Jørn utzon by PA Press

JĂ¸rn Utzon Drawings and Buildings Michael Asgaard Andersen

Princeton Architectural Press New York

To be in touch with the times, with the surroundings, to see inspiration in the project itself, is a necessity to be able to translate the requirements of the project into an architectural language that forms a unity of all the various factors. At the same time, the architect must have the ability to fantasize, which is sometimes called imagination, sometimes reverie. JĂ¸rn Utzon

1 45 Contents

Place 20

Introduction 8

Construction 128

Materiality 178

23 6 Method 64

Building Culture 98

The Importance of Architects by Jørn Utzon 281

Acknowledgments 290 List of Works 292 Bibliography 295

Illustration Credits 297 Notes 299 Index 309

Ways of Life 230

Understanding the inspiration that lies in humanityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s countless forms of expression; working based on our hands, eyes, feet, stomach, and our movements, and not on statistical norms and rules created according to the most-cases principleâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;that is the way to a varied and humane architecture. JĂ¸rn Utzon

Introduction

Illustrations accompanying Faber and Utzon’s article “Tendenser i Nutidens Arkitektur” (Trends in Today’s Architecture)

a building is made for living in and around it, and it should not be an end goal in itself. In its creation and use, a building forms part of numerous shifting relationships. Danish architect Jørn Utzon believed it was essential to keep these in mind throughout the creative process. This is apparent in the way he worked on his projects. His objective was to make an architecture that is “varied and humane,” and his works— both built and unbuilt—bear this out.1 That his buildings are not end goals in themselves does not make them any less significant. It simply underscores the importance of viewing their creation and use as interconnected. Utzon’s method of making a “varied and humane” architecture was neither simple nor self-apparent. Central to his work was the belief that the completion of a building’s construction did not mark a conclusion as much as a transition. The expected function of a building informed its creation, and its creation continued in its use. Utzon had a sense of how each of his buildings would be used, from their early design sketches to their completion. Likewise, he knew that buildings continue to change once finished, though at a slower pace. His architecture integrates these processes into a coherent whole. In an article that Utzon wrote with fellow Danish architect Tobias Faber, he used the phrase “sense of architecture” to describe the types of awareness he thought an architect should have. 2 For him and Faber, this phrase had a double meaning as the sense that enables one to experience architecture as well as to create it. “Sense of architecture” implies that both accumulated experiences of existing buildings and imagined experiences of future buildings can be incorporated into the creation of new works. In addition, Utzon included exposure to nature and different ways of living in

this experiential foundation. The term is revealing of Utzon’s work, in that it defines architecture as neither exact science nor free art. As he wrote in a later article, architecture is “based on science as well as intuition.” 3 In a sense of architecture knowledge and intuition should be seen as related rather than opposed forces. Utzon’s buildings are rich in appearance while also being relatively simple and straightforward. Each interacts with its surroundings but also stands on its own. In their article, Utzon and Faber argue that “the simpler a form or a composition is, the easier it is to understand and the stronger its effect upon us—we have to see that every element in a composition, in a house or in nature, means something and can help to enrich and clarify the whole.” 4 This whole can be seen as both the building and its integration with its site. Speaking of a whole in this context does not mean that mutual differences are leveled out, but simply that they are included in unified, heterogeneous expressions. In a characterization of the Swedish architect Erik Gunnar Asplund, Utzon writes that he “had the ability to unleash his imagination and mix many different contrasts together without ruining the whole.” 5 Utzon describes the Finnish architect Alvar Aalto in similar words: By virtue of his exceptional qualities, Aalto is now Finland’s leading architect, having executed his ideas in such extensive and difficult projects as the library in Viborg, the Paimio tuberculosis sanatorium and the Sunila sulfate cellulose mill. Among his most important qualities are his ability to find expression for all the demands—functional, technical, financial, etc.—the project makes of him and the virtuosity with which he works these demands together into a harmonious whole.6 This book is about the making and use of Utzon’s architecture. It is neither the story of his life nor a chronological review of his collected works. Going beyond these traditional forms of representation, this monograph focuses on how his projects came into being and how they function through six main themes: place, method, building culture, construction, materiality, and ways of life. These themes relate to significant aspects of Utzon’s architecture while also indicating key issues in architecture today. Other elements of his architecture appear as subthemes in the chapters. Over Utzon’s more-than-fifty-year career, themes emerged, receded, and reemerged. They were not separate, but came

