DOCSLIB.ORG

The Impact of Avant-Garde Art on Brutalist Architecture

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Impact of Avant-Garde Art on Brutalist Architecture buildings Article The Impact of Avant-Garde Art on Brutalist Architecture Wojciech Niebrzydowski Faculty of Architecture, Białystok University of Technology, ul. Oskara Sosnowskiego 11, 15-893 Białystok, Poland; [email protected] Abstract: Brutalism was an architectural trend that emerged after World War II, and in the 1960s and 1970s, it spread throughout the world. The development of brutalist architecture was greatly influenced by post-war avant-garde art. The greatest impact on brutalism was exerted by such avant-garde trends as art autre, art brut, and musique concrète. Architects were most inspired by the works of such artists as Jackson Pollock, Jean Dubuffet, Pierre Schaeffer, Eduardo Paolozzi, and Nigel Henderson. The main aim of the research was to identify and characterize the most important ideas and principles common to avant-garde art and brutalist architecture. Due to the nature of the research problem and its complexity, the method of historical interpretative studies was used. The following research techniques were employed: analysis of the literature, comparative analysis, multiple case studies, descriptive analysis, and studies of buildings in situ. The research found the most important common ideas guiding brutalist architects and avant-garde artists: rejection of previous principles and doctrines; searching for the rudiments; mirroring the realities of everyday life; glorification of ordinariness; sincerity of the material, structure, and function; use of raw materials and rough textures. Citation: Niebrzydowski, W. The Keywords: art; construction engineering; cubature architecture; design method; design paradigms; Impact of Avant-Garde Art on brutalist architecture Brutalist Architecture. Buildings 2021, 11, 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/ buildings11070290 1. Introduction Academic Editors: Oleg Kapli´nski, It is hard to imagine greater integration of art and engineering than in brutalist archi- Agata Bonenberg, tecture, especially in its beginnings. This connection did not only concern the architectural Wojciech Bonenberg and space, into which works of art (paintings, sculptures, tapestries) were introduced, nor Marco Lucchini only buildings decorated with ornaments, reliefs, and mosaics. Brutalists brought archi- tecture into an existential relationship with art that went far beyond the mere function Received: 10 June 2021 of beautification. In brutalism, integration between architecture and art took place at the Accepted: 2 July 2021 most basic level. It was the level of rudimentary ideas, common foundations, the most Published: 4 July 2021 deeply rooted principles and values from which architecture and art grew. These ideas also concerned strictly engineering issues, such as construction, materials, technical elements, Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral and installations. Artist and architects considered their meaning, aesthetics, and ways of with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affil- designing and exposing. iations. Brutalism was the architectural style that spread throughout the world after World War II. It reached the culminating point in the 1960s and faded away at the beginning of the 1980s. The architects who contributed most to the development of brutalism were Alison Smithson, Peter Smithson and Le Corbusier. They all collaborated with artists but also created art themselves. Knowledge of brutalist architecture is not sufficiently deepened. Copyright: © 2021 by the author. While the most famous works of the most eminent architects have been analyzed many Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. times, the issues related to the theory of this style require further research. In particular, This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and the relationship between brutalism and the ideas of avant-garde art should be explained. conditions of the Creative Commons When reviewing the state of the research field, significant publications and their au- Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// thors should be identified. In this context, it should be stated that the most important creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ researcher of brutalist architecture was Reyner Banham. He was at the same time a pro- 4.0/). moter, and even a co-creator, of the New Brutalism doctrine. Two of Banham’s publications Buildings 2021, 11, 290. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11070290 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/buildings Buildings 2021, 11, 290 2 of 30 are of fundamental importance—the article “The New Brutalism”, which appeared in December 1955 in “The Architectural Review” [1] and the book “The New Brutalism: Ethic or Aesthetic?” [2], which was published 11 years later. The analyses contained in the article concerned the beginnings of brutalism and included, among others, its definition. The book was largely their continuation and extension. Despite the passage of time, it is to this day the most important study on both brutalist architecture and the doctrine of New Brutalism. In the short chapter “Brute, non and other art”, Banham mentioned the influence of avant-garde art on brutalism [2] (pp. 61–67). He also presented the issues of cooperation between architects and artists in articles about two significant exhibitions: “Parallel of Life and Art” [3] and “This is Tomorrow” [4]. Tight relationships between brutalist architects and representatives of various arts took place within the Independent Group. The literature on the work of this group is quite rich. The publications of Anne Massey, including the book “The