Level 5 Thesis; Les Liaisons of Architecture by Joel Wallace Erabu

CONTENTS • Introduction………………..………………………p.3-4 • “The Contemporary Free Plan Architecture” by W. Erabu……...................................………p.5-14 • “Structural Space in Its Surrounding Form” by T. Hopla…………………..........................…..p.15-26

• “The Challenges & Criticism of the New Acropolis Museum” by E. Nicolaou……..p.27-38 • “Space as the Reflection of the Individual” by M. Sivaparan…………………………………….…p.39-52 • Bibliography…………………………………..……p.53-59 • Plagiarism Pledge……………………………..…p.60

INTRODUCTION

The world of Architecture is a complex and intricate realm which is always in constant flux and transition. This is evident from the various developments in styles of architecture from the beginning of time. When designing a building, there are many steps for the design choices where each decision to be made is based on and affected by multiple factors. As for the constructive process, some of the questions an architect would be faced with depend on the following aspects: the purpose of the construction, the design choices, the location, the history of the space, light conditions, and surroundings, not just simple aesthetics as the everyday civilian would assume. This journal will uncover the various aspects in which these essays tackle each subject and attempt to explain the ways they are interpreted and expressed through-out the various buildings.

The first article, written by Wallace Erabu called “The Contemporary Free Plan Architecture” revolves around the typology of the building created by Norman Foster named the ‘30 St Mary Axe’ building. It especially focuses and criticizes the building’s free plan design, weighing the positive and negative aspects of this type of take on construction, as well as divulging into the layout and structure of the interior aspects of Foster’s building. It also touches on the technical aspects of the building, explaining the ways in which it tackles and solves the various challenges which the surrounding environment brings to the structure and the multiple forces which are at play. Furthermore, it compares the building to the use of free plan design to Le Corbusier’s earlier modernist buildings (an idea which he created himself) and Foster’s renovated interpretation of the former’s ideology through the choice of contemporary materials and design.

The second article, by Tom Hopla with the name “Structural space in its Surrounding Form” investigates and analyses the connection between form and function in a set environment, looking at buildings and their relationship to its surroundings, using ‘The Elrod House’ as an example to discuss this argument. It further goes to analyse the visual and functional aspects of such space, looking at how they involve and evolve and the landscape in which they are situated in and the dialogue created between these two. Moreover, the writing goes on to speak about the numerous ways the construction tries to blend into its surroundings from the dynamic and organic fluidity of the space, to the materials used in that space, and to the manipulation of the unusual geometric shapes, like circles and triangles, presented in the house which is a constant rhetoric in Lautner’s work.

On the other hand, in the piece written by Ermis Nicolaou called “The Challenges & Criticism of The New Acropolis Museum” debates the many problems taking place surrounding the Acropolis museum, from the political aspects affecting the country to the construction and its aesthetic values, as it confers the multiple voices coming from: the government, ranked officers, to professors and architects, all the way down to the general public. The writing also takes one through the multiple challenges Bernard Tschumi had to face while designing the building, from turned down plans to the change of government, not to mention discovering archaeological findings from excavating the site. It further talks about the clever ways in which Tschumi manipulated glass to light up the inside of the museum. In addition, the essay touches upon the very intricate and ingenious layout and structure of the building, complimenting the buildings around it such as ‘The Parthenon’, and goes further to talk about the language created between the latter and the museum.

Last but not least, the article entitled “Space as a Reflection of the Individual” by Michael Sivaparan, discusses and displays the importance of the ways in which an architectural space would be affected by the influence of an architect and it focuses on how it reflects on the individual’s behaviour and characteristics residing in that certain space. It speaks on how it centres on the way these aspects can be viewed to be and interpreted through symbolism through-out the building in a multitude of ways, some of them being: the use of materials (interior and exterior), the shape of the structure, as well as the spatial arrangement, even down to the choice of décor. It further analyses the language between the building and surrounding structures as well as the way Johnson manipulated certain aspects of the site to emphasize attention towards the house. The above mentioned factors are clearly at display here as the manifestation of the individual is expressed either as a result of the subconscious being at play or down-right to simple and pure conscious decisions.

The focus of this journal is to help one to view structures in more than just two dimensions and hopefully, together with the help of the essays, get a better understanding of architectural structures and explore the various angles in which they could be tackled from as well as the ways they can be explored; as the writings show, buildings are free to be interpreted in a multitude of ways and have various characteristics which makes them unique in their own way, varying from their style, design, size, location, purpose and time. Each individual space makes for a great architectural piece and if understood well, they could possibly help one expand their knowledge and understanding of Architecture & Design.

The politics of design of buildings today has been a contentious issue with some people inclined to structural rigidity + aesthetic as key, while others on the other hand hold more value in structure and quality of interior space. In this essay I shall examine the free plan system, mainly criticizing the design of 30 St. Mary Axe, London, while drawing comparison with earlier buildings from the modern era by Le Corbusier that incorporated the ‘Free Plan’ which is in a way in parallel with the open plan in the contemporary context. Firstly, this essay will briefly introduce the free plan, then secondly look into the design of 30 St. Mary Axe, looking for linear components in terms of internal design of the buildings from earlier works of the modern era. Consequently, this essay will conclude with a few points wrapping up the subject of free plan.

To begin with, what is The Free Plan and Why this topic? While at first this subject may look like a treacherous route to wander, it is in fact one fascinating path that creates broad dialogue amongst architects of both present and past. Because some aspects of architecture often question the everyday, and hence these questions end up becoming rhetorical for example; what is more important in design than quality of space? Or quality of light? Alain De Botton often quotes,

‘buildings should make us better people’ and that critically thought through spaces influence human morals.1 As we will soon notice, the work of Foster + Partners is greatly focused on design of interior space with a quality that is unmatched, and its appropriate to note that this culture was natured in Foster through earlier works like the free plan.

Fig 1- Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye.

Fig 2- Perspective view of the Dom-ino system.

The open plan system, originally commenced in the modern era of architecture has greatly influenced the design of spaces today. Most compelling evidence to this will be shown in the works of Le Corbusier illustrated in (Figure1 & Figure 2).

1 De Botton, Alain. 2006. The Architecture Of Happiness. New York: Pantheon Books.

These buildings are a positive addition for architecture because this design system comprises non-load bearing walls on floors incorporated with a rib structure that supports the entire building, bestowing the architect liberty to design a space without the constraints that arise from placing columns and partitions at specific spots which would compromise the façade.2 Le Corbusier is widely celebrated as the forerunner of this style as seen with ‘Five Points of Modern Architecture’3 and he later implemented the Dom-ino system4 which is a chief influence to the modern movement. The Dom-ino house illustrated in (Fig 2) is a good example of the free plan, as we can see structural columns on the outer area of the building while the actual floor plans are open.

Moving on, the free plan architecture is best seen in 30 St. Mary Axe, which is arguably the most salient piece of contemporary architecture embracing the skyline of London. For a couple of decades, the city of London was lacking in high-rise buildings due to the rigorous planning laws set out to protect Britain’s national heritage. This was a major problem for the majority of planners because not only was the price of land escalating, but also population was constantly on a rise subsequently resulting in inadequate space within the metropolis. This spelt doom for renown architect Norman Foster whose initial proposition for Tower 42 got disallowed, consequently sending him back to the drawing board at a second attempt to refine his plans for the development of 30 St. May Axe.5, (Figure 3) Fosters approval came as a surprise to many of city dwellers as this would have an unprecedented effect on the skyline of the city. Worsley Giles then goes on to mention that Foster’s proposal for the site that had hit a dead end, which was not a shock at the beginning, led to rethinking the whole idea from the ground up, and this saw the then chairman of English Heritage, Jocelyn Stevens withdraw his initial objections to the proposal. The location for this iconic building is right at the centre of the financial district of the city6, which of course came at a hefty price. Adding on to that the cost of the project that run from 2001 - 2004 was £138,000,0007, reasons drawing from value of the former building, the Baltic Exchange that suffered damage from a terrorist bombing in 19928, to the fact that the area is the economic hotspot for London and the world at large. The allocated site called for the highest level of designing a critically thought space that would not only harmonize the architecture in the city but also benefit the inhabitants of the city.

Norman Foster commenced initial planning of the building in 1998, bearing in mind that his client, Swiss Re, an insurance company was profoundly connected with sustainability, hence the brief Norman Foster had to respond to was full of environmentally parallel design that would be incorporated into high standard of interior space. The design process involved rigorous testing of 3d models to critically study the space and cultivate a steel frame and parametric techniques to the design in so doing including complexity handled by decreased risk and a sounder economy.

2 Conrads, l., 1970, Programs and Manifestos on 20th century Architecture, Cambridge, MA: MIT. p. 99. 3 Curtis, William JR (1986). LeCorbusier: Ideas and Forms. New York: Rizzoli. p. 69 4 “Dom-ino Houses”. Arch World. Retrieved 03 March 2016. 5 Worsley, G., 2004, “Glory of the Gherkin”, The Daily Telegraph (London), Retrieved; 09/03/16, Online through; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/ culture/art/3616020/Glory-of-the-Gherkin.html 6 Munro, D., MA MIStructE, Associate, Ove Arup and Partners, London, 2004, Research Paper 7 Larsen, Erik, Mitchell Dickinson, Abby Mayfield, Jake Vinson, and Wendy Weatherly. “30 St. Mary Axe.” 8 Murray-West, Rosie (30 September 2000). “Baltic backs legal fight over ‘gherkin’”. London: Telegraph. Retrieved 6 February 2010.

Fig 3- Le Corbusierâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Villa Savoye.

This building illustrates the unprecedented ability of steel that was popular in the hi-tech era of architecture, though not to the vast scale at the time. The development process of this project rose from the combination of various criteria, a number of which were a response to the brief outlined by the client, with site in mind.

A summary of the brief included: a maximum office floor space incorporated within 46,450 m2, the building size small at street level to enable more public ground space with an expansion of space moving up, creating viewpoints around the space and easy access to the building, use of public transport for the occupants of the space, easily serviced environment with high degree of user friendly open plan space with good natural light access, great degree of visual and physical interconnectivity between floors, minimal costs incurred from use of energy through natural ventilation, reduced heat gain on the faĂ§ade with modern internal control systems. With those restrictions in mind, Foster + Partners came to conclusion that high rise buildings are more pragmatic for the reduction of buildings footprint on the ground and they also let for design of office spaces with well proportioned inlets of natural light. In like manner, the structural steel created for this project was directly addressing an issue of irregular geometry that was set out by the client, Swiss Re.9 Comparatively, Erik et al echo Munroâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s asserted that the diagrid structure bears connections joined with nodes and a 5 degree rotation at the floor plates moving up that gives the building that slender curve.