Crematorium, published in the journal Zodiac

Moroccan houses, published in a catalog for the GrĂ¸nningen artistsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; cooperative and in the journal Zodiac

together in various ways. As a result, discussions of certain aspects of Utzon’s architecture appear across chapters. The illustrations in this book document the creation of both built and unbuilt projects, as well as buildings in use. Accordingly, traditional architectural photographs, generally taken just after a building is completed but before it is occupied, are included only to a limited extent. Instead, the emphasis is on showing the processes of architecture, from the first concept drawings to the finished buildings’ patination. The book’s illustrations include sketches, drawings, and models from Utzon’s studio; photographs of construction sites and buildings; and images from his trips. Utzon wrote a number of texts about his projects and his views on architecture, and these writings play a central role in this book’s discussion of his work. Four essays stand out in particular: “Arkitekturens Væsen” (The Nature of Architecture), “Platforms and Plateaus: Ideas of a Danish Architect,” “Additive Architecture,” and “The Importance of Architects.” Alongside his project descriptions and a number of shorter writings, these essays provide a unique window into Utzon’s architectural beliefs. They show how his ideas changed during his career, but also reveal a continuity that can be traced both in the content and in terms that are rephrased and reused. Quotes from “Arkitekturens Væsen”—which was first published in a 1948 catalog for Grønningen, a longstanding Danish artists’ cooperative—introduce the theme of each chapter in this book. Sections of this essay were based on “Tendenser i Nutidens Arkitektur” (Trends in Today’s Architecture), which Utzon and Faber cowrote the year before, while other sections were further developed in “Bolig?” (Housing?), an article Utzon wrote with a group of Norwegian architects for the journal Byggekunst in 1952.7 “Platforms and Plateaus”—which is mainly discussed in the first chapter of this book—was published in English in the Italian journal Zodiac in 1962, and in Norwegian in Byggekunst in 1963. 8 This essay was also, to a lesser extent, based on an earlier text, “Om

Stockholm-universitetet” (On Stockholm University), which appeared in the Danish journal Arkitekten in 1961.9 A marked difference in interest and focus can be seen between this essay and “Additive Architecture,” which Utzon published in Arkitekten in 1970.10 While the former is mainly concerned with inspiration for and experiences of architecture, “Additive Architecture” deals with construction. Consequently, this essay is discussed mainly in the fourth chapter of this book. Utzon published “The Importance of Architects” in English in a 1984 anthology, and it is reprinted in full at the end of this book. This essay can be considered Utzon’s written testament to anyone interested or involved in building. For Utzon, writing was a way to communicate his thoughts about architecture in a format other than drawings and models. Despite the widespread impression that he shunned media coverage, Utzon personally contributed to publicizing his projects in the first decades of his career. He was by no means alone in this interest in expressing his ideas about architecture in writing and was obviously influenced by Danish and international writers. The article he wrote with Faber, by way of introduction, mentions Alvar Aalto, Le Corbusier, Arne Korsmo, and Frank Lloyd Wright, as well as Albert Frey in a subsequent correction.11 Among the many other architects who influenced the work of Faber and Utzon are Kay Fisker, Erik Gunnar Asplund, and Mies van der Rohe. Although Utzon is better known today for the inspiration he took from past building cultures and books, such as the Chinese building manual Yingzao Fashi, he was no less concerned with the architects of his own time. This is expressed in his projects, as well as in his writings that directly reference them or their works. Among others, he mentions architects as different as Ralph Erskine, Louis Kahn, and Richard Neutra. Utzon was also interested in books about things other than architecture. As an example, his article written with Faber mentions the French poet Paul Valéry as yet another source of inspiration. Illustrated books—particularly ones that dealt with growth in the natural world, non-European cultures, and, later on, Western visual art—also absorbed him.12 While Utzon wrote and published a number of texts, he never thought of himself as a writer. Many of his texts were written to describe what could not, or at least not yet, be expressed in buildings. Whether project descriptions or articles, these writings are an important part of his work. They show how he understood his buildings

