Louis Kahn: Light and Architecture Nicolas Shepherd 100012622
Contents Abstract
3
Introduction
4
Part i The Yale University Art Gallery
6
Part ii The Kimbell Art Museum
8
Part iii The Yale Centre for British Art
12
Conclusion
16
References
18
Bibliography
19
2
Abstract A chronological study of three art galleries designed by Louis Kahn in order to understand how the light is controlled by the form, geometry and structure. In the first part, I analyse the Yale University Art Gallery, and find that there is a contradiction between the natural light and the geometrical structure. In the second part, I look at the Kimbell art Museum. I find that the gallery spaces are successful due to a relationship between daylight, structure, geometry and form. In the third part, I look at the Yale Centre for British Art, finding a hierarchal division between functionality and the type of daylight provided. I conclude that over time, Kahn becomes more sensitive and mature in his use of natural light, and its integration with elements such as structure, form and geometry.
3
Introduction “Artificial light is only a single, tiny, static moment in light and is the light of night and never can equal the nuances of mood created by the time of day and the wonder of the seasons.”1 Louis Kahn, (1901 – 1974), is regarded as an architect who has significantly influenced architecture. Kahn is talked of as an architect who understood light on a superior level to other architects in his league. I was introduced to the work of Kahn in my first year of studying at architecture school. It was clear that his work had inherent qualities. It was not until I recently began to look at his work in closer detail that I gained a large respect for his use of light. Large images of his buildings are fascinating, showing washes of light, creating texture on huge concrete and masonry walls, sometimes rhythmically interrupted by oversized structure (figure1). Kahn did not consider a space to be architecture unless it was lit by daylight. Kahn would even give daylight to commonly dark rooms and spaces, believing that one could understand a dark space better if it was given a tiny amount of light. The sketches Kahn produced when he travelled are ablaze with the colour of light and its interaction with structures (figure 2+3). Kahn’s use of light has inspired me in my own thought process and creative output, which has led me to want to explore his work in greater detail.
Figure 2: Basilica of San Marco in Venice, chalk pastel sketch
Figure 1: Interior circulation of Jatiyo Sangsad Bhaban
1
Figure 3: Siena, Italy
p. 235 (book vii)
4
Through establishing and repeating a set system of analysis, I intend to learn more about light, and how it is influenced by elements such as form, structure, and geometry. The system that I will be referring to will be based on a study of these elements by analysis of plan and section, as well as background research on three of his buildings in particular. The buildings analysed will be Yale University Art Gallery, Kimbell Art Museum and Yale Centre for British Art respectively. The analysis of these buildings in this order of old to most recent is to gain understanding on Kahn’s personal development. By analysing his work in this way, it will become possible to draw comparative and contrasting conclusions. I have also included a table specifying the terminology that I have associated with natural and artificial light. This is important in understanding the light at its source, and how that specific type or combination of types influences the relevant gallery spaces.
Natural Top light Window Cassette Façade Forwarded Courtyard
Artificial Up Down Floor
5
Part i: Yale University Art Gallery
Figure 4: First floor plan
Figure 5: Cross section
The first project that I will analyse is the Yale University Art Gallery, which is one of the earliest of Kahn’s works. Kahn began work on this project after returning from the American Academy in Rome. Kahn spent almost a year, beginning late 1950, touring the ancient sites of Greece, Egypt and Rome2. The architecture of ancient Rome proved to be particularly significant in transforming Kahn’s architectural language. Kahn visited buildings including the Pantheon, which he referred to often in his later work. Kahn sketched the colour and light of different structures and materials. This trip inspired Kahn, dramatically changing the way he thought and therefore designed3. Kahn’s use of geometry was influenced by the pyramids at Giza, which he noted for the light they reflected and the shadows they cast. His use of materials and structure were changed when he saw the Roman’s visible and raw use of materials, forming structural elements such as the arch. Kahn recorded his experience of Greek columns, writing that their solid massing forced light between them. It is with this level of inspiration and influence that Kahn returned to America in 1951, to begin working on the Yale University Art Gallery. This building could therefore be understood as the first design in a new chapter of his career.