Norman Foster then mentions that the building was built in response to the technological development in Britain. Furthermore, the Hi-Tech era had reached its peak in Britain and that it would only be reasonable to reflect that in a building on a site great history, hence the choice of glass suggesting elegance, and steel for strength emphasizing the use of modern materials. He additionally notes that the choice of a circular floor plan was due to the constrains of the site, and that circular space not only creates more room for the offices, but also more circulation spaces for the building henceforth increasing the quality of the space in general. Correspondingly, the slender shape of this structure slims toward the bottom hence generating more public space which ground space then forms an interaction between the building and people of the city. 10 Dominic Munro appears to agree with Foster noting that the height of the building condenses the structures footprint on ground level and makes office floors well proportional for natural light.11 In a similar voice, Worsley Giles writes that the vertical and horizontal curving of the building was genius as it gives the impression of no scale due to lack of harsh edges, and one might assume that the building is chained and if untied may float away.

9 Munro, D., MA MIStructE, Associate, Ove Arup and Partners, London, 2004, Research Paper 10 RIBA, 2014, Brits Who Built the Modern World, BBC Documentary 11 Munro, D., MA MIStructE, Associate, Ove Arup and Partners, London, 2004, Research Paper

What is more, the curve cuts down the downdraft trend affecting many skyscrapers today, but sadly this was not an assurance that people shall occupy the space.12 What is more, Foster’s choice of design was greatly motivated by his passion for aircrafts and the other streamlined bodies, hence the appearance of the structure.13 Similarly, Le Corbusier once mentioned, ‘a house is a machine for living’ pointing to his affection of the machine age and modern material. In addition to that they note that the design is unique because the diagram structure is rigid, double twirl, the ventilation system has a double skin shell and the rotation of floors incorporates vertices light wells. Dominic Munro then adds in a like manner that the best advantage of the urban environment is reached by avoiding winds at the bottom of the building, and proportionally placing the structure within the presented plot. Moving on to the foundation, Erik et al, aver that 333 piles of 750mm diameter by 25m depth were used in the base of the structure and the restrictions on site called for development of colossal base that had to be set in one day, (Figure 4).

Fig 4- Illustration of the Floorplates.

Fig 5- Illustration of the Gravitational Load.

The exterior structure is a diagrid structure that holds the building from the outside, creating more circulation space on the interior. The diagrid has connection nodes that hold the structture forming a gerkhin shape. The floor plates are rotated 5 degrees each moving up curving the distinctive curve of the building and allowing for wedge shaped light wells. Next, the general structure of this building consists of two primary structures that include the diagrid system, and the central core that holds the floors. The main structure is the diagrid system that resists both horizontal and gravitational load of the building. Then the central core of the building holds the floor plates, but also resists gravitational load, (Figure 5). As seen on the figures, the diagrid and the central core are the main support of the space, this allows for non load bearing walls on the interior thus creating more room for circulation, but also strengthening the overall structure of the building.15 This idea is similar to pre contemporary structures like Philip Johnson Glasshouse that uses free plan system.

12 13 14 15

Worsley, Giles (28 April 2004). “Glory of the Gherkin”. The Daily Telegraph (London). Larsen, Erik, Mitchell Dickinson, Abby Mayfield, Jake Vinson, and Wendy Weatherly. “30 St. Mary Axe.” Ibid Larsen, Erik, Mitchell Dickinson, Abby Mayfield, Jake Vinson, and Wendy Weatherly. “30 St. Mary Axe.”

The main structure is the diagrid system that resists both horizontal and gravitational load of the building. Then the central core of the building holds the floor plates, but also resists gravitational load, (Figure 5). As seen on the figures, the diagrid and the central core are the main support of the space, this allows for non load bearing walls on the interior thus creating more room for circulation, but also strengthening the overall structure.

Because the structure is taken out, a lot is done to hold the system together to act as internal load bearing walls that would have otherwise been put on another structure. The connections of the diagrid structure are complex in that a special connector is used to carry both horizontal and vertical loads at the ‘buds’ that are monolithic firm and welded as one. On the other hand however, the core is built of a tough combination of columns and steel shafts that withstand gravitational load. The rigid connections of the central core and the diagrid structure create a strong external support for the building without compromising the design of the façade,16 (Figure 6).

Fig 6- Ilustration of Diagrid Nodes.

Fig 7- Illustration of Gravitation on Floor.

Moving on, its important to look at how this structure handles the gravity load. As earlier mentioned, the interior core carries part of the gravitational load vertically, then again we should remember that the diagrid structure is the primary structure. Just as seen in Le Corbusier’s La Villa Savoy, the primary structure is pushed toward the outside of the building. Adding on the core also holds the structure back to resist slanting tendencies especially for that height. More to that, the core structure’s unyielding nature uses moment frames that counterattacks torsion at the same time increasing tautness,17 (Figure 7).

16 Larsen, Erik, Mitchell Dickinson, Abby Mayfield, Jake Vinson, and Wendy Weatherly. “30 St. Mary Axe.” 17 Ibid

The internal structural design of this building is greatly influenced by the ‘free plan’ that was incorporated in earlier buildings like those of Le Corbusier. This building also draws inspiration from the housing boom in America during the early 20th century as Jones asserts ‘It is comparable with the Chrysler Building, the glorious art deco skyscraper built in Manhattan in 1920s’18 , and this points back to the design of the Chrysler Building, (Figure 8 & Figure 9) where the structure is laid with non load bearing internal walls.19

Fig 8- Floor Plan of Chrysler Building

Fig 9- Floor Plan 2 of Chrysler Building

Until now this essay has looked into the structure of 30 St. Mary Axe and lightly on the subject of Free plan. As noted earlier, the free plan was initially conceived in the modern era of architecture and became popular when Le Corbusier incorporated it in his ‘Five Points of Architecture.’ Le Corbusier is known as one of the fathers of modern architecture and has influenced many more architects since then. Le Corbusier’s five points of architecture were; internal walls to be switched with reinforced concrete in grid structure that would emphasize aesthetic more, designing of a free floor plan with no internal restrictions caused by what would have been load bearing walls, designing a façade with no structural function in order to not compromise the aesthetic, a window across the façade horizontally letting in light equally, a flat room with garden at the top providing protection to a concrete floor.20 Le Corbusier had a lucid plan on how to design critically thought through spaces and this in evident in his building, Villa Savoy where the structural pillars are pushed toward the exterior of the building, thus creating more interior space. Its no surprise that Norman Foster incorporates this style in not only 30 St. Mary Axe, but also a couple more buildings like HSBC Headquarters in Hong Kong and StockleyPark Offices in Uxbridge, UK. On BBC’s Brits Who Built The Modern World, Foster often notes that his greatest influences in his career included Le Corbusier, Frank Lloyd Wright and Mies Van De Rohe, all of whom used the free plan way to design their projects.21 Part of Fosters influence also came from the housing boom in The United States at the time when architects like Frank Lloyd Wright engaged in massive projects that shaped the look of modern America, one particularly striking building is Johnson Wax Headquarters that was built around 1939.

18 Jones, J., 2004, A Fine Pinacle, The Guardian, Online: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2004/oct/18/architecture.regeneration , Retrieved March 12th 2016. 19 Massey, Kenneth L. “History of Walter P. Chrysler and the Chrysler Building”. Allpar. Retrieved 2016-02-15. 20 Le Corbusier (1986). Towards a New Architecture. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. 21 (RIBA, 2014)

The interior of the building is a perfect example of the free plan at work as thin pillars cover the space to act as not only structure, but also create an aesthetic.22 Similarly, Mies Van De Rohe incorporated the free plan a most of his works like The Farnsworth house which is a classic example, (Figure 10). This ties back to the Bauhaus school that also in a way emphasized that structure be taken away from the interior of a building. Not to say Foster also noted the Bauhaus movement as one of his great influences. One other major fact to note is that Foster studied abroad in Yale University, USA where he got exposed to these buildings from first hand experience. What is more, his passion in travel and culture also is a factor to reckon with.

Fig 10- Ground Floor Plan, Villa Savoye, Le Corbusier

Generally speaking, the free plan has greatly influenced our perception of architectural space as we see today, and this is apparent in 30 St. Mary Axe and other contemporary work by Norman Foster and his peers. The pioneers of this system set out to create spaces that enable us more interior room without compromising the design of the faĂ§ade. My major deductions from my research are that space should be viewed as circulation ground and that structure not necessarily apparent in the building of houses. In spite of the challenges set by not only planning authorities but also small site, critical thought into what can be and what should be is what led to Fosters success on this project. One point overlooked in most architecture is the influences, the precedents, Foster greatly uses influence from the modernists to design this building and the results are simply stunning. All said and done, marrying the past and the present is key factor in architecture today and only then can spaces be well designed and accepted.

22 Hertzberg, Mark (2010). Frank Lloyd Wrightâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s SC Johnson Research Tower. Rohnert Park: Pomegranate. ISBN 0-7649-5609-4.

Elrod House - Structural Space in its Surrounding Form There are many buildings that do not meet their surrounding environments in many aspects. Buildings can be pieces of art in the way they function or the form of the building or even both, but if they do not work with their environment they can be very much out of place. The failure of an architectural project can in terms not be down to the building itself but the situation of said building, this can work very much the other way around. However a building that is sympathetic to its surroundings and environment is normally an overall much more successful building and much more appreciated as a piece of architecture and not pushed aside as a bad design. This does not mean the building needs to be the same as everything around it; it just means it needs a reason to be the way it is because of that environment.

Elrod House was commissioned by interior designer Arthur Elrod a successful and talented designer of the time, he was known for pushing the boundaries with his own work for the creation of art and perfection. John Lautner also a perfectionist was the architect for this project chosen by Arthur Elrod specifically after seeing his past work. John Lautners grand and bold features of his structures, which draw the eye away from the finer details, underpin his work time after time. Organic design was the continuous element in his designs

“Rooted in a personal design philosophy that is the imaginative extensions of the organic architecture theories of Frank Lloyd Wright”1 being one of Wright’s first apprentices he embodied this into most of his architectural achievements. John Lautner had a condition about taking on the project, the site would have to be excavated by 8 feet allowing John Lautner to really use landscape to the best in his design and create a profile which was very organic and incorporate the boulders of the rocky desert surroundings. This was a significant implication to the overall cost of the project. Does Elrod House work in its surroundings both visually and functionally?