Illustrations from the book Urformen der Kunst (Art Forms in Nature), by Karl Blossfeldt

and those of others and indicate his reflective way of working. Today, Utzon’s writings also serve as important statements about prevalent views of architecture in his time. As a practicing architect, Utzon worked in many areas of the field, from industrial design to buildings to urban planning. This book primarily focuses on his building designs, which make up the bulk of his projects. Utzon worked on the vast majority of these projects between the late 1940s and the early 1970s, but a few other works from before and after this period are included as well. The projects in this book collectively provide a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of Utzon’s work. Their expression varies according to their different conditions, processes, and purposes, and while their level of continuity is surprisingly high, there are noticeable changes and developments. The picture that emerges of Utzon’s architecture is by no means a simple or unequivocal one. A recognized and respected architect in his lifetime, Utzon won a string of international awards for his work, including the Royal Gold Medal in 1978 and the Pritzker Architecture Prize in 2003. At the awards ceremony for the former, the British architect Denys Lasdun described Utzon as follows: It seems to me that whatever problem he works on, he sees things with a fresh eye, an eye that has travelled, an eye that remembers, an eye full of observation. In the world of building—and he can build—he is practical, inventive and poetic.13 Although Utzon’s architecture did not form its own school in a broad sense, many architects have been influenced by it. Most prominently, Utzon was a key inspiration

Frederiksberg town plan

for the architects who collaborated with him, including Tobias Faber, Sverre Fehn, Geir Grung, and Arne Korsmo, as well as for those who worked for him, such as Hans Munk Hansen, Henning Larsen, Richard Leplastrier, and Rafael Moneo. Utzon left an indelible impression on these architects that can be traced in how they work and express themselves. His architecture has influenced several generations of architects, particularly in Australia, Denmark, and Spain. Utzon’s buildings have also inspired many architecture students who have either read about them or experienced them firsthand, as he only communicated his thoughts on architecture through teaching and lecturing to a limited extent.14 Despite several attempts to label Utzon’s architecture, it has not become synonymous with any one style, though it has played an important role in the work of theorists and historians. Sigfried Giedion, Christian NorbergSchulz, and Kenneth Frampton have all extensively discussed Utzon’s projects in their writings.15 To this day, his architecture continues to inspire people, not least because it is rich in thought and experiences.

Design for glass bowls

Utzon’s buildings influence the many people who live, work, or simply come and go in and around them. His architecture shapes the people and the events that relate to it. In this way, his buildings continue to renew and influence cultures around the world. On the continuing impact of Utzon’s architecture, the Finnish architect Juhani Pallasmaa writes,

All profound work arises from a dialogue between actuality and dream. Imagination fuses observation and fantasy, memory and desire, past and the future. Your images traverse space and time, unite traditions of distant cultures and merge natural phenomena with geometry, history with Utopia. You have shown how to turn motion into form, matter into luminance, and gravity into flight....Your poetic alchemy enriches the imagination of all of us.16

We put everything in relation to ourselves. Our surroundings influence us through their scale, light, shade, color, etc. Our condition depends entirely on whether we are in the city or the country, whether we are in big spaces or small spaces. By training our ability to perceive these differences and their effect upon us, by being in touch with our surroundings, we get to the nature of architecture. JĂ¸rn Utzon

1 Place

utzon’s kingo houses sit in a landscape with a valley and a lake. He placed these houses in short continuous chains based on a number of conditions, including access roads to the area, the contours of the terrain, and the buildings’ common outdoor areas. The houses are staggered relative to one another, with differences in floor levels, setbacks, and projections. The buildings’ design underscores the topography and existing features of the site, connecting the houses and the landscape in a mutual relationship. A characteristic of many of Utzon’s buildings is that they enhance existing features of their surroundings. In the opening quote of this chapter, he describes the influence of light, shade, color, and other site-specific factors on our perception. He points out the importance of paying attention to these aspects and their effects, and of using that experience to make buildings. For Utzon, a building’s site had a central place in the creation of architecture. In that regard, he followed a long tradition within modern architecture of anchoring a building in its immediate surroundings. Frank Lloyd Wright was one of the many advocates of this approach, as expressed in his thesis that “any building should arise from its site as an expressive feature of that site and not appear to have descended upon it.” 1 However, there is no easy solution for how a

