus was going to develop in contrast with the existing urban fabric, thus following the model of the industrial sites. That was Mies' major work; in 1945-1958, 19 of the designed buildings were already in place due to the prefabricated components and efficient use of low cost new technologies. Despite their program, the buildings tightly followed similar rational principles and had the minimalist attitude towards aesthetic penitence. Being faithful to "free plan", the general organization never paid special attention to any hierarchy or urban spaces, because the neutrally equal display of isolated objects prevailed over the axes and the neoclassical control of some composition parts. The way in which the vocabulary is reduced to an essential minimum, by rational understanding of constructive logic, takes an emphatic and monumental dimension in the campus buildings. The Crown Hall (1950-56), the building that I am going to focus on, reaches a high degree of refinement in tectonic principles being acclaimed as the most remarkable building on campus even nowadays; it pays homage to steel laminated profiles and glass. “The wide span structure composed of four joists visible only from the outside, although is compromised by the false suspended ceiling hiding its expressiveness, allows absolute flexibility of the interior space (67 x 36.5 x 5.4m). The tripartite rigor of the façade is intensely underlined by window frame details, using only different standard laminated profiles, clear glass and frozen glass. The entrance steps and platforms articulate the self-contained volume with the ground by a monumental succession of horizontal and carefully proportioned surfaces that reiterate the motif from the Farnsworth House, Plano, IL (1945-50).” Following the motto “beinahe nichts” ("almost nothing") Mies accomplishes “almost everything” as The Crown Hall becomes a synthesis of transhistoric principles generated by order, rhythm, and proportion, embracing the "spirit of the industrial age" yet, without the superfluous emphasis of aesthetic novelty.
Nearly one decade after, on the other side of the United States, Louis Kahn was commissioned to design the Salk Institute campus, founded by Jonas E. Salk (American medical researcher and virologist, best known for his discovery and development of the first safe and effective polio vaccine.) Salk had sought to make a beautiful campus in order to draw the best researchers in the world and his intention found its place in Kahn’s ideas. Their productive collaboration helped the architect to comprehend the scientist’s needs as they work on “the solutions to medical maladies not for the fame and glory of the possible cure, but for their individual pursuit of something bigger than themselves”. Kahn and Salk believed that the facilities should be an inspiration to all who live and visit the institute. Kahn was motivated with a desire to integrate rational functionality with spiritual fundamentality. The form of the Salk Laboratories include constructional elements such as the mediums used as well as the colour, line, shape, light, and the symmetry of the site. Kahn’s solution for the Salk Institute projected images of quiet solitude as “a scientist lives one’s life in silence not yet knowing as one waits in the light of discovery.” Kahn created a working environment that provides the eternal necessities for human creativity, plenty of light, water and air. He positioned the campus to look out towards the ocean, which scientifically is “the biological source of all life” and thus brought light into darkness to peer into the future. It seems obvious that complex thinking occurring on site resulted in simplicity and genuineness of the outcome. The institute is perched on the coastline with laboratories, which are going to be my particular interest, residences, auxiliary services, a mechanical building and extraordinary courtyard which becomes canvas for the daily works of art as the sky “paints” the background and ever-changing view of the ocean adds final brushstrokes on foreground. The materials for the buildings were used considering rough coastal weather of storms, the salt air and the hot Californian sun. Concrete and teak plywood were used for the exterior and stainless steel, concrete and teak for the interior. “The reddish exterior concrete was developed with the same components used in Roman Pozzolana architecture, one of Kahn’s favourite architectural time period. The exterior teak plywood was three-quarter inch exterior type; the details of the final product required the wood to be sanded and finished with topcoats of catalyzed polyurethane resin. Kahn infused the construction properties with the design properties. He exposed the steel wires and designed with special consideration in their spacing. The steel wire was extended out beyond the concrete face and cut off and then filled with a lead plug to prevent corrosion of the steel ties. This permitted the concrete blocks with the reinforced steel wire to have a design quality versus just a constructional identity.” The Salk Institute was created as a center devoted to human studies, values and total health. However I think it has similar hidden symbolism just as Illinois Institute of Technology does. As Kahn said “that which you desire and that which is available can be expressed in two words, silence and light.”