Independent Group: Modernism and Mass Culture in Britain, 1945–1959” from 1995 [5], as well as a monograph edited by David Robbins, “The Independent Group: Postwar Britain and the Aesthetics of Plenty” from 1990 [6], should be mentioned here. An important publication is also the book “As Found: The Discovery of the Ordinary” by Claude Lichtenstein and Thomas Schregenberger, which was published in 2001 [7]. The authors presented the idea of As Found, which is essential to both brutalist architecture and avant-garde painting, sculpture, photography, and film. In research on brutalism, the publications of its precursors are important. Alison and Peter Smithson were involved in intensive publishing work [8–11]. In the 1953 article “House in Soho”, they used the term “New Brutalism” for the first time [12]. Significant publications on the brutalist phase of Le Corbusier’s work were books from the “Oeuvre complete” series, especially volumes 5, 6 and 7 [13–15]. The achievements and ideas of other important architects related to brutalism are presented in monographs. Books about the following architects helped obtain research material: Denys Lasdun [16], James Stirling and James Gowan [17], Ern˝oGoldfinger [18], Louis I. Kahn [19], Josep Lluís Sert [20], Paul Rudolph [21], John M. Johansen [22], Kenzo Tange [23], Kunio Maekawa [24], Gottfried Böhm [25], Sigurd Lewerentz [26], Vilanova Artigas [27], Lina Bo Bardi [28], and Balkrishna Doshi [29]. The works and ideas of avant-garde artists are also presented in individual mono- graphs or articles. These include books about two of the artists most connected with the New Brutalism doctrine, Nigel Henderson [30] and Eduardo Paolozzi [31]. The au- thors of articles relating to the influence of individual artists on brutalist architecture are Ben Highmore [32,33], Hadas A. Steiner [34,35], Alex Kitnick [36], and Dirk van den Heuvel [37]. The analysis of the current state of the research field has shown that so far, only fragmentary research has been carried out on selected issues, artists, and architects. There is a lack of studies dealing with the issue of the influence of ideas of avant-garde art on brutalist architecture in a holistic manner. The most important artistic ideas in this respect should be identified, characterized, and systematized. The research should also go beyond the theory aspect and include practice: architectural forms, building structure, architectural elements and details, and textures. It should be shown that architectural solutions show similarity, or even identity, with artistic and architectural ideas. Therefore, this article will present the fundamental ideas and assumptions of avant-garde trends in the art of the post-World War II period. It will be proved that the precursors of brutalist architecture not only adopted these ideas but also co-created them. Artists used the common creative principles in their works of art, music, and literature, and architects used them in their architectural doctrines and buildings. This ideological connection between certain trends in art and brutalist architecture is evident, especially in the formation of brutalism, i.e., in the 1950s and early 1960s. A special place here is occupied by the theoretical activity of British architects of the young generation, which is led by the Smithsons. They developed the architectural doctrine of Buildings 2021, 11, 290 3 of 30 New Brutalism, which left a deep mark on brutalist architecture. Another precursor of the brutalist style in architecture was Le Corbusier. His work and concepts were particularly analyzed in the study. Summarizing this introduction, the basic hypothesis should be emphasized. Post- war avant-garde art and brutalist architecture shared common ideas. These ideas and assumptions influenced the spatial, aesthetic, construction, and engineering solutions characteristic of brutalist buildings. The main purpose of the research was to identify and characterize the most important ideas and principles common to avant-garde
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Brief History of Architecture in N.C. Courthouses
    MONUMENTS TO DEMOCRACY Architecture Styles in North Carolina Courthouses By Ava Barlow The judicial system, as one of three branches of government, is one of the main foundations of democracy. North Carolina’s earliest courthouses, none of which survived, were simple, small, frame or log structures. Ancillary buildings, such as a jail, clerk’s offi ce, and sheriff’s offi ce were built around them. As our nation developed, however, leaders gave careful consideration to the structures that would house important institutions – how they were to be designed and built, what symbols were to be used, and what building materials were to be used. Over time, fashion and design trends have changed, but ideals have remained. To refl ect those ideals, certain styles, symbols, and motifs have appeared and reappeared in the architecture of our government buildings, especially courthouses. This article attempts to explain the history behind the making of these landmarks in communities around the state. Georgian Federal Greek Revival Victorian Neo-Classical Pre – Independence 1780s – 1820 1820s – 1860s 1870s – 1905 Revival 1880s – 1930 Colonial Revival Art Deco Modernist Eco-Sustainable 1930 - 1950 1920 – 1950 1950s – 2000 2000 – present he development of architectural styles in North Carolina leaders and merchants would seek to have their towns chosen as a courthouses and our nation’s public buildings in general county seat to increase the prosperity, commerce, and recognition, and Trefl ects the development of our culture and history. The trends would sometimes donate money or land to build the courthouse. in architecture refl ect trends in art and the statements those trends make about us as a people.
