As to What Is Structural and What Is Not

IMPLEMENTATION OF IIT CAMPUS MASTER PLAN BUILDINGS as to what is structural and what is not.”19 On the contrary, this 5.12 View of the facade of IIT Alum- transposed order found difficult to prevent structure from undue ni Memorial Hall under construc- stress or temperature differences involving the facade mechanical tion, used as a generic solution for deformations, to the detriment of its water-tightness and durabil- other campus buildings. The steelwork shows that horizontal ity. plates were executed in continuity with As a consequence, mullions spanning between the uprights of non-bearing steel mullions to resem- the framework run regularly along the elevation at �� ft intervals, ble the skeleton frame behind, as part their dimension —consistent with floor heights— determined to of the formwork needed to encase it in prevent the �-inch-brick panels from cracking, as it had in the concrete. This solution transformed the buildings previously executed according to the �� ft. module. This building structural principles and their way, the problem of design seemed to be displaced towards a for- execution process into its external image. 19 Ibid., «Structural and Spatial Concepts,» ch.�, pp. ��-��. ANALYSIS AND HISTORY OF A COMPOSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 251 EXPANSION, 1946-50: CITY PLANNING BY MEANS OF ARCHITECTURE 5.13 Views of building corner solu- mal solution, to be faced from a paradoxical tectonic posture al- tion (right), facade mullion behind most exclusively focused on the problem of dimensional coordina- structural support (left, top), and tion of the thicknesses and modulations of its different elements. intermediate facade mullions (left, Notwithstanding, the quest of this image turned to be impos- bottom) of typical IIT buildings, un- sible, whereas the logical order of the envelope demanded to place der construction. its structural support behind the facade for its protection and best performance as a constructive whole, implies a discontinuity in structure modulation all over the border [Fig. �.�� (b)]. Faithful to his will of representation, Mies nevertheless final- ly reduced the numerous technical problems by attaching the skin to the exterior face of the frame, thereafter allowing a symmetri- cal treatment of the reentrant corners, turned by terminating the skin on the center line of the corner column, its exposed portion acting as a “pivoting agent”20 [Figs. �.�� (c), �.��]. These corners were compounded in part out of a steel angle facing, representing the steel skeleton frame behind the concrete, 20 Ibid., «Low-rise Skeleton Frame Buildings,» ch. �, pp. ��-��. 252 MIES VAN DER ROHE'S ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION OF IIT CAMPUS MASTER PLAN BUILDINGS 5.14 View of typical corner of IIT buildings as finished (left), and dia- gram of all its constructive elements (above). Although the detail of the corner showed the intersection of the tangency planes between the building enclosure and the outer side of the square support, and not just the node of the grid ordering the campus —which actually coincides with the longitudinal axis of the inner steel rolled section, later embedded in concrete— the detail was able to effectively convey the idea of an skeleton frame structure, ordered according to the latter. Given the fact that none of the shown standard steel sections were actually structural, slimmer sections could be and in part out of two flanking I-sections that formed the receiv- used, therefore giving the impression of a ing frame for the infill brick walls. Mies's honesty, emphasizing lighter and graceful construction. the actual tectonic nature of this famous corner detail, is proved to be deliberated by finishing the corner before it reaches the ground and making it rest on a brick base, clearly free of any structural function [Figs. �.��-�.��]. Hence, the part of the building actually bearing loads —its steel skeleton frame— becomes present. This treatment, “was his way to distinguish between the primary structure of the building and the secondary structure of the skin”,21 i.e. that the skin of a building requires an additional structure of its own, even if secondary, or that the structure of a building can set an order for its skin. 5.2.2 Shaping Construction To Understand Structure While losing in terms of constructive coherence, the building, without hiding these contradictions, nonetheless reached such a 21 SCHULZE, F. (��), «Revival: Modernism Without Utopia, ��-��,» in Mies van der Rohe: A Critical Biography (Chicago: UoC), ch. �, p. ��. ANALYSIS AND HISTORY OF A COMPOSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 253 EXPANSION, 1946-50: CITY PLANNING BY MEANS OF ARCHITECTURE level of refinement in its clear formal articulation as to acquire an intense capacity to communicate its own internal logic. There- upon, architecture breaks through purely linguistic problems, typical of a classical architecture.22 It is in this quest for a so-called 5.15 View of IIT typical building fa- “critical nature of the generalized ideal” that Mies puts