Elrod House was constructed in 1968 and designed by American architect John Lautner who had previously before 1968 designed, Carling House, Pearlman Cabin and Malin House (Chemosphere). Elrod House is located on a hill at 2175 Southridge Drive in Palm Springs, California.

1 Cover page, John Lautner. Alan Hess

Palm Springs being world famous for its mid century modern architecture, this being a real reflection of the Bauhaus movement. Palm Springs has a number of buildings from residential to hotels with all having similar modernism roots. Elrod House being just one of the architectural achievements of Palm Springs, It has rooms that flirt with both inside and out, combining the two environments through subtle connections and also brave technical design features. From the rocky boulders that pierce through both the concrete and glass walls to the circular concrete roof structure. The over bearing roof structure is designed by the influence of the environment and not just positioned there due to it unusual and striking form on a house. The roof is designed from the desert flower petals, shown in figure 1, a distinctive feature that is naturally formed and it’s found in the environment around the building. “Embedded in this broad idea was a structural and spatial concept”2 this idea yet bold and so close to the line of an overbearing and bad design allowed for a function space to be created with maximum visual aesthetics.

Figure 3 - shows the roof structure and how it represents the desert flower.

Elrod House’s most iconic feature is the large circular concrete roof structure, which appears to float seemingly above the main atrium. From just a few very thin and flimsy metal poles, this illusion adds to the dynamics of the structure. The large circular space below the concrete sunburst style roof incorporates large natural boulders that burst through the side of the building.

2 Page 97, John Lautner, Alan Hess

This feature in Elrod House gives a sense that the house is entwined with nature creating one fluid body. Half of the building can be completely opened up to the elements using the mechanical sheer glass wall. This wall can be opened to allow half of the building to become even more connected with the environment. This really accelerates the movement and the connection between outside and inside. The pool latches its self on to the exposed portion of the building, almost looking like a lake attached to a rocky outcrop. This exemplifies the organic form John Lautner was hoping to achieve with his design; simple features and connections can really push a key theme in architecture. John Lautner uses the space provided to it’s full potential to really improve the function of the house,

“Beauty is the harmony of purpose and space”.3

The pool enters the inside of the house and so does the pool deck both of these are inside and outside and when the glass wall is open it becomes one huge space that allows the flow from inside to out occur with almost no barriers. Connections between the two spaces are crucial to achieve an organic flowing building. The Environment has been dragged inside at Elrod House, “The combination of black floor and massive dome shielded the space from the fierce brilliance of the desert sun and heighted the brightness and color of the view beyond”4 but in turn also took the inside to the environment outside from the comfort of the home.

Three rooms have large boulders in them which all pass through external dividing walls, breaking down the harsh concrete environment and bringing in nature. Lautner poses the additional challenge of connecting the boulders to walls of glass, a thin line of adhesive, which adds to the organic feel of the building and heightens the thoughts behind the overall design, only connects the glass panes, as shown in figure 2. These rooms are the three main rooms of the house, the living room, the master bedroom and the master bathroom. The owner of the house, Arthur Elrod believed the form met the functionality that was required, he said “Once I get home and into my sauna, I’m so thrilled to be there that I hate to go out”.5 The person who commissioned the project also being the designer that would live in it met up to his high levels of perfection. Elrod House’s organic form flows with the functionality of the house, to make it a working and living environment, which the house needs to be, but with being a dynamic piece of art that extends out from the rocky outcrop.This extension of the environment is a pleasant extension with natural shape but also mechanical lines and radical shapes. “His work was concerned with the relationship of the human being to space and of space to nature. “Shelter,” he said, “is the most basic human need.””6

3 4 5 6

Quote by Finnish architect, designer, sculptor and painter Alvar Aalto (1898-1976) Page 104, between heaven and earth the architecture of John Lautner. Jean Louis Cohen, Nicholas Olsberg, and Frank Escher. Quote from Arthur Elrod, 1001 buildings you must see before you die, Mark Irving The John Lautner Foundation http://www.johnlautner.org/wp/

John Lautner’s Elrod House is a key example of his work and it shows that his architecture is really about connections. Connections in the environment and connections between people and the architecture, so all these different elements do not become separate but actually work symbiotically together as one key movement. Much as a mechanical clock works, where all the cogs are turning together and in sync, but with the form aspects as well as the function. Form and function start to become one organic role and the difference is not noticed, as they do not need to fight each other but instead they bounce off each other working together.

“The basic needs of the human being and the subtle variations of the individual are the source for Real Architecture as well as, of course, the natural environment and the natural use of materials”7 The form of Elrod House meets the functions of a working house and the space becomes part of the surroundings, not just a stress on the landscape.

Figure 4 - shows the natural boulders in Elrod House and the glass wall and how these two elements come together and blend with the environment.

John Lautner designed some interesting houses and buildings in his time. On the same stretch of road Southridge Drive a few doors up from Elrod House, Lautner designed a house for Bob Hope (Figure 3), and this house is very iconic. The style of the building is very similar to Elrod House in the key features it sticks to but the outcome is very much a different visual experience.

7- http://www.johnlautner.org/wp/?p=710

Figure 5 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; shows Bon hopes House and the volcano and naturally formed view from the inside.

Lautner seems to have a recurring style of house and building type, a rather interesting design that looks almost sinister and evil like. Almost as if it is straight from a super villains lair from a comic or movie, Bob Hopes House almost looks like the inside of a volcano, as shown in Figure 3, and Elrod House was actually a villains house in one of the James Bond movies. Elrod House was casted as a location in the movie (Diamonds are forever), this was the most publicity John Lautner had received for one of his building and help put the name John Lautner on the map.

Four key design aspects that recur in many of Lautnerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s buildings seem to be the connection between space and earth, furthermore how it all comes together in form and structure. John Lautner creates spaces which embody both nature but with the design of the future and looking away from simple housing. Most of Lautners buildings are a piece of art not just a structure, they take in to consideration the surrounding and features of everyday seen objects and accelerated the visual and qualitative environment.

“The Purpose of architecture is to improve human life.”8 On this John Lautner does not just design his buildings to work spaces to live but also be key points in people’s lives, something physical to improve their lives and make things easier in daily activities.

Figure 6 - shows the map location of Elrod House and the gradients around on the connecting landscape.

The use of materials fascinates me; John Lautner uses these materials in a landscape that is showing nature off in a powerful way, but at the same time the building is displacing its self from its surroundings. John Lautner managed to bring two extremes and make them into one, the extreme different use of materials to landscape and their shapes. Elrod House’s organic design manages to identify itself in the desert but also become part of the desert; “Its concrete finish echoes the desert colors and textures”9 this is down to subtle features and detailing on the house.

8 Living Architecture greatest American houses of the 20t century, Dominique Brown and Lucy Gilmour. Page 184 9 Page 97, John Lautner, Alan Hess

There is a huge juxtaposition with the Elrod House and the landscape in which it is featured. A large concrete structure jutting out of the ground with a large curved glass facade is hard to blend into any surroundings, especially such a harsh environment such as the Coachella Valley Desert. The hillside placement of the building gives for fantastic views out across the landscape but the hill location makes it a visible site. However, the gradient of the hill on the east side is much more gradual, shown in figure 4, than the west side meaning it actually sinks into the hillside, making it hard to spot from the bottom of the hill. From the west side the gradient is much sharper and this makes it much more visible, however with the steep gradient it cannot be seen from the parallel running road down the hill on the west side. Its low profile allows it to then further more imbed itself into the rocky outcrop making it extremely hard to see from a distance. The positioning and profile of Elrod House is by all means outrageous but it simply complements its landscape into to which so much of the house is designed around. Concrete was a key material used by John Lautner in nearly every building he designed and built, it involved a significant amount of concrete but it never underpinned the design. None of the buildings become concrete cells, they all worked with the environment, which in most concrete structures this is not present.

“Lautner’s fascination with new shapes and structures had nothing to do with Space age futurism, or movieland glamour, or virtuoso engineering, but came from his determination to humanize the spaces of the built world and create and endlessly varied organic poetry. This was a profoundly serious agenda.”10 This is what John Lautner’s architecture shows, its dynamic response to its surroundings and focus on the function working with the form not just a well-designed piece of architecture. His use of materials is all in connection with the landscape, even though he uses some juxtaposing materials from the landscape the way he has used them allows the building to feel almost like an organic extension out of the Palm Springs rocky desert. The success of Elrod House is down to the detail, “Even it’s materials-concrete, clay, wood, stone and steel- are all used in an organic way that emphasizes their rich, idiosyncratic treasure.”11 This level of detail in design is found in many of Lautner’s building and the motion of organic architecture is imbedded into this design process.

Surrounding landscapes join with the geometric shapes used by John Lautner they rise up from the ground, but with a low setting due to the house being dug deeper into the ground its profile is very low. Its entrance is subtle and discrete from the road; it hides the grand open space inside and the full volume of Elrod House.

10 Ann Philbin, the director of the Hammer Museum, in a foreword to the book on Lautner that accompanied a retrospective exhibition of his work. 11 Living Architecture greatest American houses of the 20t century, Dominique Brown and Lucy Gilmour. Page 184

The techniques used allow the house to be very hidden even though it is situated on the ridge of a large hill and next to a road, shown in figure 5, that has multiple houses along it. As you go round the corner at the entrance of the house, shown in figure 6, a green corridor opens up and this is the entrance to the house. As you go through a set of glass doors you enter into the main living room, the grand open circular space with its large opening over the pool and the views other the desert. This organic flow and movement throughout Elrod House is what allows if to function as a house, well in its surroundings. Geometric shapes were founded on the very first design aspects of Elrod House, much like many other buildings designed by John Lautner, “Lets have a Circle here and a circle there”12 he was bold with his moves if he wasn’t to design something that was radical visually, then it may as well just purely been on function. Functionality doesn’t make for the happiest environment to be in all of the time, if you’re in an environment that helps you get to an end point, but also while enjoying the travel, this makes for a much more life improving structure.

Figure 7 - shows a view of Elrod Housefrom the road and this just shows how hidden the house is from view.

Figure 8 - shows the first entrance into Elrod House and aalso again how hidden it was designed to be from people over looking.