    [Show full text]
  • Giancarlo De Carlo : an Obituary John Mckean
    Giancarlo De Carlo : an obituary John McKean Giancarlo De Carlo, who died on Saturday morning 4th June aged 85, was architecture’s last great link with the heroic modernism of CIAM; not least in his scathing critique of pre-war existenz-minimum, his finding Corbu’s Marseille Unité “terrible”, and his providing the serious theoretical underpinning for Team-X. He was, as his close friend Aldo van Eyck said long ago, a master of paradox. He was both elusive and absolutely clear. He was both renowned and yet a secret. One of the foremost architectural thinkers of his time, he published no unified volume of theory. He was not an architect who played at being a theorist, but an intellectual whose medium was architecture. (That is, not abstract writing around architecture, but its concrete profession, embedded in its social practice.) He was one of the most memorable architectural teachers of his generation, and yet always set himself outside, at a critical angle to the academy. Fascinated by Napoleon (a man nearly as small as himself) he was a lifelong anarchist and prominent anti-Fascist fighter during the Second World War. In architecture too, he fought against heroes, signatures and icons, as against so much else which subverts the possibility of a real modern architecture. This - in itself an heroic struggle - forced a continual questioning of the nature of the modern. I remember, at a time when so many couldn’t be bothered with the issue, in those post-modern years around 1980, not just his intellectual probing of the differences between eclecticsm and multiplicity, but his generous invitations to Charles Moore and Donlyn Lyndon and others to enrich the debates.
    [Show full text]
  • Architettura 1.2016 Stare in Tanti Architettura Spedizione Inabbonamento Postale 70% Firenze € Anno XX N.1 Periodico Semestrale Firenze PRESS UNIVERSITY FIRENZE
    FIRENZE stare in tanti architettura 1.2016 1.2016 stare in tanti FIRENZE UNIVERSITY firenze architettura PRESS ISSN 1826-0772 Periodico semestrale Anno XX n.1 € 14,00 Spedizione in abbonamento postale 70% Firenze In copertina: Le Corbusier, photogramme da sequenza filmata con la sua cinepresa tra il 1936 e il 1939 © FLC Paris DIDA DIPARTIMENTO DI ARCHITETTURA architetturaFIRENZE via della Mattonaia, 14 - 50121 Firenze - tel. 055/2755419 fax. 055/2755355 Periodico semestrale* Anno XX n. 1 - 2016 ISSN 1826-0772 (print) - ISSN 2035-4444 (online) Autorizzazione del Tribunale di Firenze n. 4725 del 25.09.1997 Direttore responsabile - Saverio Mecca Direttore - Maria Grazia Eccheli Comitato scientifico - Alberto Campo Baeza, Maria Teresa Bartoli, Fabio Capanni, João Luís Carrilho da Graça, Francesco Cellini, Maria Grazia Eccheli, Adolfo Natalini, Ulisse Tramonti, Chris Younes, Paolo Zermani Redazione - Fabrizio Arrigoni, Valerio Barberis, Riccardo Butini, Francesco Collotti, Fabio Fabbrizzi, Francesca Mugnai, Alberto Pireddu, Michelangelo Pivetta, Andrea Volpe, Claudio Zanirato Collaboratori - Simone Barbi, Gabriele Bartocci, Caterina Lisini, Francesca Privitera Info-Grafica e Dtp - Massimo Battista - Laboratorio Comunicazione e Immagine Segretaria di redazione e amministrazione - Grazia Poli e-mail: [email protected] Copyright: © The Author(s) 2016 This is an open access journal distribuited under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode)
    [Show full text]
  • Clelia Tuscano
    Giancarlo de Carlo and the Italian context of Team 10 Clelia Tuscano 227 Sociology, Production and the City Introduction Giancarlo de Carlo is the only Italian meber of Team 10. He was born in 1919 and now lives in Milan. He is an individualist, and a humanistic architect and a man of strong morality. I say humanistic, because of his manyfold culture and because of his view of architecture as something which is about people. He looks at architecture as part of the whole, com- plex process which deals with transformation of society through time. Architecture cannot change society as a whole, but can suggest the directions of change and support them, make them grow, give them spaces and represent them in physical forms. He has said somewhere that towns are written history, and the process of designing in his