sign in sign up
<<
Home , Deutscher Werkbund, Hermann Muthesius

The 1914 Werkbund Debate Resolved: The Design and Manufacture of Frank O. Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum, Bilbao Irene Nero

Concern about McDonaldization in is not new pride should dictate that goods be of fine quality, so as not to to architectural discourse.1 The terms of expression may be “pollute the visual environment.”4 different, but some of the important issues are fundamentally Van de Velde, another of the founding members, was also the same as those found at the core of the historic 1914 influenced by England’s Industrial Revolution, but this time, Werkbund debate between and Henry van by its vocal opponent—John Ruskin. Van de Velde was in de Velde. This landmark debate serves as one of the earliest, if agreement with Muthesius that goods produced should be of not the earliest, example of publicly demonstrated concern high quality, but felt that handcrafting in the English Arts among modern architects regarding the origins of design and and Crafts tradition was more appropriate for establishing a manufacture of architecture.2 Primarily, at debate was the is- national identity.5 Both of the powerful Werkbund members sue of architecture becoming a standardized type-object, sub- agreed that quality was an issue in the production of German ject to ubiquitous distribution, versus architecture remaining goods, but had divergent ideas regarding their manufacture. an individualized, artistically-inspired creation. “Sameness” Manufactured goods, however, were not the only items under was an issue, simply because it was deemed an affront to the consideration at the Werkbund exhibition for standardization. creative process. The 1914 debate, which took place at the Indeed, the Werkbund members were concerned with archi- first exhibition of the , in , has tectural issues as well—in particular, the social messages in- often been referred to as the unresolved Art vs. Industry ques- herent within architecture. In July of 1914, the two protago- tion. I maintain that in 1997, with a single building, Frank O. nists, polarized by their strong beliefs, eloquently stated their Gehry reconciled the seeming opposition of technology ver- cases at the opening conference of the Werkbund exhibition. sus art, so resoundingly articulated in the Cologne debate. The In the first of ten proposals, Muthesius asserted: “Architec- building in question is the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, ture and with it the whole area of the Werkbund’s activities, is Spain. pressing towards standardization, and only through standard- In terms of understanding the fundamentals of modern ization can it recover that universal significance which was architecture, we must briefly explore the history of the Co- characteristic of it in times of harmonious culture.”6 logne Exhibition. Muthesius, one of the founding members of In the first statement of his ten point rebuttal, Van de the Deutsche Werkbund, had served as architectural attaché Velde maintained the following: “By his innermost essence in 1896, at the German embassy in England. Part of his as- the artist is a burning idealist, a free spontaneous creator. Of signment was to study the effects of the Industrial Revolution his own free will he will never subordinate himself to a type, a on art and architecture in England.3 As a result of this experi- canon.”7 He further stated that the artist should “cultivate . . . ence, he concluded that design should embrace the machine the gifts of individual manual skill[s] . . . [and, believe] in the age and begin the task of standardizing forms for machine beauty of highly differentiated execution, uninhibited by stan- manufacture. However, he also felt that machine-produced dardization.”8 goods had fallen to a low level of aesthetics. He wanted Ger- With their differences clearly apparent, Muthesius and many to return to good design and quality, which he felt rep- Van de Velde continued to debate, and the Russians began resented a national purity. Furthermore, he stated that national mobilization for World War I. By August, the unresolved is-

1 This paper was presented at the 54th Conference of the Society of Architec- 4 Conrads 22. tural Historians, in Toronto, Canada, April 20, 2001. At issue was the term McDonaldization, which architects have adopted as a pejorative term re- 5 John Heskett, Design in : 1970-1918 (London: Trefoil Books, ferring to the mindless repetition of contemporary building “styles.” Ltd., 1986) 116. Heskett, among other authors discusses the widely held belief that applied arts could affect the character of a generation. It is this 2 The full text of the Cologne debate can be found in Ulrich Conrads, Pro- belief to which Muthesius, by way of English Arts and Crafts, subscribed. grams and Manifestos on Twentieth Century Architecture, trans. Michael Bellock (Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press, 1991) 21. 6 Conrads 21.