Figure 6: Night time view of north-east façade
Figure 7: Interior view of fourth floor
The influences are easily visible. Rather than using lightweight structure, such as a steel frame, the building is constructed from brick and concrete. The facades are a contrast of open and closed, varying from the closed brick facades to the south and the west, with open curtain glazing on the north and east (shown in figure 6). The 2 3
p.56-59 (book iii) p.P56-5 (book iii)
6
brickwork is interrupted only by four horizontal protruding courses, showing where the floor planes lie within the building. On entering the building, it is said to be the ceiling structure which captures attention4. Negatively formed across the in-situ concrete are triangular based pyramids, sitting edge to edge (figure 7). This inverts the massing, giving the ceiling a far more heavy and robust appearance in contrast to the timber panelled flooring. The ceiling structures are used to conceal the services, allowing for more flexible gallery spaces. This ceiling design was inspired by the steel space frames which were becoming popular at the time5. Khan has retained the engineered geometry, but in a solid mass. This structure has an effect on the light inside the galleries. The light entering the galleries from the glazed facades casts shadows within the inverted triangular pods, lighting different sides and creating different textures at different times of the day.
Figure 8: Diagram showing light entering the façade
It is evident, however, that Kahn was still in a learning and experimental stage with his use of light. The curtain glazed facades appear to be relatively simple and underdesigned in comparison to the ceiling structure. The curtain wall allows light to enter at the cost of valuable wall space, and lacks a system of control. Much of the façade was therefore covered with boarding and curtains. This in turn means that large areas of gallery space are now mainly artificially lit by spotlights that are mounted inside the ceiling structure. This reliance on artificial light is a partial failure according to Kahn’s principles. Kahn initially intended for the glazed facades to diffuse the light by a series of vertical hung fabric strips, which were proved not to work6. Kahn’s failure lies in not allowing the structure to breathe the light. The structure and the façade seem to be disjointed. It almost appears that he focused so much on perfecting the structure of the ceiling and the integration of its services that the glass façade was an afterthought. Kahn would later teach that structure is the giver of light. In the Yale Art Gallery, the structure is the giver of light, but unfortunately the only light it gives is artificial.
4
p.66 (book iii) p.70 (book iii) 6 p.79 (book i) 5
7
Part ii: Kimbell Art Museum
Figure 9: Site plan
Figure 11: Site plan sketch
Figure 10: First floor plan
The effectiveness of Kahn’s use of light in the Yale University Art Gallery is better understood when compared with another art gallery he designed. The Kimbell Art Gallery in Texas was finished in 1972, almost 20 years later7. When it was being constructed, it was doubted that Kahn would manage to light the galleries inside with the harsh Texas sun, whilst maintaining a desirable environment in terms of temperature and solar glare8. Kahn commented on the light of the Kimbell Art Gallery during a talk that he gave in Kansas in the same year that the building opened: “An architecture must have the religion of light. A sense of light as the giver of all presences. Every building, every room must be in natural light because natural light gives the mood of the day. The season of the year is brought into a room. It can even be said that a sun never knew how great it was until it struck the side of a building. When a light enters a room, it is your light and nobody else’s. It belongs to that room. The Kimbell Art Museum uses all natural light.”9 This variety of rooms which each possess their own unique light conditions is apparent when understanding the building. The museum is spread out over the site, distinguished by its long linear vaults which appear to zone spaces for activities beneath (figure 13). Kahn placed all the gallery spaces on the top floor of the building, so they would receive the best of the natural light straight from the roof. Below the galleries are service and storage areas. There are no windows on the exterior, making the building appear reminiscent of the vaulted chambers found in Romanesque churches. Form plays a critical role in allowing the light to enter these vaults and be evenly distributed. At the tip of each vault is a small opening which runs the entire length of the vaults, sealed by a thin curved strip of transparent plastic. As the light shines through the plastic, it reaches a symmetrically upward curved sheet of 7
p.341 (book iii) (film i) 9 p.216 (book vi) 8
8
aluminium. This reflection strip is punctured by tiny little holes, allowing the light to bleed through as well as reflecting it upward onto the concrete vaults. These aluminium elements are half perpetrated, and the geometry of the curve was calculated by Kahn to reflect the most sunlight to the gallery spaces10. Artificial spotlights are attached to these reflectors, but the focus is clearly on the natural light, with the artificial only existing to act as a supplement. It is evident that Kahn had learned from his previous work. Soon after the Yale University Art Gallery was completed, the curator changed aspects of the building, such as the addition of new dividing walls, hiding purposely exposed structure11. Kahn commented in 1959: “If I were to build a gallery now, I would really be more concerned about building spaces which are not used freely by the director as he wants. Rather I would give him spaces that were there and had certain inherent characteristics. Then the visitor, because of the nature of the space, would perceive a certain object in quite a different way12.� The balance lies between creating versatile space which is simultaneously driven by a fixed idea, and has specifically decided ideals. In the brief of the Kimbell Art Museum, it was specified that natural lighting was imperative. The collection of artwork that was to be exhibited was not mentioned, which was taken as a challenge by Kahn to design the perfect gallery space13.