case is somehow linked to ‘read’ the context, both social and physical, and to find out the vital forces in it, and to deal with them for transformation. And ‘reading’ the context is not the recording of an objective pattern, but a tendentious interpretation of how a local context works and, through planning and architectural design, bring it closer to how it should work. Giancarlo de Carlo is one of the most tough moral architects, one of those persons who might make their client regret their choice: working for people is not always a private and even a public aim. No celebration or monumentalism in his work, and a lot of energy spent on designing the open spaces, which are not sold or used in ‘productive’ ways.
    [Show full text]
  • A Short Cultural History of Britain
    S. L. Yeliseyev T. O. Kupinska A Short Cultural History of Britain Ministry of Education and Science, Youth and Sports of Ukraine State Institution “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University” S. L. Yeliseyev T. O. Kupinska A Short Cultural History of Britain A manual for students of foreign languages departments of higher education institutions Luhansk SI “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University” 2012 УДК 908:81.2Англ (076) ББК 26:81.2Англ–9 Є51 Rewievers: Mihalskiy I. S. – Doctor of Historical Sciences, Professor, the chair of Political Studies of SI “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University” Krysalo O. V. - Candidate of Philological Sciences, Associate Professor of Translation Studies Department SI “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University” Demidov D. V. – Candidate of Pedagogical Sciences, senior lecturer of English Philology Department of SI “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University” Yeliseyev S. L. Є51 A Short Cultural History of Britain : a manual for students of foreign languages departments of higher education institutions / S. L. Yeliseyev, T. O. Kupinska ; State Institution “Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University”. – Luhansk : Luhansk Taras Shevchenko National University Press, 2012. – 103 p. A Short Cultural History of Britain is a manual intended for students of foreign languages department, specialities “Language and Literature (English)”, “Philology. English and Oriental language and literature” and “Translation Studies”. Its aim is to give a general idea of artistic styles in European art from the Gothic style through the Romantic movement, and the detailed information on the history of theatre, music, visual arts and architecture of Great Britain. The content of the book conforms to the requirements of the syllabus of “Country Studies: the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland” for senior students.
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing Tokyo Page 10 Panorama Views
    Introducing Tokyo page 10 Panorama views: Tokyo from above 10 A Wonderful Catastrophe Ulf Meyer 34 The Informational World City Botond Bognar 42 Bunkyo-ku page 50 001 Saint Mary's Cathedral Kenzo Tange 002 Memorial Park for the Tokyo War Dead Takefumi Aida 003 Century Tower Norman Foster 004 Tokyo Dome Nikken Sekkei/Takenaka Corporation 005 Headquarters Building of the University of Tokyo Kenzo Tange 006 Technica House Takenaka Corporation 007 Tokyo Dome Hotel Kenzo Tange Chiyoda-ku page 56 008 DN Tower 21 Kevin Roche/John Dinkebo 009 Grand Prince Hotel Akasaka Kenzo Tange 010 Metro Tour/Edoken Office Building Atsushi Kitagawara 011 Athénée Français Takamasa Yoshizaka 012 National Theatre Hiroyuki Iwamoto 013 Imperial Theatre Yoshiro Taniguchi/Mitsubishi Architectural Office 014 National Showa Memorial Museum/Showa-kan Kiyonori Kikutake 015 Tokyo Marine and Fire Insurance Company Building Kunio Maekawa 016 Wacoal Building Kisho Kurokawa 017 Pacific Century Place Nikken Sekkei 018 National Museum for Modern Art Yoshiro Taniguchi 019 National Diet Library and Annex Kunio Maekawa 020 Mizuho Corporate Bank Building Togo Murano 021 AKS Building Takenaka Corporation 022 Nippon Budokan Mamoru Yamada 023 Nikken Sekkei Tokyo Building Nikken Sekkei 024 Koizumi Building Peter Eisenman/Kojiro Kitayama 025 Supreme Court Shinichi Okada 026 Iidabashi Subway Station Makoto Sei Watanabe 027 Mizuho Bank