12 Page 97, John Lautner, Alan Hess

Figure 9 - shows the vine covered entrance into Elrod House and how it starts to open up the closer you go throught the building.

Elrod House’s internal space flows with a seamless blend between nature and man made structures. From the very start when you turn around the corner to a vine covered entrance, shown in figure 7, and into a large atrium and then straight onto the pool with the views, with seemingly little barriers in your way, just a thin glass curtain either side. The constant motion of organic flow is found within Elrod House, reasserting the value of function in the home. Derivative from Frank Lloyd Wright, Lautner shows a strong connection with geometric forms like the circle and triangle. These geometric shapes juxtapose with the surrounding landscape forming a vast contrast in shapes, making for a powerful set of imagery, which is constantly photographed. Elrod House has been in many magazines and advertisements down to the iconic shape and power the building displays. Geometric shapes are dominant themes in his works, as is integrating a structure with its surroundings to create an organic flow between the structure and its environment. “Many have described Lautner’s architecture as “space age”, but more than anything else, the Elrod house feels of this world- embedded, grounded and secure. Perhaps a paradoxically, it is an exciting place but earthly in its power.”13 Very powerful imagery is found in Elrod House from a simple plot of land that from the street looks almost non-existent, it’s being from inside the plot that makes for a grand statement and over exaggeration of simple structures.

13 Living Architecture greatest American houses of the 20t century, Dominique Brown and Lucy Gilmour. Page 184

With vast use of concrete on show making it look like a single formed structure, much like the rocky hill it sits upon. From walls that work as environment connections, to hidden stairs in boulders, which emphasize the environment link. These all come together to connect the structural space of the living environment and the natural surrounding form.

In conclusion Elrod House works both visually and functionally, its know for its powerful imagery and concrete geometry. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s also known for its intensity in imagery it creates for photo-shoots and advertisements. John Lautnerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s spaces both involved and evolved the landscape in which they were situated. Spaces in which architecture is happening can enhance oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perception of that space, both raising it functionally and aesthetically in form and function. This process of function and form coming together and complimenting their natural environment have come together in Elrod House. I believe for the site Elrod House meets all possible requirements that are required of it and it goes above and beyond the call of duty in terms of improving the qualitative aspects of daily life in the household. Its form allows it to become a timeless classic in terms of style and design, allowing its iconic geometric shapes and desert backdrop recur in imagery through history time after time, but also retains the motion of the building being a home to live in. Elrod House manages to work well in its surrounding environment and work in functionality combined with form simultaneously, down to precision design features and attention to detail and the idea of organic extensions with a geometric brutalism twist.

The New Acropolis Museum lies in the triangle of ideology, history and enjoyment, it is proven the greatest cultural project in Greece of the 21st century. A new museum was needed since the old one, could not keep up with the politics propaganda involved, the demands of the people coming in and was failing to present lot’s of archaeological findings that were kept in storage or left vulnerable out in the open due to lack of space also more important reasons were pushing for it. In 2001 following 4 previous competitions and 30 years of planning, the Swiss, New York based Architect Bernard Tschumi won the architectural competition for the designing of the new Acropolis museum in cooperation with the Greek Michalis Photiades. This is an ambiguous project for both, the Architect, Greece and the whole world. The museums location, in the area of Makrygianni just 300 meters from the Parthenon was thoughtfully selected to enable a link between the museums exhibitions and the archaeological buildings and monuments of Acropolis. It stands as a modern historian narrator of human presence on the Acropolis, from the prehistoric period until the Late Antiquity, affecting the visitors’ education and the aesthetics of the environment space of Acropolis. Almost all books, articles and writings when referring to the Acropolis Museum start off emphasising the many restrictions, arguments, criticisms and finally the achieved greatness and importance of this building. The opinions of both, high ranked officials or simply people living in the neighbourhood opposing the architects design, the change of government and 104 court cases against the scheme really delayed the project and tested Tschumi and his team. ‘’On Saturday, Council of State sources said the supreme administrative court has rejected as illegal initial plans... The court reportedly found that the plans allowed for significant antiquities to be destroyed without Culture Ministry approval. The decision will be published in a few weeks. The project is already 11 months behind schedule’’1.

As the project proceeded and Tschumi had put in more time on studying the project and the site and city of the project in general he found major challenges he had to overcome. One of them was that with any major construction project in central Athens is very likely to come across archaeological finds of great importance. Tschumi took that challenge in his favour and came up with a great solution. With cleaning up the remains of the finds to search for spots that could be penetrated deep to the bedrock without damaging the surrounding ancient founding’s and built the museum on pillars without affecting the site and at the same time being able to withstand heavy vibrations because of the seismic activity in the area. ‘’The building’s polemical location added further layers of responsibility to the design. Located at the foot of the Acropolis, the site confronted us with sensitive archaeological excavations, with the presence of the contemporary city and its street grid and with the Parthenon itself, one of the most influential buildings in Western civilization.

1. Tuesday May 20, 2003 (Museum project ‘to go ahead’) by Kathimerini

Combined with a hot climate in an earthquake region, these conditions moved us to design a simple and precise museum with the mathematical and conceptual clarity of ancient Greece.â&#x20AC;&#x2122;â&#x20AC;&#x2122;2 Following the glass floor the ground level, entering the museum reveals to the visitors the ancient civilisation from an incredible perspective.

Fig 1-Archaeological site below the main entrance to the museum.

In the making of the other floors and exhibition areas of the museum the materials used were mostly concrete and glass, (Figure 1). Since the museum is occupied mostly by sculptures which most of them were architectural pieces that stood outdoors in antiquity, decorating the memorials of Acropolis, the engagement with artificial light in order to create an outdoor feeling was one of the project requirements.

Tschumi experimented with different types of glass and windows/openings, allowing the Parthenon Gallery at the top floor to overwhelmingly flood with natural light, letting that light reach the archaic galleries underneath towards the core of the building and fading out by lightly touching the archaeological excavations underneath offering the best possible presentation of the sculptures in their normal environment, the Athenian sun and still keeping the exhibitions in a controlled environment by cool air flow and double glazing windows. Therefore the Acropolis Museum is usually called Museum of Light. Adding to it the concrete columns in the buildings exhibition have succeeded in helping present spectacular views of the sculptures with the appropriate light reflections and colour contrast.

2 Said by Bernard Tschumi (http://www.arcspace.com/features/bernard-tschumi-architects/new-acropolis-museum/).

Fig 2- The Votives of the Roman Period.

The criticisms from all kinds of people, Greek architects, theorists, amateurs and professionals critics and all kinds of professors and everyday people from all around the globe was a lot about building on top of the archaeological findings and the use of so much glass and concrete since some people thought it didn’t much with the surrounding buildings in the Acropolis. But it didn’t seem to be for a specific reason, like Tschumi handling something badly or against a specific point and in some way it is normal to have arguments and criticism when building a project that big in a site so important, the Acropolis, and a quarter of a mile away from the Parthenon. One of the people against the style of the museum was build, was academician and secretary general of the Archaeological Society Vassilios Ch. Petrakos which said the following in a formal hearing. ‘’To construct the new museum violated fundamental ethical rules of the Office, that I met and I lived . Violated rules of scientific, aesthetic and social justice. The new museum exists and will exist after us. By its nature and character, as the formed, is aggressive factor of this unique region that faces , namely the south slope of the Acropolis’’3.

‘’ here were, you know, some who argue that the new museum should have the Parthenon style. But who wants -I at least didn’t like it at all, to imitate Phidias’’4 Bernard Tschumi supports while he tries to make clear his goal, through architecture to develop a communication with the monument of Parthenon and not to compare the coexistence between a newer and older version.

3 BASILIS K. KALAMARA , AFP , Monday, May 17, 2010. 4 Acropolis Museum : the Greek vision of Joanna Halatsi ARCHITECTUREApo pro.plus.ma arkitektones | April 7, 2014.

“The Parthenon was the highest point of culture and worship,” says Tschumi. “The museum is a place that records those achievements. The museum will stage the work of that era while asserting a new identity.”5

Tschumi’s design with key planning forms of using light and movement is projected through a conceptual geometric sense. By humble architectural expressions the museum seems to diminish intentionally to focus attention towards the Parthenon. It mirrors the philosophy and reasoning of why the building, (the museum), exists in that specific place and reveals its self through different styles each time, with transparent glass that help and guide the direct connection with the third floor architectural monument and with the sunken archaeological neighbouring area sometimes by the alignment of the museum which is in parallel to the Parthenon or with the visitors circulation in it which is resembling going up on the Sacred Rock. The top floor, the Parthenon gallery in rectangular shape rotates slightly to position the marbles of Frieze accurately as they used to be in the Parthenon. As for the circulation path it recites the overwhelming space as the city’s streets are continued in the different historical periods in the museum, the course of the visitors around the museum is shaped as a three dimensional loop from the glass floor walk-way over the archaeological excavations, to the entrance and towards the Parthenon gallery which projects the scene of the Acropolis.

Fig 3- Sketch courtesy Bernard Tschumi Architects Circulation.

5 From Columbia News by By Jason Hollander.

Fig 4- Sketch courtesy Bernard Tschumi Exploded Axonometric.

ig 5- The entrance of the Acropolis Museum with the concrete columns.

“ t is very contextual and powerfully respectful of the urban fabric of Athens while doing a dance around the ruins.”6

“ quiet work…a building that is both an enlightening meditation on the Parthenon and a mesmerizing work in its own right.”7

“ geometrical marvel dedicated to the celebration of antiquity…a purposefully, rather than gratuitously, dynamic building.”8

Furthermore, the materials used are glass, concrete and marble showing simplicity. The glass allows the museum to flood with natural light and the concrete is the main material and also used as a background in the projection of the sculptures. Marble is used in the flooring with black for spaces of movement, and a lighter colour in the exhibitions.

There was even a contradiction about these suggested concrete columns because the Greek authorities kept arguing that these columns didn’t comply with the local building regulations and codes. These columns were suggested by the world’s best engineers and when Tschumi and his team studied the authorities building codes they found out they had last been revised in 1916.

Despite Tschumi’s efforts to use as much natural light for better representation and provide an easy circulation with also views on the ancient civilisation underneath some people find the way that the museum is using its perks is wrong with many different and negative comments like supporting the building attracts more attention than the actual exhibited historic contents themselves.