Figure 12: Internal view of entrance area
Figure 13: North facade
Kahn based his design around light from the beginning; with an understanding that light would be the connection between the interior to the outside world. Kahn wanted the public to be aware of the change in seasons, as well as the change of day and weather, without going outside, or looking through a window. The structure was inspired strongly by the Roman vault, even though it differs in its fundamental principle. A traditional Roman barrel vault displays a solid curve, with the forces being brought downward through load bearing wall elements running lengthways at each side. Kahn developed his vault in such a way that the walls do not 10
p.145 (book i) p. 77 (book i) 12 p.341(book iii) 13 p.341 (book iii) 11
9
have to be structural. It was by supporting the vaults on four columns, positioned one at each corner, that Kahn could split the section symmetrically down the middle, allowing for the light gap at the top. Another feature of this structure is a 15cm horizontal glazing strip that rests where the curve of the vault meets the external wall on the east side of the building. The walls at the north and south ends of the vaults are shown to be non-load bearing by a curved tapered glazing strip which follows the geometry of the vault. These external walls are made from travertine, furthermore highlighting their structural unimportance14. This simple shift in material defines what is structural from a glance, furthermore showing where the light comes from. The building is entered on foot from the west side, with parking on the east. On entrance, the public are led underneath an external hollow vault, only existing as a curved concrete element sitting on corner columns. This acts as an entrance unit, creating shelter from the sun, and showcasing a raw and diagrammatic system from which the rest of the building is repeated. The atmosphere of the entrance vault is said to be closed and dark, creating a contrast to the interior15. On entering, the repeated geometry is split by the light, creating a series of brightly lit spaces16 (figure12).
Figure 14: Diagram showing light gap on end walls
The building has
Figure 15: Diagram showing top light reaching bottom spaces
14
p.348 (book iii) p.355 (book iii) 16 p.555 (book iii) 15
10
been praised as
not only an incredible series of spaces, but as a functional success17. Rather than using windows, Kahn introduces sunlight to the galleries in a more abstract manner. Courtyards are also used to give a connection to the natural. The structural solution has allowed for a lighting of spaces in which the architecture reinforces the experience of viewing artworks. The structure is made clear by the light, showing what are and are not structural elements. In Kahn’s design of the Yale University Art Gallery, the light enters the building by the north and east facades, which are entirely glazed. This led to the issue of a lack of wall space to display art. The sun shades designed to control the light were flawed, leading to a lack of control. This is contrasting to Kahn’s design at Kimbell, which has no glazed facades, making the gallery spaces inside more flexible. More thought has been put into the lighting, which is reflected and dispersed into the spaces, allowing the light levels to vary according to nature. The natural lights exist to supplement the daylight. Due to the failure of the glazing at Yale, the artificial lighting must be relied upon. These two art museums have structural differences. The structure in both cases is designed to be expressed in such a way that it is enforced by the daylight. The public are intended to enter a space and be able to understand its construction. The dividing walls which were later inserted onto the Yale University art gallery obscure this original intention. However, at Kimbell, Kahn succeeded to create gallery spaces which have more carefully designed qualities. The structure is still evident, and is integrated with the supply of daylight. This is a contrast with Kahn’s gallery at Yale University, on which the structure and the light are two very different elements. The structure is carefully considered, and wonderfully detailed with concealed services. It is evident that Kahn has made an attempt to create unity between the structure and light by bringing the light from the vertical plane across the structure, resulting in differing textures and shadows at different times of the day. The structure, however, is not supplying the light, but just responding to it. The light strategy for the Kimbell art Museum is part of its structure. There is a clear process of structural development to allow the light to enter and inform the spaces. It can therefore be suggested that the Kimbell Art Museum boasts a more successful and mature gallery space in concern with the lighting conditions and Kahn’s fundamental beliefs on the relationship and hierarchy of materials, structure, form, and light.