Head Office Building Yoshinobu Ashihara 028 Tokyo Sankei Building Takenaka Corporation 029 Palace Side Building Nikken Sekkei 030 Nissei Theatre and Administration Building for the Nihon Seimei-Insurance Co. Murano & Mori 031 55 Building, Hosei University Hiroshi Oe 032 Kasumigaseki Building Yamashita Sekkei 033 Mitsui Marine and Fire Insurance Building Nikken Sekkei 034 Tajima Building Michael Graves Bibliografische Informationen digitalisiert durch http://d-nb.info/1010431374 Chuo-ku page 74 035 Louis Vuitton Ginza Namiki Store Jun Aoki 036 Gucci Ginza James Carpenter 037 Daigaku Megane Building Atsushi Kitagawara 038 Yaesu Bookshop Kajima Design 039 The Japan P.E.N.
    [Show full text]
  • Aauk 393-David Chipperfield
    20 21 SORTIR DU SOLILOQUE DAVID ARCHITECTURAL CHIPPERFIELD ABANDONING THE ARCHITECTURAL SOLILOQUY PAR / BY JONATHAN GLANCEY HEC PARIS Bâtiment d’accueil, entrance hall, Jouy-en-Josas, France, 2012. 22 23 « IL Y A DE LA PLACE POUR LA RADICALITÉ. » “THERE IS ROOM FOR RADICAL IDEAS.” Commissaire de la Biennale d’architecture de Venise en 2012, David Chipperfield, reconnu pour ses prestigieux projets culturels, ne renonce pas pour autant aux constructions « du quotidien ». Le Londonien confie sa lutte pour une culture architecturale basée sur des valeurs communes : érudition, responsabilité et réflexion. Curator of the 2012 Venice Architecture Biennale, David Chipperfield, known for his prestigious cultural projects, has nevertheless not turned his back on “ordinary” constructions. The London architect recounts for AA his battle for an architectural culture based on shared values: erudition, responsibility and reflection. L’ARCHITECTURE D’AUJOURD’HUI. Commençons L’ARCHITECTURE D’AUJOURDHUI. Let’s start with par Venise. Vous avez été le commissaire de la Biennale Venice. You were the curator of the 2012 Architecture BIENNALE d’architecture 2012. Quelle était l’idée phare de cette Biennale. What was the point of the show? What message DE VENISE édition et le message que vous vouliez faire passer ? were you trying to get across? VENICE BIENNALE 2012. DAVID CHIPPERFIELD. J’ai intitulé cette édition « Common DAVID CHIPPERFIELD. The title I chose for the show was Ground » [« socle commun », NDLR]. Il y a quelque temps de “Common Ground”. A while before, I’d been sitting in a late cela, j’étais en compagnie de Jacques Herzog dans un bar de night bar in Madrid with Jacques Herzog.
    [Show full text]
  • Brutalism? Some Remarks About a Polemical Name, Its Definition, and Its Use to Designate a Brazilian Architectural Trend
    Published at En Blanco n.9/2012 pages 130-2 Avaliable at: http://www.tccuadernos.com/enblanco_numero.php?id=86 Brutalism? Some Remarks About a Polemical Name, its Definition, and its Use to Designate a Brazilian Architectural Trend Ruth Verde Zein [email protected] Mackenzie University São Paulo, Brazil Abstract The term Brutalism is both used and ignored in the architectural literature of the second half of the twentieth century. A thorough analysis of the term shows that it does not have a single, agreed-upon meaning. Although its definition and frequent use have not provided an unequivocal characterization of a Brutalist “essence,” to use Reyner Banham’s words, there seems to be no shortage of architecture identified as Brutalist, even if they are only superficially related. Paradoxically, instead of disregarding the term as inappropriate or vague, we might consider it adequate if we agree that what is common to all the architecture referred to as Brutalist is nothing more than their appearance. By accepting a non-essentialist definition of this movement, one may correctly apply the term to a number of different works, from different places, designed between 1950 and 1970. For the most part, what really connects these buildings is not their essence but their surface, not their inner characteristics but their extrinsic ones. Such a straightforward definition, encompassing the broad variety of Brutalist works, has the merit of providing a working definition of a broadly influential if understudied movement in modern architecture. 1 Fifty years after Brasilia’s inauguration in 1960, Brazilian architecture remains stuck in the same frozen images of a glorious moment in history.