‘’ he volume and the architecture of the building essentially crushes the findings intended to highlight. A few hours after visiting, a person has in mind more the image of the interior of the building (its size, the play of light and glass surfaces) and less any finding. The building does not work as invisible shell promotion of the exhibits, but as itself an exhibit. ‘’, ‘’ The high level of modern architecture of the building and the effort of a dialectic between two remote architectural eras (classic and modern) coexist with absence historical care for rapport building and findings.’’9

6 Comments of the AIA Honor Award Jury writing in 2011. 7 New York Times critic Nicolai Ouroussoff. 8 Jonathan Glancey, Guardian. 9 Author : Theodoros,Title:

Ένας νεόπλουτος ημιμαθής: το νέο μουσείο της (αρχαίας) Ακρόπολης Ι (Published

19/08/2009) & II (Published 06/09/2009).

Another example based on the article, “The Acropolis Museum: An unhappy Fit’’ they state that the building shows very little regard for its surroundings which is an important site of Athens cause is the only district survived from the 19th century.

But the good hard work put in by Tschumi and the whole team was acknowledged by lots. In one case even got support by a Chairman of the British Committee for the Restitution of the Parthenon Marbles. At the time Professor Snodgrass visited the construction site of the New Acropolis Museum, he was impressed by the design, the type of work and how the Architect managed to respond efficiently to all the challenges and problems that he phased. Mainly by the way they treated the archaeological remains that were underneath the building. Some days before he travelled to the site there were some stories rising in the British press about the remains under the museum being destroyed, ignored and not protected in the way they should.

He responded on a Press release with the following: ‘’In the 16th of July.... I was given a conducted tour of the site of the new Museum by the Director of the project, Professor Dimitrios Pandermalis. The main focus of the visit was on the archaeological excavations which will underlie the new building....Two days before our visit, a series of alarmist stories had begun to appear in the British press, to the effect that, by a piece of cultural vandalism, the remains underlying the Museum were being “destroyed”; and that a different site should have been chosen for it all along. Remarkably, appears that the Athens correspondent of the Guardian, with whom the story seems to have originated, had not visited the site or even, checked the facts with the Director; nor, equally remarkably, had the Athens-based archaeologists who were the primary sources for the story. The correspondent preferred to rely instead on video clips seen by the Guardian. This is like sneaking into a hospital, catching a glimpse of a delicate surgical operation through the window of the operating theatre, and then accusing the surgeons of murder. A.M.SNODGRASS.’’10

10.From: “BCRPM” <info@parthenonuk.com> List Editor: “H-Museum [Marra]” <marra@MUSEUMSLIST.NET> Editor’s Subject: NEWS: The New Acropolis Museum (Press Release) Author’s Subject: Press Release The New Acropolis Museum Date Written: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 16:07:31 +0100 Date Posted: Sat, 26 Jul 2002 04:05:55 -0400 23rd July, 2002 info@parthenonuk.com Press Release.

Tschumi being a famous architect, theorist and academic argued about the role of architecture in the social structure and was generally a person with strong opinions and beliefs. Even he, being involved in the incredibly challenging and ambitious project made him changes his points of view on some factors of architectural practise and theory. As noted in an interview between Michele Costanzo and Bernard Tschumi in April 2008 ‘’ In recent times, words like event and space in Tschumi’s work have been replaced by others like concept and context. This seemed to start happening with the project for the New Acropolis Museum. Does this shift in terminology represent a critical reassessment of the work? Tschumi: ‘The project for the New Acropolis Museum had a profound effect on my thinking. After we won the competition and for a couple of years I was not sure what to make of it..., it took me a while to realise that this project brutally confronted issues that I had been able to sidestep before, such as the issue of context. Rather than a reassessment of the work it became a means to expand thought about the overall work,

A case where practise feeds theory.”11

The importance of this project is huge for Greece, as Tschumi said in the constructing phase of the project, ‘’ Clearly it is part of an ambition on the part of Greece to modernize itself, This is the first step’’. this project is not just an improvement to a better and bigger museum, but it is a big step in a 200 year old ‘battle’ with the British for the return of the Elgin Marbles back to Greece, as Professor Evangelos Venizelos (Minister of Culture 2009) said ‘’The new Acropolis Museum , dream of Melina Mercouri is our obligation towards the major monument of our cultural heritage, In this unique room can only unite all the Parthenon sculptures back to their place .In this way, the new Acropolis Museum serves as the most powerful argument for the return of the Marbles’’. Melina Mercouri was an Actress, Former Minister of Culture, one who first announced the competition of the new museum of Acropolis and the first to promote the demand of the return of the Elgin marbles from the British museum back to Greece and mentioned this act of the British not giving back the marbles as ‘‘Political imperialism’’.

After many years of dead end arguments with the British, when the building was eventually completed the Organisation of the museum was established in 2008 and the museum opened for the public on the 20th of June 2009, the Greek’s had played their strongest card.

And it is clearly stated by many high ranked officials of the Greek government, with an example what the Greek Embassy in London said: “With this project, which costs a lot, proclaim in a practical way our commitment to complete the museum with the expectation 11. Interview between Michele Costanzo and Bernard Tschumi in April-June 2008, Book: Theoretical meltdown.

that the Parthenon Marbles will brighten the new halls. So we show our determination move on,”

The big question, ‘who is the owners of this marbles?’ One of the advantages that this New Acropolis Museum had offered was cultural propaganda, the past years the Greeks struggled with the weakness to retrieve the marbles due to the lack of a suitable exhibition centre, museum, to position them and were hoping that Tschumi would design a museum so great that would convince the British and the whole world to return the marbles.

After the completion of the project, even in the Grand opening the times Culture Minister A. Samaras, in a symbolic gesture of requesting the reunification of the Eglin marbles, placed in the Parthenon exhibition room another marble piece that was returned from the Vatican Museum. Even Bernard Tschumi himself had expressed his opinion about it, ‘’Now that the building is completed and everyone can see the quality of light but also the way in highlighting the exhibits compared with the British Museum, the very reasonable logic demands to return the Parthenon sculptures in their place. After all, only then the visitor will have the opportunity to confront under the Greek sun, the same sun that gave birth to them and under which they were created . And below which is made for all of us to admire them.’’

Fig 6- The projection of the Parthenon frieze on a rectangular cement core with the same dimensions as the Parthenon’s cella, enabling a continues detailed view of the frieze when someone walks around the gallery. There is a combination of original alongside the copies that are missing because they are located in other museums, such as the Louvre and the British Museum.

After the completion of the museum, even the Sunday Mail talked about how great the museum is and that the marbles should head back to Greece where they will have a safe home now. ‘’The Acropolis will this year have a museum fit for Greece’s greatest treasure, the Elgin Marbles.’’12 Even with all the challenges and criticisms a great level of success was achieved. The New Acropolis Museum has been awarded with many awards and is one of them most important museums in the entire world. Tschumi has succeeded to create a building that has earned respect and can stand tall and proud about its name ‘Museum of Light’ next to the Parthenon and symbolise the Acropolis Facing all this, Tschumi was asked if this project was something of a poisoned chalice. He answered:

“I think architects are often at their best when faced with restrains”.13

Fig 7’ An aerial image of the Site on Acropolis, including the museum and the Parthenon.

12. The Sunday Times 13. Said by Bernard Tschumi.

What is Space? Space is a dimension dependent on the emptiness and limitations set by certain physical or imaginary boundaries, translating the thoughts and ideas of the surroundings, interpreted by the architect through form.

This concept is important to understand how the manipulation of space has a direct correlation with the architect, as depending on its arrangement, it can be viewed as an embodiment of the individual, reflecting, mirroring certain aspects and characteristics of the one residing in it; as Philip Johnson said

“All architecture is shelter, all great architecture is the design of space that contains, cuddles, exalts, or stimulates the persons in that space”.1 ‘The Glass House’ does exactly that, designed to be his own private residence and considered to be one of his most iconic and exemplar pieces of work, it acts as a mirror, going in parallel with his life, echoing the various, multiple layers to his flamboyant nature as “his architecture is invoked as a sort of by-product of his personality”2 , but to understand this we need to first understand, just who Philip Johnson was.

Philip Johnson (8th July 1906 -25th January 2005) was a renowned and very imp ortant figure in the world of Architecture, especially thanks to his contributions to the modernist movement. Born in Cleveland, Ohio he was labelled as the “dean of American architecture”3 . Thanks to his father’s wealthy background, he was able to meet, study and look closely at the works of the likes of Mies Van de Rohe and Le Corbusier which enabled him to voyage around the world and encouraged him to stop being an Architectural Historian and turn into an Architect himself.

Johnson was a very complex man, “an unapologetic aesthete who took pleasure in testing new ideas”4 who continuously craved to improve and discover new ways to interpret the different styles of architectural design of the time since he relished to constantly challenge himself, he viewed himself to be “a chameleon, so changeable… a gadfly and a questioner”5 even at the case of being critiqued and labelled to be un-original and a copycat as he admitted himself,

“I got everything from someone. Nobody can be original” and believed that *it was better to be good than original”6 undertaking one of Mies Van de Rohe’s sayings to be his theology in life. 1 Lamster, Mark. 2012. “Philip Johnson (1906-2005)”. Architectural Review. http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reputations/philip-johnson-1906-2005/8627000.fullarticle. 2 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 3 Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. 4 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 5 “Philip Johnson Quotes At Brainyquote.Com”. 2016. Brainyquote. http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/p/philipjohn598102.html. 6 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press.

This is the case of the glass house as it can easily be viewed in his evidently clear “Interpretation of Mies’s (Johnson’s friend and mentor, whose design idea for such a building originated from) concept of a glass-and- steel house”7 , taking inspiration from the collage-designs which the former created “for an unrealised project… in Wyoming”8 (Figure 1) which later came to be realised a year after the latter’s work in, Plano, Chicago, Illinois.

Fig 1- Mies Van de Rohe’s collage concept design.

Being very minimal and simplistic in its shape and structure, the house (located at New Canaan, Connecticut) is “sited within commuting distance of New York”9 . The house was built on a five acre range of a property spanning up to 47 acres which he bought for himself, 49 acres as it currently stands. It was his very own big ‘canvas’ in which he could play with and experiment multiple, different styles of architecture. The land was his “fifty year diary”10 as he would call it and ’The Glass house’ was his first and most prized possession of his creations. He continued to develop with fourteen other separate, individual structure through time.