common cade under construction (right), and construction through an ordered language which, in a paradoxi- vertical section details (above). cal self-representation of its structure, calls to a critical experience Previously set rolled-section mullions in the beholder. were used as an exposed formwork This way, an idea of the general order in the campus Master against which to pour concrete over steel Plan layout is achieved. But this is true only when recognized in columns, therefore a necessary element an everyday experience, that re-frames and shatters the familiar for the final image. —by virtue of a critical sight that perceives the common in the general, and the general in the common. Within this only ap- parently arbitrary way of working within the design components, which seemed functional when they were actually just a recall to the structure behind it, Mies confirmed his own self-confidence to modify —or even break— his own rules whenever he finds it appropriate. As famously described, 22 LAMBERT, Ph. (��) «Learning a Language,» in LAMBERT, Ph. (ed.) et al. Mies in America (Montreal/New York: CCA/WMAA), pp. ��-��. 254 MIES VAN DER ROHE'S ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY IMPLEMENTATION OF IIT CAMPUS MASTER PLAN BUILDINGS “(...) the real structure of Alumni Memorial Hall, though sup- 5.16 View of IIT typical building pressed, is expressed: what one knows is there is not what one roof under construction, 1947. actually sees, but it is made evident by what one sees. Mies's As experienced in some of his previous reasoning is tortuous, but ever so much his own: to demon- European work, Mies did not use a con- tinuous slab to solve the construction of strate that the supporting steel frame is the basis, or essence, the roof, but instead precasted concrete of the building, it is indicated, rather than shown, externally; slabs, alternating its direction according to acknowledge that what shows, moreover, is not fact but to the requirements of the spaces housed [Figs. �.��, �.��] 23 symbol of fact” . beneath it. In addition to this, the ho- mogeneous dimensions of the skeleton Here, that so-called tectonic form of IIT buildings seems to pose frame allowed the horizontal bracing of 24 a contradiction between their raw construction and the ideal- the entire structure by just changing the ized representation of their material properties and structuring orientation of its last bay. principles. Indeed, tectonic form is here referred as the compo- sition of constructive elements that, while breaking down into its ready-made components, moves attention to the relation of the 23 SCHULZE, F. (��) Op. cit., ch. �, pp. ��-��. 24 Rather than the complementary relationship between its technical and represen- tational forms of classical tectonic theory. For an examination of these two modes of the tectonic form in Mies's American work, see FRAMPTON, K. (��), «Mies van der Rohe: Avant-Garde and Continuity,» in FRAMPTON, K. and CAVA, J. (ed.) Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of Construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture (Chicago: Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts), ch. �, pp. ��-��. ANALYSIS AND HISTORY OF A COMPOSITIVE DEVELOPMENT 255 EXPANSION, 1946-50: CITY PLANNING BY MEANS OF ARCHITECTURE 5.17 Views of Alumni Memorial Hall North facade (left), and South facade (opposite page), as finished in 1947. The extensive use of glass in the North facade effectively clearly described the inner steel structure of the buildings (left). However, while the vertical plates of the facade no difference was made between mullions and structural supports (opposite page). Similarly, the change in the deepness of girders to cover the inner voids in the buildings set the final width of the horizontal plates, which resulted in an oversized dimension that resembled those of the roof section. parts in the whole at the same time. This tension in the proportion between the individual elements of an assembled form finds spe- cial justification when its arrangement makes visible the invisible play of forces of load and support in the structure, calling forth a new mode of perception and experience of the whole building.25 In other words, “(...) when a structural concept has found its implementation through construction, the visual result will affect us through certain expressive qualities which clearly have something to do with the play of forces and corresponding arrangement of parts in the building, yet cannot be described in terms of 25 On this regard, see HAYS, K.M., «Reproduction and Negation: The Cognitive Project of the Avant-Garde,» in OCKMAN, J., and COLOMINA, B. (eds.) (��) Architecture- production (New York: Princeton Architectural Press), pp. ��-��. Noteworthy, the author has later developed these ideas concerning specifically the American work both of Mies —see HAYS, K.M. «The Mies Effect,» in LAMBERT, Ph. (ed.) et al. (��) Op. cit., pp. ��-��— and of Hilberseimer —see HAYS, K.M. (��) Mod- ernism and the Posthumanist Subject: The Architecture of Hannes Meyer and Ludwig Hilberseimer (Cambridge, Mass: MIT).

Load more