    [Show full text]
  • Akaa2007 Final 01-65:Akdn 2007
    AKAA2007_FINAL_130-192:AKDN 2007 24/7/07 16:02 Page 181 180 AKAA2007_FINAL_130-192:AKDN 2007 24/7/07 16:02 Page 182 Aga Khan Award for Architecture Aga Khan Award for Architecture Retrospective 1977 – 2007 Over the past 30 years, the Aga Khan Award has recognised outstanding architectural achievements in some 32 countries. It has held seminars, conferences and exhibitions to explore and discuss the crucial issues of the built environment, and published the proceedings to bring these subjects to a wider audience. It has brought together the architectural community and policy-makers to celebrate the prize-winning projects of 10 award cycles in important historical and architectural settings, and has invited the leading thinkers and practitioners of the day to frame the discourse 10 th on architectural excellence within the context of successive master juries and steering committees. Cycle 1st Cycle 6th Cycle Award Award Ceremony Ceremony Pakistan 1980 Indonesia 1995 2nd Cycle 7th Cycle Award Award Ceremony Ceremony Turkey 1983 Spain 1998 3rd Cycle 8th Cycle Award Award Ceremony Ceremony Morocco 1986 Syria 2001 4th Cycle 9th Cycle Award Award Ceremony Ceremony Egypt 1989 India 2004 Building for Change With an introduction by Homi K. Bhabha 5th Cycle Samir Kassir Square Beirut Lebanon 10th Cycle Award Rehabilitation of the City of Shibam Yemen Award Ceremony Central Market Koudougou Burkina Faso Ceremony 182 183 Uzbekistan 1992 University of Technology Petronas Bandar Seri Iskandar Malaysia Malaysia 2007 Restoration of the Amiriya Complex
    [Show full text]
  • “How Do We Live?” Housing Workshop / London 2019 11Th April — 18Th April 2019 Jocelyn Froimovich, Johanna Muszbek University of Liverpool in London
    “How Do We Live?” Housing Workshop / London 2019 11th April — 18th April 2019 Jocelyn Froimovich, Johanna Muszbek University of Liverpool in London Housing design never starts afresh; housing design operates through variation, iteration, and/or mutation of prior examples. The series of workshops “How do we live?” venture into a typological investigation, with the expectation that types can provide a framework to deal with complex urban variables. By understanding the particulars in the production of a housing type, the architect can manipulate and reorganise—invent. This workshop will discuss housing types, exemplary of a particular city in its making. By looking at past exemplary projects ant today’s market offer, the goal is to observe, analyse, participate and hopefully interfere in the production system of the urban. Rather than dismissing examples of the current housing offer as “bastard” architecture, it is assumed that these housing types portray specific subjects, their living and urban conditions; the politics, policies, and socio economic factors that lead into developing a particular urban setting. Thus, the goal of the studio is to design new housing types that expand the existing housing repertoire. These new types will respond to current and future lifestyles and contribute to resolve specific urban demands. The question for this workshop is: what defines the housing crisis of London today? By forcing the notion of crisis as a methodology, each student will question a specific London housing type and propose alternative designs for each of them. For this workshop, the notion of “crisis” will be used as an operative term. “Crisis” is understood as a turning point, a time when a difficult or important decision must be made.