To get to the house one would have to go through a long drive before getting to the destination itself (Figure 2). The property’s walkthrough is dramatized straight away at the entrance as it is “marked by a monumental postmodern gate… [That] conveys to all who enter, “You have arrived””11. The individual would be presented with multiple things, varying from tall pine trees, meadows, pavilions and follies all carefully “positioned in the landscape”12 to create different sceneries, each drawing attention at different viewpoints trying to build suspense before reaching to the house itself, his most personal piece of work, ‘the Glass House’.

7 Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. 8 IBID. 9 IBID. 10 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 11 Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. 12 IBID.

Fig 2- New Canaan site plan with ‘The Glass House’ and ‘The Guest House’ in black.

This goes hand in hand with his fixation to be in touch and at the forefront of the latest trends (which could be viewed as one of the reasons for his infinite contradictory nature), as well as his thirst for attention at all times directed through his some-what arrogantly posh behaviour, can only be possible to understand if one were to view the house as Philip Johnson himself and the surrounding land as his media platform. His star-like attributes allowed him to keep up with such fixations with ease (although it was mostly possible due to his immense financial wealth) together with his strong influential persona, it allowed him to impel an image as a strong figure “that shaped the discipline’s future… [using] his position at MoMA to shine a spotlight on those he deemed worthy”13 along with distributing commissions to his disciples and “orient[ing] the discipline in new directions”14 ; factors that propelled him to further his fame.

“If there is any single characteristic that defines the architectural vocabulary of Johnson’s work, it is the void”15 which seems to be recurring theme in his works “regardless of programme: private residence, office tower, public institution”16 . This is because he believed that an architectural structure should not be just a construction but should be able to resonate with the individual himself. In many ways ‘The Glass House’ conveys that, as like his architecture, he was constantly in search “for an external charge”17 , the reason for his ever changing nature and his contradictory statements, hence why it can be viewed as the embodiment of Philip Johnson.

Aside from this aspect, the building has many opposing factors that are carefully put together which somehow manage to flow harmoniously in its rigidness, similarly to the ‘yinyang’ symbol, they reflect his conflicting characteristics. “He was a historicist who proselytised for the new, a populist who was an elitist, an anti-Semite who befriended Jews, a visionary who lacked vision, a ‘genius’ who proclaimed his lack of talent”18 .This flux in behaviour is 13 Lamster, Mark. 2012. “Philip Johnson (1906-2005)”. Architectural Review. http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reputations/philip-johnson-1906-2005/8627000.fullarticle. 14 IBID. 15 IBID 16 IBID 17 IBID 18 IBID

represented symbolically (either through materiality, within the spatial arrangement or with its relation with its surrounding) through-out the building.

“ et on a closely cropped lawn”19 , the house itself can easily be viewed as a part of a set along with its almost identical in shape yet dissimilar pair, ‘The Guest House’. “These two structures… represent two halves of a whole”20, with the latter purposely designed to contrast with the former building it brings us back to the recurring theme of opposites as it is completely enclosed in a brick façade with only three circular windows as it’s openings; it can be described as the polar opposite to its twin (Figure 3). This was done so that this latter wouldn’t take away the attention from the architect’s own residence, ‘The Glass House’

Fig 3- ‘The Glass House’ & ‘The Guest House’.

Even ‘The Gallery’ (another one of his creations on the site of New Canaan) was buried underground into a grassy hill because “he didn’t want the gallery to draw attention away from his house”21 which is pretty amusing as there is “a very sophisticated irony at work… as… over time he dotted the estate with outbuildings and follies in a wild diversity of styles”22 . This is a reflection of his assertion to the world as he declares himself as an Architect, although some would argue that he was more of a socio-critical figure rather than of Architect.

The house is a “steel-frame structure with symmetrically opposed doors in all four walls”

encompassing the glass panels acting as a cage, with the only thing hidden being: the shower, the lavatory, the fireplace and the chimney, by “a circular brick core”24 piercing through the roof of the building (Figure.4). This use of glass and steel can be viewed as another element of reflection to his opposing views to his ever changing statements as the thick, strong, dull properties of the metal frames are balanced out by the very thin, fragile, transparent properties of the glass sheets. 19 Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. 20 Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. 21 Ouroussoff, Nicolai. 2007. “Philip Johnson - Glass House - Architecture - Review”. Nytimes.Com. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/arts/design/06glas.html?_r=1. 22 Hawthorne, Christopher. 2016. “Architect Philip Johnson’s Glass House | Architectural Digest”. Architectural Digest. http://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/architect-philip-johnson-glass-house-modernism-article. 23 Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. 24 IBID.

Fig 4- Elevation of ‘The Glass House’.

The interior of the house consists of one large space. “There is an instant expansion, imaginatively and physically, in an invisible lobby… with… The disposition of furniture and objects contrast spatial areas and volumes which act as surrogates for rooms and passages” 25 creating the illusion of having “invisible partitions and corridors”26 as there no palpable boundaries to divide and subjugate the limits to that space.

Due to the nature of arrangement of the objects, Johnson made sure that “the furniture around the house is precise”27. There is a cylindrical brick chimney at the core of the house [which is a] clear reference to the architecture of the traditional family home”28 since he would never be able to have what was considered to a ‘regular family life’ of the late 1940s. His “outsider’s view of that way of life”29 is resonated through the placement of the chimney, as he uses it as a mean of connection to the world he desired to conform and accepted into.

“ he whole arrangement inside the house… was done from a simple, Mies-ian arrangement of planes and blocks”30 indicating the relationship between the bedroom closet and the kitchen both of them being “anchored by the circular bathroom”31 creating this small world of asymmetry, quickly denied by the exterior of the house. As in Johnson’s own words: “I put the whole thing in a symmetrical cage”32 which seems to deny and defeat the whole purpose of having the Miesian arrangement in the first place. A strong reflection of his contradictory nature.

The Glass House is “in many ways less rigid than the Farnsworth House, more picturesque in its setting, more decorative in its details and more open to the landscape around it”33, it focuses more on the complexity of the layout of the domestic programme rather than the architectural aspects which is why the more in depth one looks, they would find glances of his personality.

Most of the furniture in the living room have been designed by none other than Mies Van de Rohe himself. Johnson started defining and reinforcing the idea of that space by having an off-white rug defining with “seating around a low table”34 which is allocated at the heart of the house. Aside from those elements of Mies, (Figure 5), there is the “standing lamp of oriental simplicity, designed by Johnson…. [there is] a painting on an easel: A Poussin legendary landscape with figures”35. This latter is then ‘balanced’ with the placement of a small marble replica of the sculpture ‘Two Circus Women’ by Elie Nadelman directly opposite to it, (Figure 6). Furthermore, one would find that the “fixed furniture plan contrasts with the surrounding landscape… ever changing through weather and season”36 to be quite ironic and amusing since Johnson always tried to keep up with the latest trends and be in touch with the times, whereas this correlation seems to imply just the contrary. 25 26 27 28 29

Johnson, Philip, Yukio Futagawa, and Bryan Robertson. 1972. Johnson House, New Canaan, Connecticut, 1949-. Tokyo: A.D.A. EDITA. IBID. “The Glass House | The Glass House”. 2016. Theglasshouse.Org. http://theglasshouse.org/explore/the-glass-house/. Friedman, Alice T. 1998. Women And The Making Of The Modern House. New York: Abrams. IBID.

30 31 32 33 34 35 36

“The Glass House | The Glass House”. 2016. Theglasshouse.Org. http://theglasshouse.org/explore/the-glass-house/. IBID. IBID. Friedman, Alice T. 1998. Women And The Making Of The Modern House. New York: Abrams. “The Glass House | The Glass House”. 2016. Theglasshouse.Org. http://theglasshouse.org/explore/the-glass-house/. Johnson, Philip, Yukio Futagawa, and Bryan Robertson. 1972. Johnson House, New Canaan, Connecticut, 1949-. Tokyo: A.D.A. EDITA. “The Glass House | The Glass House”. 2016. Theglasshouse.Org. http://theglasshouse.org/explore/the-glass-house/.

Fig 5- Living space inside ‘The Glass House’.

Fig 6- Living space inside ‘The Glass House’ (2).

Fig 7: Reflection of the outside inside the house.

When asked about ‘the walls’, Johnson would often answer by saying that the landscape is his “wallpaper that change every five minutes throughout the day”37, with the glass being its medium, it would change according to different amount of sun light depending on the ever-changing light conditions that would create refracted images with the trees outside and the interior inside overlapping to create multiple silhouettes (Fig.7) that would bring the two together. He would then often reinforce that statement expressing the notion of walls being just an “idea in your mind. If you have a sense of closure you are in a room”38. These notions could be interpreted as a subconscious representation of his homosexuality as a way of blurring the lines, by placing something out of the ordinary and blend in with the landscape around him, hiding in plain sight just as he did by hiding his sexuality in the world around him.

Although, Johnson was sometimes remarked as being an exhibitionist, due to the properties of ‘The Glass House’, it was rather a subtle expression of his homosexuality as the inside of the house are being revealed to public by “operating as a TV set”39, meanwhile the fully enclosed Guest House represents the true nature of his being as it depicts “the repression of self, the claustrophobically enclosed space in which gay people are forced to relegate their hearts and souls”40. This statement reveals to be true as Johnson would often use the glass house as a room in which he would spend most of his daily activities but would, at times, prefer to sleep in the house facing opposite to it. 37 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 38 IBID. 39 IBID. 40 Stern, Mark J. 2012. “”The Glass House” As Gay Space: Exploring The Intersection Of Homosexuality And Architecture”. Student Pulse 4 (06). http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/651/the-glass-house-as-gay-space-exploring-the-intersection-of-homosexuality-andarchitecture.

Fig 8: Site ground and house floor.

The building “raised on a plinth set amid trees with extensive view beyond”

is essentially detaching the house from the surrounding creating the illusion of the building to be elevated, “floating on the sea”42, (Fig. 8)as he would describe it which is kind of ironic as “he disliked the sea as much as he disliked elevators”43. This could be interpreted as his inability to conform to the world of the mid-20th century as well as the discomfort he was experiencing as being a gay individual was considered outrageous and inacceptable by society. 41

“ nsuspecting visitors could not know that this apparent monument to transparent living was a hotbed of homosexual activity behind locked windows.”44 The fact that Johnson was gay, as mentioned earlier, was hidden from the public. In fact he even opted out from having his choices exposed to the public as he “specifically requested that the New Yorker conceal his homosexuality… fearing it would cost him his commission to design the AT&T building”45; since the likes of him were considered dangerous and being treated as “sexual perverts”46 , the house can essentially be interpreted as the manifestation of the subconscious hunger for a space for him to belong and call home which is clear as he would invite his friends (most of whom would happen to be gay) and host gay cocktail parties where they would “exhibit their homosexuality within the Glass House”47 and expose their true nature while they are being protected by the barrier of glass, once again reinforcing “this sense of remove”48. In essence “the liberation of the individual is achieved here”49. It was made “by and for one person”50 and that is Philip Johnson; the fact that the “world could look in on gay men inhabiting an aesthetically pleasing setting and not understand that they are gay”51 is quite funny to see this very evident ironic contradiction.