BirkehĂ¸j housing development The small square on top of the hill, surrounded by houses with small flats for the elderly, will create an environment with a peaceful protected atmosphere in a relatively open landscape, not unlike the feeling in small Italian villages. Great care has been taken to follow the landscape and to utilize its values. There are many ways to arrange the same books in a bookshelf. I can hardly see any reason for repetition of the same face on different flats beside each other and above each other in these sad modern housing schemes. I have some difficulties, too, to feel excitement when I see the grid of most modern office buildings. Karen Blixen, the great Danish author, in Out of Africa, relates how she once tried to order her African farmers to build their huts in a row. It was impossible for them to understand the significance of a line. Instead, they spread the huts in relation to each other, the sun and the trees. JĂ¸rn Utzon

building can be an “expressive feature” of its site. Utzon investigated this problem in a number of different ways. Like the Kingo Houses, the later Fredensborg Houses, also in North Zealand, Denmark, are situated in an undulating terrain, though here the buildings form one long chain winding up and down a south-facing slope. The chain of houses divides the area into two parts: a northern segment with access, parking, and vegetation, and a southern part with a lawn and scattered groups of boulders. In both projects, the buildings are L-shaped with a courtyard, giving each house a roughly square outline in plan. The houses’ courtyards face either southeast or southwest, giving direct sunlight to all yard-facing rooms. The walls surrounding each house are different heights depending on their context, adding variation to the buildings’ uniform expression. Designed to provide shelter from wind and peering eyes, they are still open to the sun and unique sight lines. Shifts in the placement of the houses cause these conditions to vary. The orientation of the courtyards and the shape of the walls help to anchor the houses in the site. Many of Utzon’s other projects are located in landscapes on the edge of cities or beyond, which became crucial to their design. Describing his Birkehøj housing development, he explains that “great care has been taken to follow the landscape and to utilize its values” by making a terraced platform that follows the contours of the landscape.2 Utzon placed the housing blocks at the edge of this platform, staggered them relative to each other, and then oriented them in different directions, resulting in an irregular plan.3 In contrast, the individual blocks are rectangular modules. Thus, the project relates to the terrain by both following and contrasting with it. A similar relationship to the landscape can be seen in the third-prize competition project for the Folk High School of the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions in Elsinore. This building’s platform is orthogonal, with an angular contour that follows the terrain. As Utzon describes it, “The platform ... stands in a slightly undulating landscape and emphasizes, by its squareness and straightness, the soft movements of the landscape.” 4 This way of placing a building in a site aligns with work done by other Nordic architects, including Alvar Aalto and Erik Gunnar Asplund.5 Both were advocates of modern architecture in the interwar years, but unlike many of their

Fredensborg Houses

fellow architects in Central Europe, they went against the tendency to view the site as a tabula rasa. On designing in the landscape, Asplund writes that he does not believe that “one or another form of building necessarily has a better relationship of rhythm and color to a given landscape than other forms of buildings. The outer architectural result (if that can be judged in its own right) does not rely on the types of forms but on their adaptation.” 6 A modern architecture adapted to the landscape was one of Asplund’s most important goals, and one that Utzon also adopted and developed. However, both Asplund and Utzon did more than just adapt so-called form types— they developed new ones. Utzon believed that views looking both in and out should be considered when locating and designing a project. Though at a different scale than the terrain, a view continues beyond the plot of land where the project will be located. Utzon had an understanding of and interest in the fact that new projects also change a site’s visual conditions. He designed the winning submission for the Sydney Opera House without having ever visited the city, acquiring an understanding of the place solely through representations, such as descriptions, photographs, and maps. Even so, Utzon gave pronounced attention to how the project would be experienced visually, as is evident in a later description of its location: The Sydney Opera House is a house which one will see from above, will sail around—because it sits on a point sticking out into a harbor, a very beautiful harbor, a fiord with a lot of inlets. This point is in the middle of the city and the city rises on both sides of the fiord, so the Opera House is a focal point. This means that...in fact, one must have a fifth facade which is just as important as the other facades.7 The roofs are the fifth facade, seen up close and from afar. A focal point in the city, the opera house also offers distant views. The mutual visual contact between the building and its surroundings has a huge influence on how each is experienced, and indicates how a new building can change the character of its site.

Folk High School of the Danish Confederation of Trade Unions, third-prize project 31

Sydney Opera House The lot, Bennelong Point, is a narrow point in Sydney Harbor between the inner harbor, with its docks, etc., and the outer harbor, which is fiord-like with countless coves. It is considered one of the most beautiful harbors in the world. The architecture emphasizes the character of Bennelong Point and takes the greater advantage of the view. JĂ¸rn Utzon