    [Show full text]
  • Royal Gold Medall
    1912 - Basil Champneys 1977 - Sir Denys Lasdun Royal Gold Medall 1913 - Sir Reginald Blomfield 1978 - Jørn Utzon 1914 - Jean Louis Pascal 1979 - Charles and Ray Eames 1848 - Charles Robert Cockerell 1915 - Frank Darling, Canada 1980 - James Stirling 1849 - Luigi Canina 1916 - Sir Robert Rowand Anderson 1981 - Sir Philip Dowson 1850 - Sir Charles Barry 1917 - Henri Paul Nenot 1982 - Berthold Lubetkin 1851 - Thomas Leverton Donaldson 1918 - Ernest Newton 1983 - Sir Norman Foster 1852 - Leo von Klenze 1919 - Leonard Stokes 1984 - Charles Correa 1853 - Sir Robert Smirke 1920 - Charles Louis Girault 1985 - Sir Richard Rogers 1854 - Philip Hardwick 1921 - Sir Edwin Landseer Lutyens 1986 - Arata Isozaki 1855 - Jacques Ignace Hittorff 1922 - Thomas Hastings 1987 - Ralph Erskine 1856 - Sir William Tite 1923 - Sir John James Burnet 1988 - Richard Meier 1857 - Owen Jones 1924 - No award 1989 - Renzo Piano 1858 - Friedrich August Stüler 1925 - Sir Giles Gilbert Scott 1990 - Aldo van Eyck 1859 - Sir George Gilbert Scott 1926 - Prof. Ragnar Ostberg 1991 - Colin Stansfield Smith 1860 - Sydney Smirke 1927 - Sir Herbert Baker 1992 - Peter Rice 1861 - JB Lesueur 1928 - Sir Guy Dawber 1993 - Giancarlo de Carlo 1862 - Rev Robert Willis 1929 - Victor Alexandre Frederic 1994 - Michael and Patricia Hopkins 1863 - Anthony Salvin Laloux 1995 - Colin Rowe 1864 - Eugene Viollet-le-Duc 1930 - Percy Scott Worthington 1996 - Harry Seidler 1865 - Sir James Pennethorne 1931 - Sir Edwin Cooper 1997 - Tadao Ando 1866 - Sir Matthew Digby Wyatt 1932 - Dr. Hendrik Petrus Berlage 1998 - Oscar Niemeyer 1867 - Charles Texier 1933 - Sir Charles Reed Peers 1999 - Barcelona 1868 - Sir Austen Henry Layard 1934 - Henry Vaughan Lanchester 2000 - Frank Gehry 1869 - Karl Richard Lepsius 1935 - Willem Marinus Dudok 2001 - Jean Nouvel 1870 - Benjamin Ferrey 1936 - Charles Henry Holden 2002 - Archigram 1871 - James Fergusson 1937 - Sir Raymond Unwin 2003 - Rafael Moneo 1872 - Baron von Schmidt 1938 - Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • Boston Government Services Center: Lindemann-Hurley Preservation Report
    BOSTON GOVERNMENT SERVICES CENTER: LINDEMANN-HURLEY PRESERVATION REPORT JANUARY 2020 Produced for the Massachusetts Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) by Bruner/Cott & Associates Henry Moss, AIA, LEED AP Lawrence Cheng, AIA, LEED AP with OverUnder: 2016 text review and Stantec January 2020 Unattributed photographs in this report are by Bruner/Cott & Associates or are in the public domain. Table of Contents 01 Introduction & Context 02 Site Description 03 History & Significance 04 Preservation Narrative 05 Recommendations 06 Development Alternatives Appendices A Massachusetts Cultural Resource Record BOS.1618 (2016) B BSGC DOCOMOMO Long Fiche Architectural Forum, Photos of New England INTRODUCTION & CONTEXT 5 BGSC LINDEMANN-HURLEY PRESERVATION REPORT | DCAMM | BRUNER/COTT & ASSOCIATES WITH STANTEC WITH ASSOCIATES & BRUNER/COTT | DCAMM | REPORT PRESERVATION LINDEMANN-HURLEY BGSC Introduction This report examines the Boston Government Services Center (BGSC), which was built between 1964 and 1970. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the site’s architecture, its existing uses, and the buildings’ relationships to surrounding streets. It is to help the Commonwealth’s Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) assess the significance of the historic architecture of the site as a whole and as it may vary among different buildings and their specific components. The BGSC is a major work by Paul Rudolph, one of the nation’s foremost post- World War II architects, with John Paul Carlhian of Shepley Bulfinch Richardson and Abbot. The site’s development followed its clearance as part of the city’s Urban Renewal initiative associated with creation of Government Center. A series of prior planning studies by I.
    [Show full text]