Fig 9- ‘The Glass House’ plan.

41 Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. 42 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 43 IBID. 44 Stern, Mark J. 2012. “”The Glass House” As Gay Space: Exploring The Intersection Of Homosexuality And Architecture”. Student Pulse 4 (06). http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/651/the-glass-house-as-gay-space-exploring-the-intersection-of-homosexuality-andarchitecture. 45 IBID. 46 IBID. 47 IBID. 48 Friedman, Alice T. 1998. Women And The Making Of The Modern House. New York: Abrams. 49 Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. 50 Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing.

Even through all the complexities of his life, Johnson was a very simple man which is echoed through the simplicity of the geometric shapes inside the house. The elements of the house can be essentially broken down to: squares, a circle, rectangles and a triangle in its most basic form, where truth and beauty are expressed through pure geometric form, (Fig.9).

“ hile keeping theory at a distance…Johnson paradoxically liked to keep some of its protagonists close”52. He did so that he could be aesthetically inspired by their work as he viewed architecture mainly as an alternative tool and platform to display art and valued the aesthetical aspects of a building more than its functionality, (hence why Van de Rohe stormed out when he saw the house) It “calls attention to the complexity of the domestic programme especially to the sexuality and privacy”53 where each element in the house was placed carefully with meaning. He expressed this notion by stating that “architecture is an art primarily and hardly anything else”54, “You can’t learn architecture any more than you can learn a sense of music or of painting”55 emanating his desire and pleasure of style and keeping up with trends.

All in all, ‘The Glass House is a remarkable building. It may not be the best architectural piece in terms of function but it is a great in term of its purpose as it emulated his deeper desires and acted upon it creating a safe ambience for homosexuals such as himself to live in. Notorious for its revolutionary and controversial ideology of the house, it is an iconic building which evolved the concept of the modernism movement. Johnson relished on the idea of “pushing himself and others to the edge”56. This notion stands to be true for this building as one is able to see hence why it can be perceived as a manifestation to the different aspects of his personality, revealing “his interests in the past, present and future”57 through the simplicity of the aesthetical aspects of the building with each individual element having multiple layers to its meaning as interpreted through either materiality or domestic arrangement, hence why this space can be perceived as being a reflection of the individual itself, Philip Johnson.

BIBLIOGRAPHY’S THE CONTEMPORARY FREE PLAN ARCHITECTURE: • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • •

Botton, Alain De. 2006. The Perfect Home. Documentary Series. Directed by Alain De Botton. Produced by Chanel 4. Performed by Alain De Botton. Chanel 4. Christiaanse, K. (2007). 30 St. Mary Axe. 30 St Mary Axe.Built identity: Swiss Re’s corporate architecture (pp. 139-166). Basel: BirkhaÌˆuser. Conrads, lrich (1970). Programs and Manifestos on 20th century Architecture. Cambridge, MA: MIT. p. 99. Fact File. (n.d.). 30 St Mary Axe - The Gherkin. Retrieved January 19, 2016, from http://www.30stmaryaxe. com/fact.html Foster, N., (2013), Brits Who Built The Modern World, BBC, Online Glass Skyscraper - Gherkin. (2013, March 1). Glazette. Retrieved January 18, 2016, from http://www.glazette. com/glass-skyscraper-gherkin-412.html Home Page. (n.d.). The Baltic Exchange. Retrieved January 19, 2016, from http:// www.balticexchange.com/ default.asp?action=article&ID=19 Larsen, Erik, Mitchell Dickinson, Abby Mayfield, Jake Vinson, and Wendy Weatherly. “30 St. Mary Axe.” Le Corbusier (1986). Towards a New Architecture. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, Inc. Massey, Kenneth L. “History of Walter P. Chrysler and the Chrysler Building”. Allpar. Retrieved 2016-02-15. Masters, F. J. (n.d.). Measurement, modeling, and simulation of ground level tropicalcyclone winds. Florida Coastal Monitoring Program, University of Florida. Retrieved January 19, 2016, from http://fcmp.ce.ufl. edu/pubs/ForrestMastersDissertation.pdf Miller, J. P., & Antholz, R. D. (2006, November). Strong Diagonals. civil engineering, 76, 60. Munro, D., MA MIStructE, Associate, Ove Arup and Partners, London, 2004, Research Paper Murray-West, Rosie (30 September 2000). “Baltic backs legal fight over ‘gherkin’”. London: Telegraph. Retrieved 6 February 2010. Powell, K., & Smith, G. (2006). 30 St Mary Axe: a tower for London. London: Merrell. RIBA, 2014. Bits Who Built The Modern World. illustrated ed. London: s.n.The Perfect Home. 2006. [Film] Directed by Alain De Botton. Britain: s.n. RIBA, 2014, Brits Who Built The Modern World, BBC Documentary 30 St. Mary Axe, Archweb, (n.d), Image, Online, Retrieved on 08/03/16, from: http://www.archweb.it/ dwg/arch_arredi_famosi/Norman_Foster/30_St_Mary_Axe/30_st_mary_axe_dwg.jpg

•

Richardson, J. (n.d.). Wind Loads. Civil, Construction and Environmental Engineering Department, University of Alabama. Retrieved January 20, 2016, from http:// richardson.eng.ua.edu/Former_Courses/DWRS_ Worsley, G., 2004, “Glory of the Gherkin”, The Daily Telegraph (London), Retrieved; 09/03/16, Online through; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/art/3616020/Glory-of-theGherkin.html 30 St Mary Axe Facts | CTBUH Skyscraper Database. (n.d.). Skyscraper Center. Retrieved January 20, 2016, from http://www.skyscrapercenter.com/london/30-st-maryaxe/2369/ 30 St’ Mary Axe (The Gherkin), London. (n.d.). Archinomy. Retrieved January 20, 2016, from http://www. archinomy.com/case-studies/669/30-st-mary-axe-the-gherkin-london STRUCTURAL SPACE IN ITS SURROUNDING FORM;

• • • • • • • • • • • • •

• •

Ann Philbin, the director of the Hammer Museum, in a foreword to the book on Lautner that accompanied a retrospective exhibition of his work. Quote by Finnish architect, designer, sculptor and painter Alvar Aalto (1898-1976) The John Lautner Foundation website http://www.johnlautner.org/wp/ Quote from Arthur Elrod, 1001 buildings you must see before you die, Mark Irving. Daring Design, by Allison Engel http://www.palmspringslife.com/core/ The John Lautner Foundation website, http://www.johnlautner.org/wp/?p=710 Living Architecture greatest American houses of the 20t century, Dominique Brown and Lucy Gilmour, Page 184. Between Heaven And Earth The Architecture Of John Lautner, Jean Louis Cohen, Nicholas Olsberg, and Frank Escher, Page 104. John Lautner, Alan Hess, Page 97. John Lautner. Alan Hess, Cover page inside first page. Figure 1, photo of Elrod House, main home screen from Elrodhouse.org home screen, http://elrodhouse.org Figure 2, plan of Elrod House, interactive plan view on Elrodhouse.org, http://elrodhouse.org Figure 3, photo of the roof of Elrod House, http://inhabitat.com/ca-modern-home-tourthe-hidden-details-of-john-lautners-incredible-eldrod-house/lautner-elrod-house-livingroom/ Figure 4, photo of the glass and boulders connected, https://spfaust.wordpress. com/2011/11/09/james-bond-modernism-elrod-house-by-john-lautner/ Figure 5, photo showing Bob Hope’s house, http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/05/ article-2288168-186FDEC1000005DC-153_634x438.jpg

• • • •

Figure 6, map showing topography, http://www.topozone.com, edited on Adobe Photoshop to show location of Elrod House Figure 7, photo of Elrod House from the Road, https://spfaust.wordpress. com/2011/11/09/james-bond-modernism-elrod-house-by-john-lautner/ Figure 8, photo of the first entrance, https://spfaust.wordpress.com/2011/11/09/ james-bond-modernism-elrod-house-by-john-lautner/ Figure 9, photo of the vine covered door way, https://spfaust.wordpress. com/2011/11/09/james-bond-modernism-elrod-house-by-john-lautner/ THE CHALLENGES & CRITICISM OF THE NEW ACROPOLIS MUSEUM;

• • •

•

• • •

• •

Puglisi, L.P. (ed.) (2009) Theoretical meltdown. United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons. Servi, K. (2011) The Acropolis: The new Acropolis museum. Athens: Ekdotike Athenon S.A. Beresford, J.M. (2015) ‘Museum of light: The new Acropolis museum and the campaign to repatriate the Elgin marbles’, Architecture_MPS, 7(1), pp. 1–35. doi: 10.14324/111.444.amps.2015v7i1.001. The Classic and the Modern in the Acropolis Museum: The Dialogue Between the Parthenon and the Acropolis Museum Vasileios Iliopoulos UPLOADED BY Vasileios Iliopoulos. (2007) Available at: http://www.archinnovations.com (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Acropolis museum (2016) Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acropolis_Museum (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Archinect Op-Ed: The Acropolis museum; an unhappy fit (no date) Available at: http://archinect.com/features/article/90818/archinect-op-ed-the-acropolis-museum-an-unhappy-fit (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Architects, B.T. (no date) Bernard Tschumi architects. Available at: http://www.tschumi. com/projects/2/# (Accessed: 11 March 2016). BBC (2009) Greece urges return of sculptures. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/ hi/entertainment/arts_and_culture/8110010.stm (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Beresford, J.M. (2015) ‘Museum of light: The new Acropolis museum and the campaign to repatriate the Elgin marbles’, Architecture_MPS, 7(1), pp. 1–35. doi: 10.14324/111.444.amps.2015v7i1.001. Bernard Tschumi Q&A exclusive (2008) Available at: http://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/bernard-tschumi-qa-exclusive (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Bernard Tschumi Q&A exclusive (2008) Available at: http://www.wallpaper.com/architecture/bernard-tschumi-qa-exclusive (Accessed: 11 March 2016).