17
(film i)
11
Part iii: Yale Centre for British Art
Figure 16: Fourth floor plan
Figure 17: Section facing south
The project for the Yale Centre of British Art was given to Kahn in 1969, to be constructed on the opposite side of the road of the art gallery. Similarly to the brief of the Kimbell Art Museum, the Centre for British Art was required to use natural light in a specific way. Jules Prown, the director of the centre, was said to pick Kahn to design the centre because of his acuteness of natural light18. Edmond P Pillsbury, the initial director of the Centre before being instated as the director of the Kimbell art Museum, commented on Kahn’s design:` “The Center incorporates and develops ideas about viewing works of art under natural light which Kahn had introduced in the Yale University Art Gallery, his first major commission (1951-53), and the Kimbell Art Museum in Fort Worth, his last work before taking on the British Art Center at Yale.”19 The plan of the building is rectangular, and consists of four floors. The roof plan and the section clearly show how Kahn has brought light down through the building. The roof plan shows 56 square voids, which also read in section, with a concrete column structure clearly meeting between the roof-lights. The section also shows two courtyards which are extruded throughout the depth of the building, allowing light into all of the floors. The galleries are placed on the top floor to make most use of this daylight. A main narrative becomes clear when analysing the section; that the public are led towards the light, journeying upwards through the building towards the well lit gallery spaces on the top floor. The brief for the centre described in detail a large accommodation of gallery and archive spaces, as well as presentation rooms and cinemas20. The variety of function required for such a diverse brief requests a more substantially developed series of spaces than what is found in the Yale University Art Gallery: “The method Khan used to define each space was, to enclose spaces with massive walls, but two more important points must be mentioned. The first is to make each space have its own centre and the second is to make each space accept light in their own particular way…Louis Kahn told me, ‘to design space is to design light.’”21 18
p.369 (book iii) p.8 (book v) 20 p.12-15 (book v) 21 p.P22 (book iv) 19
12
The roof light system in the final design was Kahn’s method of allowing for this diversity of spacial quality. The collection to be included in the centre consisted of rare watercolours and printed items such as books. This provided the challenge of using natural light in such a way that exhibit items were not issued ultra violet damage. Originally, the skylight was designed to face north in order not to allow harsh sunlight, but this developed into a flat light, which included a system of louvers resting above the light to make the light levels as even and consistent as possible22 (figure 17). The shutters were designed to block out more light when the sun was at its highest point in the sky, allowing for brighter interior conditions in the morning and evening. The light entering through this system passes through two curved layers of plastic containing UV filters; creating a safe environment for delicate artifacts 23. A light diffusing system was also developed to sit underneath the skylight, helping the rooms to be evenly lit. These light cassettes are hung just below the skylights, and spread the daylight evenly, regardless of the direction and intensity of the light24. This system of filtering light was intended to create consistently good places to view art:
Figure 18: Exterior view of a roof light
Figure 19: Wooden blinds on the interior facade
“The impact of the individual works of art is especially enhanced on the fourth floor where pellucid daylight admitted through the louvers and diffusing cassettes defines each object with stunning effect25” The plan for the Centre furthermore highlights the zoning of spaces according to the type of light. Kahn controls the stainless steel façade by inserting glass where he wants light to enter. The ground floor is mainly occupied by storage, with most of the natural light belonging to the separate commercial shop units. Khan uses this floor to contain most of the rooms that do not require daylight, such as the plant room and a lecture theatre. The light on the entrance level is focused towards the two internal courtyards, the first of which houses the main stair. Further daylight zoning is obvious on analysis of the second floor plan. There is a clear distinction between two types of light; the light entering on the vertical plane of the façade, and the light from the skylights, brought down through the building by the two courtyards. The first type is carefully controlled and safe, and the second is controlled less strictly by a series of 22
p.40 (book v) p.41 (book v) 24 p.42 (book v) 25 p.66 (book v) 23
13
wooden blinds (figure 19). Khan therefore places rooms such as study rooms and work offices around the perimeter, reserving the safe light for the archive display rooms, to which the light is forwarded from the second internal courtyard. This contrast can also be distinguished by the structure, in holding Kahn to his principle of structure birthing light. In keeping with his belief of exposing structure and construction methods, Kahn allows the post and beam structure of the building to be read on the façades:
Figure 21: Diagram showing top filtered light passing through shutters, UV filter and cassette.
Figure 20: Third floor plan, showing safe forwarded light (middle, corresponds to figure 20) and façade light (bottom, corresponds to figure 21).
Figure 22: Diagram showing façade light being dispersed by wooden blinds.