In favor of highlighting the contextual qualities of two afore-mentioned buildings, it would not be excessive to have a look at the masterplans either considering polar nature of each city in relation to the subject; Chicago being very geometrically aligned and La Jolla almost completely opposite, slightly irregular and ÂŤfree flowingÂť. Thereby I would attach two aerial views showing each building in visible relationships with the surroundings.
IIT(Chicago) seen on upper images and SIBS(La Jolla) seen on lower images:
The Crown Hall and The Salk Laboratories have very common principles such as obscured service cores and free arrangement plans (Crown Hall bottom left; Salk Institute bottom right), clarity of geometry and delicate attention to details and usage. Although some might argue the opposite, but I am certain on ideas that the essence stays the same even when the form of expression is polar in every way. In order to clarify why do I include contextual qualities and functional descriptions, not to mention contradictive materiality, it is due to draw the line between what is the same whilst being different and how two architects having rather constrasting outcome are sharing the initial timeless essence or purity deeply inside.
(Mies' Crown Hall images below, including interior shots and his sketch)
(Kahn's Salk Institute images below, including interior shots and his sketch)
I believe that the latter statement has strong corelation to ancient greek ideology of Cynicism, which stands for living the life of Virtue in agreement with Nature. This meant rejecting all conventional desires for wealth, power, health and fame, and by living a «simple life» free from all possessions. As reasoning creatures, people could gain happiness by rigorous training and by living in a way, which was natural for humans. Belief was that the world belonged equally to everyone, and that suffering was caused by false judgements of what was valuable and by worthless customs and conventions, which surrounded society. It may sound far from the truth of capitalism environment which embraced Mies and Kahn, however to certain extent it is true as both architects struggled to conform to the route the world was taking, as to me they clearly approached the same essence of existence by different means. Clarifying the relation of ancient ideology to the 20th century architecture I may say that in ancient world the notion for eternity, clarity and purity was much stronger, people tried to identify themselves as citizens of the universe and their realm seemed clearer to do so in opposite to how desintegrated the same notion appeared in Mies and Kahn's era, where modern time had dictated its rather mandatory rules to follow. In this occasion I could easily imagine Mies and Kahn being modern cynics in tailored suits with fashionable attributes ressembling their vicinity and unity with capitalist realm whilst reaching out for immeasurable essence. I find it reasonable at this stage to mention both architects' main principles in order to bring further speculation back on track of the specific design of afore-mentioned institutions and enrich the existing material with some other perspectives. To begin with they both follow principles of articulated structure and reduced palette of materials, they both appreciate highest quality craftmanship and both agree on god(devil) being in the details (Crown Hall left image; Salk Institute right image), however the difference is in exclusion of applied ornament by Mies and rather natural, debatable, usage of ornaments by Kahn and there is difference in how they refer to open plan, Mies seems to be investigating all possible solutions of free plan during his notable appartment design, in opposition to that Kahn said in his own words that «solution is not in the plan, but in the design principles such as form, content and context». It seems clear he had realized that the whole needed to be represented by its parts.
Fine, painted steel elements carefully designed by Mies represent his comprehension of touchable yet immeasurable purity, which itself is timeless. On the other hand water stream flow incrusted in the paving slabs of the courtyard by Kahn symbolizes immeasurable cyclic or endless nature of mere existence.
