Architecture After Las Vegas Stanislaus Von Moos, Martino Stierli
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Stanislaus vonMoos, MartinoStierli (eds.) EYES THAT Scheidegger&Spiess Yale School of Architecture SAW Architecture AfterLas Vegas I Timelines andContexts II Eyes That Saw III On Trial: The“DecoratedShed” IV What We Learned III 11 Robert A.M.Stern On Trial: Preface The“DecoratedShed” 13 Stanislaus vonMoosand MartinoStierli Introduction 267 Neil Levine Robert Venturiand Denise ScottBrown’s I Duck/DecoratedShedDyadinaHistorical Perspective Timelines andContexts 291 Karin Theunissen Billboarding andDirectional Spaces 33 EveBlau 325 Stanislaus vonMoos Pedagogy andPolitics: Making Placeand Learning AViewfromthe Gondola:Notes on History, from LasVegas Spectacle andModernArchitecture 67 Mary McLeod 373 ElizabethDillerand DavidAllin Wrestlingwith MeaninginArchitecture: ChainCity Learning from LasVegas 93 Valéry Didelon IV TheRevolutionisDead; LongLivethe Revolution What We Learned 106 Valéry Didelon TheLearningfromLas VegasCase(1968–79) 381 Denise ScottBrown LasVegas Learning,Las VegasTeaching II 408 VenturiScott Brown&Associates Eyes That Saw Robert Venturiand Denise ScottBrown’s Memory 419 Robert Venturi 129 MartinoStierli What Did YouLearn? LasVegas andthe MobilizedGaze 431 DavidM.Schwarz 175 KatherineSmith HaussmannBackwards PopPrecedentsand Contemporary Contexts 457 Rafael Moneo 212 BeatrizColomina ArchitectorCritic?Both/And Learning from Learning 461 Stan Allen 232 DanGraham AfterLas Vegas: Five Observations AfterVenturi on VenturiScott Brown 247 PeterFischli From Dessau to LasVegas 483 Appendix Previouspage EveBlau GatewaytoDisneyland,Anaheim, CA.PagefromCharles Moore. “You Have to Payfor thePublic Life,” Perspecta 9/10(1965). Pedagogy andPolitics: Making Place andLearningfromLas Vegas In thelate1960s theYaleSchoolofArt andArchitecturewas one of thekey sites at whichthe trajectories of politicalactivismand Postmodern critique intersected,generatingaculturallandscape andpolitical subtextfor theculturalradicalismthatfollowedin theirwake. At Yale that collisiongenerated aseriesofprojects, themostinfluential of whichwas thestudio/seminarLearning from LasVegas,orFormAnalysisasDesignResearch, taught by Robert Venturi, Denise ScottBrown,and Steven Izenourin thefall of 1968. Butthere were many others.After Yale pres- identKingman Brewsterbrought in CharlesMoore to chair theDepartmentofArchitecturein1965, architecture students became increasinglyinvolved in urbanresearch, experiments with film,video,and communications technology,“intermedia” installations,new methodsand materialsofconstruction(includ- ingfoamand inflatable structures), andbuildingprojectsin remoteand impoverishedparts of ruralAppalachia, all of which held thepromise of newdirectionsfor thediscipline.1 This con- text is critical forunderstandingboththe milieu in which Learn- ingfromLas Vegas took shapeand thecurrentsthatshifted the 1Charles W. Moore(1925–93) waschair of theDepartmentofArchitecturefrom1965to1969 andthendeanofthe Faculties of Design andPlanningfrom1969to1970. Formore, seeEve Blau, Architecture or Revolution:Charles Mooreand Yale in theLate1960s (New Haven: Yale University SchoolofArchitecture,2001);LeslieL.Luebbers, “Place,Time, andthe Artof Architecture:The EducationofCharles W. Moore” (PhD diss., InstituteofFineArts, New York University,2001);Charles W. Moore, YouHavetoPay forthe PublicLife: Selected Essays, ed. Kevin P. Keim (Cambridge:The MIT Press, 2000); andRichard W. Hayes, TheYaleBuild- ingProject:The First40Years (New Haven: Yale University Press andYaleSchoolofArchi- tecture, 2007). IamindebtedtoPeter Rose andDan Scully fortheir insights andmemoriesof Yale in thelate1960s,and to Danfor hishelpful readingofthistext. An earlierversion of this essay appeared in Log,no.38 (fall2016). 33 EveBlau Pedagogy andPolitics critique of Modernism from aquestioning of establishedcodes work establishedhim as asignificant educator anddesignerin of practice to afocus on signsasgeneratorsofradical newforms theearly 1960sand ledtothe invitation to head thearchitecture of society, culture, andsubjectivity. department at Yale.Italsoinformedafundamental tenetofhis In 1968,asMoore reported to Brewster, Yale was“riding architecture andpedagogy. thecrest of thepresent wave.” Theschoolwas held to be the In 1962 Moore, with hisBerkeleycolleaguesDonlyn “notably turned-onfree-wheelingplace where It’s Happening,” Lyndon,Sim Vander Ryn, andPatrick J. Quinn, publishedthe attracting “first-rate” studentsand “aninordinateamount” of firstinaseriesoftextsonplace, titled “TowardMakingPlaces,” positivemedia attention(ProgressiveArchitecture wasdubbedthe in J. B. Jackson’smagazine Landscape.Inthe openingparagraphs “YaleAlumniMagazine” becauseitfeaturedYalestudent work so they setout thefundamental premise: “The basicfunctionof frequently).2 Yale’s popularity andnewsworthiness,Moore sug- architecture ...pastthe provisionofmerelyshelter,pastthe gested, were duefirst to thequality of thestudentsand second expressivemanipulationofmaterials or even of space...is “tothe absenceofrestrictionsontheir imaginationand their thecreation of place, of what SusanneLangercallsan‘ethnic involvement, [rather] than to anyhighlyorganized regimen.”He domain.’ This creation of placeamounts at firsttotakingpos- also observed that “our profession is,atthispoint in time,dra- sessionofaportionofthe earth’ssurface.Then, architecture maticallydevoidofany impressive—or useful—bodyofteachable beinganact,thatprocess of takingpossessionisabstracted.” 5 theory.Thismay turn outtobeadisguised boon,asit leaves us Thearchitectural act, Moorelater elaborated,is“theordered embarrassingly free to deal with rapidlydeveloping problems of extensionofman’sideaabout himselfinspecificlocations on theurban environment;itcertainlyhas theeffectofheightening, thefaceofthe earth.”6 This conceptofplace as specific and andspeedingthe wavesofsignificant change.” 3 culturallydeterminedrelates to anumberofphilosophical and When Moorewas recruited by Yale he hadbeenchair of the cultural discourses of thetime, includingJackson’s “human architecture department at theUniversity of California, Berkeley, geography,” thepoeticphenomenology of Gaston Bachelardand forthree years. There hisobjectivehad been tobroaden thecur- MauriceMerleau-Ponty,and thediscourses of psychoanalysis,all riculumtoinclude “everything from computerstooperations of whichMoore referenced in histeaching. ButMoore’s signal research; mathematical,social, andall kindsofacademictheo- contribution wastolinkthese discourses specifically to archi- ries,” nottomakeitmoretechnocraticbut to enable architects to tectureand urbanism andtowhathesaw as thearchitect’s single be “moresubtle, more supple,morecomplex,instead of rigid.”4 most importanttask: to make place in an increasingly “aspatial Mooreworked closelywithJosephEsherickonthe curriculum electronic world.”7 andrecruited ChristopherAlexander andarchitecturehistorians Twoworks in particular precipitated Moore’sappointment SpiroKostofand NormaEvenson to thefaculty.But thecentral at Yale.His most importanttextonthe subjectofplacemaking, focusofMoore’s teaching,writing,and practice whileatBerkeley “You Have to Payfor thePublicLife,”was publishedinYale’s wasthe development of what he called a“theory of place.” This Perspecta in 1965.InitMoore sets outtoconsidermonumental 2Charles W. Moore, Annual Reportofthe Chairman,DepartmentofArchitecture,SchoolofArt andArchitecture,tothe Presidentand FellowsofYaleUniversityfor theAcademicYear1967–1968. 5DonlynLyndon, CharlesW.Moore,Patrick J. Quinn, andSim Vander Ryn, “Toward 3Ibid. Making Places,” Landscape 12,no.1(Autumn 1962): 32. 4Charles W. Moore, oral history interviewbySallyWoodbridge, December 28,1984, tran- 6Moore,“Plug It in Ramses,and SeeifItLightsUp, Because We Aren’t GoingtoKeepIt script,ArchivesofAmericanArt,Smithsonian Institution. Moorebegan teachingatBerkeley Unless It Works,” Perspecta 11 (1967):34. in 1959. 7Ibid.,37. 34 35 EveBlau Pedagogy andPolitics architecture as part of theurban sceneinCalifornia, achallenge offeredtohim by editor Robert A.M.Stern(Fig. 1).“Perspecta’s editorssuspected,Ipresume,thatIwould discoverthatin Californiathere is no contemporary monumental architec- ture,orthatthere is no urbanscene,” Moorewrites.8 Rejecting Perspecta’s termsofreference, he asserts that monumentalityisan act, notathing, “not aproductofcompositionaltechniques, ... of flamboyanceofform, or even of conspicuousconsumption of space,time, or money.” 9 Rather, monumental and urban,he claims,are adjectives that describe individuals“giving up some- thing, spaceormoney or prominence or concern, to thepublic realm.”The “function” of that actistomarkaplace that has more than privateimportanceorinterest.10 On onelevel Moore’sassertionscan be read as areprise of themonumentality discourseofthe 1940s.11 But, significantly, he shifts theterms of discussion from architectural form to politi- cal space:Where,heasks, is thepublic realminacitylikeLos Angeles, whereall property andspace areprivatizedand hardly anyonegives anything to thepublic?The closestthing LosAnge- leshas to atraditionallyconceived public realm, Mooreproposes, is Disneyland,which he describesasanersatzurbanismthatlooks andfeels like therealthing butlacks politicalspace,and there- fore does notallow forpolitical experience.InDisneyland there is nowhere“to have an effectiverevolution.”12 Theonlyspaces in LosAngeles conducivetorevolutionare thefreeways. Just as theCommunardstooktothe streetsofParis in 1871,Angelenos wishingtostage arevolutionincontemporaryLos Angelesmust take to thefreeways. Alternatively, Mooresuggests, they