“…because you realise that structure has an order; that the material has an order; that the construction has an order; the space has an order in the way of the servant and served spaces and the spaces served; and the light has an order because it has an order in the sense that it is given by the structure and the consciousness of the orders be felt.”26 26
p.449 (book vi)
14
The light entering through the glazed sections is therefore rhythmically broken by the structure, and diffused to suit, as seen in the reading rooms on the second floor. The light entering through the ceiling of the courtyards intentionally appears to be more sophisticated. The concrete ceiling structure appears to be hugely over structured, which gives the light flowing from it a more authoritative feel. The skylight grid of the roof plan becomes most noticeable on the top floor, where the emphasis is clearly on the structure, with the spaces strongly determined by the ceiling. Vincent Scully, a former professor of art and architectural history at Yale University comments on Kahn’s use of light in both of his designs at Yale: “In a way, the British-Art Centre at Yale, Kahn’s last completed work, is the most touching, if not the most primordially powerful, of all the late projects, because here Kahn turned to glass, that unsympathetic, breakable, international-style material he had tried to cast out before. Now he handles it with rare eloquence…27” The contrast shown here is between a failure and a successful use of glass. Kahn uses a minimal amount of glass in the Kimbell Art Museum, probably due to the problems it caused in his first design at Yale. There is also a connection to the historic power of Kahn’s designs, relating to the sketches that Kahn made on his journey through the ancient world during his time with the American Academy in Rome (figure2+3). When later asked what his travels involved, Kahn was said to respond; “I watched the light28”. Kahn was fascinated by the Pyramids of Giza29, an obvious influence for the ceiling form of his first gallery design, and a more subtle one for his last. Kahn was fascinated by hieroglyphic symbols, of which the pyramid symbol represents the Egyptian tomb30. Egyptian writings explain the belief that the dead Pharaoh encased in the tomb would ascend to the afterlife on beams of sunlight31. The truncated pyramid holds the same symbolic meaning, therefore showing a theme of spiritual symbolism amongst the three buildings. The Yale gallery shows a fascinating form, but a weak use of light in terms of this powerful symbol. The British Art Centre engages more directly, with the top light creating a powerful vertical connection with the sky. Kahn engages with the symbolism, creating a hierarchy of light. On almost a spiritual sense, the light coming from above is used by Kahn to guide upwards, directly to the source of the magnificent light.
27
p.34 (book ii) p.57 (book iii) 29 p.58 (book iii) 30 p.50 (book ii) 31 p.52 (book ii) 28
15
Conclusion To conclude, when looking at the work of Louis Kahn, there is a clear focus on natural light. It is apparent that Kahn strived to create a verity of unique spaces, which were unique because of the different and special qualities of light that were given to them. The theme of integration is also underlying, as was explained by Kahn in his famous lecture, in which he talks of structure providing light. In terms of Kahn’s own standards, as well as through the analysis of elements such as form and geometry, there is a clear development across three of his projects: Yale University Art Gallery, Kimbell Art Museum, and the Centre for British Art. In all three buildings, there is a clear focus on the ceiling. In the Yale Art Gallery and the British Art Centre, the massing of the ceiling and the floor almost appear to be reversed, with a huge concrete ceiling structure. The massing of the Kimbell Museum has a more monolithic appearance, with Kahn’s play on structure allowing for an even distribution of light inside the gallery spaces. Kahn also uses a particular choice of materials to create structure, and therefore give light to his galleries. Concrete is used in all three examples in slightly differing ways. The geometry of the concrete halfvaults in the Kimbell Museum are designed to spread the light evenly, whereas the geometrically complex tetrahedrons in the Yale Gallery create rough texture by casting shadows from the vertical light planes. The Kimbell Museum and the Centre for British Art have a stronger connection between the structure and the light, with the latter design breaking a larger brief down into two light zones, both influenced by the structure in different ways to give different types of light.
Figure 23: A comparison of diagrams, shown in order from left to right.
The Centre for British Art also shows the best hierarchy; with the two organisational interior courtyards bringing down light, and leading the public upwards through the building, which becomes increasingly better lit. The galleries on the top floor consist of a sensible balance between structure and light. The three projects become chronologically more considered and successful in fulfilling their intended function, allowing for their intended light qualities to remain unchanged. The Yale Gallery is very extroverted, making it difficult to control the façade light. The integration between the services and the structure comes as a result of the relationship between the light and the structure coming second place. I feel that the diffusion of the light was not given enough thought, which results in a disharmony between the contributing elements of the building. The Kimbell Art Museum, on the other hand, is an introverted building, which shows a better affinity between structure, form, geometry, and light. I find that the Yale Centre for British Art shows a greater maturity in its combination of extraversion and introversion to define spaces in light. The building functions inwardly with the courtyard light, whilst still feeling grounded in its context by the light and views created by the façade light. The building 16
successfully manifests a combination of things which Kahn hinted at in his previous two designs. Even though Kahn did not live to see the building completed, I’m sure that he would have regarded the synthesis between the order of spaces and light ruled by structure and mass as the greatest success of the three. The strong narrative of his studies in Egypt is also here most subtly but strikingly manifested. Kahn offers a symbolic spiritual journey through the building; a journey in which the spirit ascends through the building and into the light, encapsulating Kahn’s principles on natural light and the wonder of the seasons.