•

• • •

•

Caskey, M. (2011) ‘Perceptions of the new Acropolis museum’. Review of by .Etherington, R. (2009) New Acropolis museum by Bernard Tschumi architects. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2009/04/10/new-acropolis-museum-by-bernard-tschumi-architects/ (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Glancey, J. (2007) Acropolis now. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2007/dec/03/architecture (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Glancey, J. (2016) Acropolis now. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2007/dec/03/architecture (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Greek courts rule against new Acropolis museum (2003) Available at: http://www. elginism.com/new-acropolis-museum/greek-courts-rule-against-new-acropolis-museum/20030520/4504/ (Accessed: 20 March 2016). Hitchens, C. (2009) Christopher Hitchens on the Acropolis museum. Available at: http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2009/07/hitchens200907 (Accessed: 11 March 2016). H-net discussion networks - NEWS: The new Acropolis museum (press release) (2002) Available at: http://h-net.msu.edu/cgi-bin/logbrowse.pl?trx=vx&list=h-museum&month=0207&week=d&msg=HzQAspOi6RrLVpRP3g8ZJg&user=&pw= (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Hodson, M. (2008) The new Greek Acropolis museum. Available at: http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/travel/Destinations/Europe/Greece/article103856.ece (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Hollander, J. (2002) Columbia news:: Architecture Dean Bernard Tschumi designs new Acropolis museum in Athens. Available at: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/02/04/ tschumi_nam.html (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Hollander, J. (2002) Columbia news:: Architecture Dean Bernard Tschumi designs new Acropolis museum in Athens. Available at: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/news/02/04/ tschumi_nam.html (Accessed: 20 March 2016). . Kimmelman, M. (2014) Athens museum opening Reprises debate on Elgin marbles. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/24/arts/design/24abroad.html?ref=topics&_r=0 (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Lianopoulos, M. and Genadiev, V. (2010) Articles - ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW the Acropolis museum: An unhappy fit. Available at: http://www.greekarchitects.gr/en/ architectural-review/the-acropolis-museum-an-unhappy-fit-id2353 (Accessed: 20 March 2016). Lomholt, I. (2010) New Acropolis museum - Athens building, Bernard Tschumi. Available at: http://www.e-architect.co.uk/athens/new-acropolis-museum (Accessed: 11 March 2016).

•

• • •

•

• •

• • •

•

Melina Merkouri, Karolos Papoulias, ntonis Samaras, Konstantinos Karamanlis, David Hill, Anthony Snodgrass, Selina Figueiredo Laz, Mika Rissanen, Dusan Sidjanski, Bill Clinton, Vladimir Putin, Costa Gavras, Christopher Hitchens, Bernar Tchumi, Gough Whit (no date) Available at: http://www.bringthemback.org/energeies/dhlwseis.aspx (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Museum history (no date) Available at: http://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/en/content/ museum-history (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Museums (2014) Available at: http://www.visitgreece.gr/en/culture/museums (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Mutuli, I. (2015) The new Acropolis museum: Bernard Tschumi’s homage to the Greek Golden Age. Available at: http://www.archute.com/2015/09/26/the-new-acropolis-museum-bernard-tschumis-homage-to-the-greek-golden-age/ (Accessed: 11 March 2016). New Acropolis museum / Bernard Tschumi architects (2010) Available at: http://www. archdaily.com/61898/new-acropolis-museum-bernard-tschumi-architects (Accessed: 20 March 2016). New Acropolis museum / Bernard Tschumi architects (2010) Available at: http://www. archdaily.com/61898/new-acropolis-museum-bernard-tschumi-architects (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Phillips, S. (2008) Bernard Tschumi’s new Acropolis museum. Available at: http:// www.bdonline.co.uk/bernard-tschumi%E2%80%99s-new-acropolis-museum/3129742. article (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Photiadis, M. (2009) Bernard tschumi architects: New acropolis museum. Available at: http://www.designboom.com/architecture/bernard-tschumi-architects-new-acropolis-museum/ (Accessed: 11 March 2016). The Parthenon gallery (no date) Available at: http://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/en/ content/parthenon-gallery (Accessed: 11 March 2016). The new Acropolis museum (2015) Available at: https://www.yatzer.com/ The-new-Acropolis-Museum-Athens-Greece-Bernard-Tschumi (Accessed: 20 March 2016). The new Acropolis museum (no date) Available at: http://www.greece.org/parthenon/ marmara/museum_gr.htm (Accessed: 20 March 2016). Theodoros (2009) (2013) Available at: http://www.ili-ktirio.gr/1A47EF2F.el.aspx (Accessed: 20 March 2016). Tschumi, B. (2013) The new Acropolis museum in Athens by Bernard Tschumi architects. Available at: http://www.arcspace.com/features/bernard-tschumi-architects/ new-acropolis-museum/ (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Tschumi, B. (2013) The new Acropolis museum in Athens by Bernard Tschumi architects. Available at: http://www.arcspace.com/features/bernard-tschumi-architects/ new-acropolis-museum (Accessed: 11 March 2016).

•

• • •

• •

Tschumi, B. (2013) The new Acropolis museum in Athens by Bernard Tschumi architects. Available at: http://www.arcspace.com/features/bernard-tschumi-architects/ new-acropolis-museum/ (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 1 : Acropolis museum (2016) in Wikipedia. Available at: https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Acropolis_Museum (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 5 :Museums (2014) Available at: http://www.visitgreece.gr/en/culture/museums (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 8 :New Acropolis museum / Bernard Tschumi architects (2010) Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/61898/new-acropolis-museum-bernard-tschumi-architects (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 6 :The Parthenon gallery (no date) Available at: http://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/en/content/parthenon-gallery (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 3,4 :Tschumi, B. (2013) The new Acropolis museum in Athens by Bernard Tschumi architects Available at: http://www.arcspace.com/features/bernard-tschumi-architects/new-acropolis-museum (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 7 :(no date) Available at: http://media.vanityfair.com/photos/54cbfbc72cba652122d9137f/master/h_606,c_limit/image.jpg (Accessed: 11 March 2016). Figure 2 :(no date) Available at: http://www.theacropolismuseum.gr/el/content/i-aithoysa-ton-arhaikon-ergon (Accessed: 11 March 2016).

• • SPACE AS THE REFLECTION OF THE INDIVIDUAL; •

• • •

•

• • •

Bell, Mark Stuart. 2016. “Philip Johnson | The Architect On The Art Of Wasting Space”. The Culture Trip. http://theculturetrip.com/north-america/usa/ohio/articles/philipjohnson-the-architect-on-the-art-of-wasting-space/. Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. Friedman, Alice T. 1998. Women And The Making Of The Modern House. New York: Abrams. Hawthorne, Christopher. 2016. “Architect Philip Johnson’s Glass House | Architectural Digest”. Architectural Digest. http://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/architect-philip-johnson-glass-house-modernism-article. Jacobus, John M. 1962. Philip Johnson. New York: G. Braziller.Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. Johnson, Philip. 1979. Writings. New York: Oxford University Press. Johnson, Philip, Yukio Futagawa, and Bryan Robertson. 1972. Johnson House, New Canaan, Connecticut, 1949-. Tokyo: A.D.A. EDITA. Lamster, Mark. 2012. “Philip Johnson (1906-2005)”. Architectural Review. http:// www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reputations/philip-johnson-1906-2005/8627000. fullarticle.

•

• • • •

• •

• • • • • • • • • •

Lamster, Mark. 2012. “Philip Johnson (1906-2005)”. Architectural Review. http:// www.architectural-review.com/rethink/reputations/philip-johnson-1906-2005/8627000. fullarticle. Murray, Rheana, and Robin Hill. 2016. “Ludwig Mies Van Der Rohe’s Farnsworth House And Philip Johnson’s Glass House Are Paired In A New Exhibition | Architectural Digest”. Architectural Digest. http://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/mies-van-der-rohefarnsworth-philip-johnson-glass-house. Ouroussoff, Nicolai. 2007. “Philip Johnson - Glass House - Architecture - Review”. Nytimes.Com. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/06/arts/design/06glas.html?_r=1. Perez, Adelyn. 2010. “AD Classics: The Glass House / Philip Johnson”. Archdaily. http://www.archdaily.com/60259/ad-classics-the-glass-house-philip-johnson. Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. “Philip Johnson Glass House, New Canaan Town, Fairfield County, New Canaan, CT, 06840”. 2016. Livingplaces.Com. http://www.livingplaces.com/CT/Fairfield_County/ New_Canaan_Town/Philip_Johnson_Glass_House.html. “Philip Johnson Quotes At Brainyquote”. 2016. Brainyquote. http://www.brainyquote. com/quotes/authors/p/philip_johnson.html. Stern, Mark J. 2012. “”The Glass House” As Gay Space: Exploring The Intersection Of Homosexuality And Architecture”. Student Pulse 4 (06). http://www.studentpulse. com/articles/651/the-glass-house-as-gay-space-exploring-the-intersection-of-homosexuality-and-architecture. “The Glass House | The Glass House”. 2016. Theglasshouse.Org. http://theglasshouse.org/explore/the-glass-house/. Figure 1- Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. Figure 2- Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. Figure 3- Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. Figure 4- Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. Figure 5- Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. Figure 6- Dunn, Dorothy. 2008. The Glass House. New York, NY: Assouline Publishing. Figure 7- Petit, Emmanuel, and Robert A. M Stern. 2009. Philip Johnson. New Haven: Yale University Press. Figure 8- Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster. Figure 9- Johnson, Philip, Charles Noble, and Yukio Futagawa. 1972. Philip Johnson. New York: Simon and Schuster.

PLAGIARISM PLEDGE We hereby declare that, we have consulted, and understand, the information provided in the University of Brighton's Plagiarism Awareness Pack and the information on academic standards and conventions for referencing given in the module directive. We know that plagiarism means passing off someone else's writings or ideas as if they were our own, whether deliberately or inadvertently. We understand that doing so constitutes academic misconduct and may lead to exclusion from the University. We have therefore taken every care in the work submitted here to accurately reference all writings and ideas that are not our own, whether from printed, online, or other sources.

Module: AD573 -Architectural Humanities II Institute: University Of Brighton Tutor: C. Mejia Moreno