Consequently Mies's famous quote «less is more» gains new meaning in terms of time, the more you show the more edges are there to touch on, in this case his architecture becomes immeasurable timewise as it has no distinct features that I could relate it to any movement or to any specific time frame. I believe that this notion derives from his personal experience which is described in his quotation: “I remember seeing many old buildings in my home town when I was young. They were mostly very simple, but very clear. I was impressed by the strength of these buildings. They did not belong to any epoch; they had been there for a thousand years and were still impressive, and nothing could change that. All the great styles passed, but they were still there. They did not lose anything and they were still as good as on the day they were built.” Furthermore, as Werner Blaser remarked in his monographic studies, “Mies raised the act of building up to "art of form" and by not being interested in coining new forms, he furthered the rationalist tradition of Viollet-le-Duc; he refined the most elementary structural models. Moreover, he connected architecture to the spirit of the age, dismissing fashions or the eternal classical canons, though neo-classicism was a constant source of inspiration. By refining several solutions and reducing the formal vocabulary, his work displays real spiritual dimension and aspires to asceticism and final unity.” This somehow correlates to previously expressed ideas, that his approach to immeasurable is based on measured principles, in other words Mies reaches out for timelessness through palpable, measurable means. Nonetheless, his distinctive approach must not be assumed thoughtlessly, I am certain that creating something pure and minimalist is harder than designing something complex, as it takes subtlety and delicate consideration to distinguish what is truly relevant and therefore important. Robert Venturi in a rather severe form blamed Mies’ followers whom oversimplified initial “less is more”: “The doctrine “less is more” bemoans complexity and justifies exclusion for expressive purposes…Mies’ exquisite pavilions have had valuable implications for architecture, but their selectiveness of content and language is their limitation as well as their strength…[and in the hands of others] blatant simplification means bland architecture. Less is a bore.” At the same time on the other side of the debate Kahn appears as quite an opposite force to Mies, but here I would repeat my statement on things being the same whilst being different. Louis Kahn bases his approach on expressive nature of materiality, on relationships of light and shade, on loud-speaking silence and fundamentality of human in nature. These informal principles are fully expressed in Salk Institute, as well as Kahn's words “architecture is the reaching out for the truth”. His work achieves its own order, which is therefore achieved through clarity, definition and consistency. Experiencing and understanding his architecture is possible and neccessary not only in material form, but also in enigmatic spiritual way, and this way seems to me to be aiming at eternity. Whether time is the fourth dimension or the biggest of measures, in Kahn's and Mies' architecture it barely has any power. It is already half a century since the moment those buildings first opened their doors to serve people and their purposes. Those two campuses might have rather different destinies almost as their authors do, but their existence extends far beyond their lifespan. In spite of man's quality to label things embracing him Salk Institute and IIT stand respectfully on the opposite side of defined architectural styles and movements, in fact they are movement themselves. I allow myself to edit one famous quotation by Christopher Wren: “Not all that architecture aims at eternity”. Thereby, I am more interested in hidden manifesto represented in those aforecited designs, and I see irresistable desire to travel through time and to find out the elementary and primordial substance of life. The purity which has neither the start
nor the end, that can not be described in modern terms, that has no categories and no masks.
“A great building must begin with the immeasurable, must go through measurable means when it is being designed and in the end must be immeasurable.� -Louis Kahn
Bibliography:
•
Critique of Pure Reason
•
American Architecture: Ideas and Ideologies in the Late Twentieth Century
Second edition, I. Kant (1787)
Heyer, Paul. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1993. Pg. 195.
•
Louis I. Kahn: Complete Works 1935-1974
•
Between Silence and Light: Spirit in the Architecture of Louis I. Kahn
•
Mies van der Rohe
•
Essentiality: More with Less
•
Silence
•
Zeppelin Magazine, 71, February 2009 :
•
A Delicate Balance
Ronner, Heinz.. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1997. Pg.158-165. Scully, Vincent Jr. Louis I. Kahn. Pg. 36-37.
(1979)
Werner Blaser , Birkhäuser, Basel, 1997
Alberto Campo Baeza ,A+U 264, 9/1992, pp.12-43.
Louis Kahn, 1968, in Latour, Op. cit, pp. 232-233
Louis Kahn: The Salk Institute, La Jolla, California Rem Koolhaas & OMA: Mccormick Tribune Center,IIT Chicago, Il
Henderson, Brain. Architecture (July 1993): 46-49. • Criticism: A Reading of Louis Kahn’s Salk Institute Kieffer, Jeffery, Architecture and Urbanism 271 (1993): 3-17.
Laboratories
• Modern Architecture. New York: Times Press, 1989. • Architecture in Detail: Salk Institute, Louis Steel, James London: Phaidon Press Limited, 1993.
•
I. Kahn
Beginnings: Louis Kahn’s Philosophy of Architecture
Tyng, Alexander. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1984.
•
Salk Addition:Pro and Con
Venturi Robert, Architecture ( July 1993): 41-45.