17
References Books (i)
Urs Büttiker, Louis I. Kahn: Licht und Raum. Translation of German text into English by David Bean: Louis I. Kahn: Light and Space (Belin: Birkhäuser, 1993), pp. 76-79, 142-147, 156-161, 186-187.
(ii)
Bea Goller, Kahn Libraries Bibliotecas (Barcelona: Publications Del Col.legi D’Arquitectes De Catalunya, 1986), pp..
(iii)
Robert McCarter, Louis I Kahn (New York: Phaidon Press Inc, 2005), pp. 6286, 340-387.
(iv)
Toshio Nakamura, Louis I. Kahn: Conception and Meaning (Tokyo: A+U Publishing Co, Ltd, 1983), pp. 19-23.
(v)
Jules David Prown, The Architecture of the Yale Center for British Art (Connecticut: Yale University, 1977), pp. 12-17, 40-43, 46, 51, 61, 66-68.
(vi)
Heinz Ronner, Sharad Jhaveri, Alessandro Vasella, Louis I. Kahn: Complete Work 1935-74 (Zurich: Birkhäuser Verlag Basel und Stuttgart, 1977), pp. 6571, 343-351, 401-417, 447-449.
(vii)
Richard Saul Wurman, What Will Be Has Always Been: The Words of Louis I. Kahn (New York: Access Press Ltd, 1986), pp. 86, 216. Films
(i)
My Architect, dir. By Nathaniel Kahn (Louis Kahn Project, 2003) Websites
(i)
Brooke Hodge, (2011). Seeing Things: Louis Kahn’s Italian Idyll. Available: http://tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/seeing-things-louis-kahnsitalian-idyll/. Last accessed 28th March 2013.
(ii)
Unknown, (2010). Louis Kahn, Available: http://oakazine.com/2010/07/louiskahn/ Last accessed 28th March 2013.
18
Bibliography Books (i)
Michael Brawne, Kimbell Art Museum: Louis I Kahn. Architecture in Detail (London: Phaidon Press Ltd, 1992), pp..
(ii)
William J.R. Curtis, Modern Architecture: a Critical History, 3rd edn (New York: Phaidon Press Limited, 1982), pp. 513-527.
(iii)
Kenneth Frampton, Modern Architecture: a Critical History, 4th edn (London: Thames & Hudson, 1980), pp. 242-243.
(iv)
Thomas Leslie, Louis I. Kahn, Building Art, Building Science (New York: George Braziller, 2005), pp. 48-86.
(v)
John Lobell, Between Silence and Light (Boston: Shambhala Publications Inc, 1979), pp. 22-23, 94-99, 106-111.
(vi)
Michael Merrill, Louis Kahn: Drawing to Find Out (Switzerland: Lars Muller, 2010), pp. 7-19.
(vii)
Marshall D. Meyers, Louis I. Kahn (Tokyo: A.D.A Edita Co, Ltd,1976), pp..
(viii) Patrick Nuttgens, The Story of Architecture, 4th edn (New York: Phaidon Press Limited, 1983), p. 292. Journals (i)
D. Ketcham ‘Illuminating Kahn’ ARTnews, 106 (3), (2007), pp. 114-116.
(ii)
P. Nobel ‘Between Noiseand Light’ Metropolis, 27 (3), (2007), pp. 84, 86. Lectures
(i)
Charles Rattray, ‘Louis I Kahn’ 07/02/13
Images 1 (website ii) 2 (website i) 3 p.59 (book iii) 4 p.65 (book vi) 5 p.66 (book vi) 6 p.69 (book vi) 7 p. 68 (book vi) 9 p.349 (book vi) 10 p.349 (book vi) 11 p.351 (book vi) 12 p.530 (book vi)
13 p.350 (book vi) 16 p.416 (book vi) 17 p.416 (book vi) 18 p.161 (book i) 19 p.159 (book i)
19