3 Joan Campbell, The German Werkbund: The Politics of Reform in the 7 Conrads 22. Applied Arts (Princeton: Princeton UP, 1978) 12. Campbell has provided the reader with a well-documented discussion regarding Muthesius’ for- 8 Conrads 22. mative sojourn in England. ATHANOR XX IRENE NERO

sues became moot, because the exhibition was prematurely mountain mist and river mist are periodically reinforced. Gehry terminated, due to the beginning of the war. These issues would has instituted an hourly spectacle, much like the “timed” foun- not gather importance again until the end of the war when the tains at Versailles. At the strike of each hour, streams of mist necessity for rebuilding Europe was evident.9 shoot at oblique angles into the air from below the pedestrian It is with the completion of the Guggenheim Bilbao, some bridge for the duration of five minutes. The ethereal quality of eighty-three years later, that the early modern concerns of art the building becomes even more accentuated. The museum vs. industry were resolved. The Canadian born Frank Gehry has been referred to as a “village of forms,” with its façades demonstrated that an architect could use machines to repro- tilting in and tipping out while curving and contorting in an duce individualized artistic creations. By using a computer unprecedented fashion (Figure 2). Renaissance stasis and sym- program to translate his sketchy, hand-drawn designs directly metry are abandoned for expressive continual movement. into workable computerized drawings, Gehry resolved the Glazed steel-gridded sections, which clearly nod to Walter Werkbund issue of art vs. industry. He showed us that both Gropius’ curtain wall, are employed as both finished exterior ideas could coexist in a building. Furthermore, the architect and interior walls. These glazed panels, cut on the diagonal was able to transform the resultant graphics into pre-fabri- and resembling crystalline shards found in Die Brücke paint- cated sections that were assembled on site. Marked, measured, ings of 1909, or recalling ’s 1914 Werkbund exhi- and cut by computer, these sections served as modular compo- bition building, the Glass House— force the viewer to acknowl- nents, easily recreated due to computer memory. This build- edge an extreme interplay of positive and negative space (Fig- ing could be unique, or one of any number desired. This is ures 3, 4). Additionally, Gehry floated travertine panels, three akin to the standardization that Muthesius so strongly advo- millimeters thick, and indigenous to Spain, onto a steel grid. cated in 1914. It is evident that Gehry’s use of computers (or The travertine serves as cladding for the base, and as the pri- e-technology) has responded to the early modern historical mary material for the land-locked façades. The warm honey- debate that engaged architects for nearly a century. I suggest colored stone is found in Granada. Furthermore, he created a that with the creation of the Guggenheim Bilbao, Gehry has subterranean entrance, rather than a raised temple approach altered the course of modern architectural history. instituted by Alberti and perpetuated throughout nineteenth The Guggenheim site is on the Nervérion River at the century museum building (Figure 5). His subterranean entrance foot of the surrounding mountains. The museum is a visually evokes a primal expression, geographically akin to entering tantalizing building, nestled into its environment, reflecting the nearby caves of Altamira, metaphorically enforcing a pri- all levels and sources of light—creating a continually chang- mordial response to art. With its subtly reflective skin and the ing façade (Figure 1). The titanium-clad building has no ap- complexly multi-faceted façade, the Guggenheim museum is parent stasis because it reflects not only temporal light changes, unlike any other building constructed. but also its surrounding river site, formerly a nineteenth cen- In 1904, , another of the founding tury shipyard. Layers of reflection from the sky and water are members of the Deutsche Werkbund, wrote in the journal Die unendingly present. These natural reflections allow the mas- Hilfe: “Art in the Age of the Machine . . . [calls for] industrial sive edifice to appear to be in constant motion, and shifting methods of production to be used to create new forms express- form. The building also displays amorphic tendencies due to ing the spirit of the time.”10 Besides aptly describing the its materials and perpetually changing light that distorts and Guggenheim Bilbao, a statement such as this brings into ques- dissolves its form. To further enhance the amorphous quality tion the issue of industry. Certainly, in 1904, at the inception of the museum building, Gehry embraces and accentuates the of an industrialized Germany, buildings such as Behrens AEG atmospheric qualities found in the nearby terrain. A fine natural Turbine Factory, 1908-09, , were seen as revolutionary. mist exists in the area and makes for numerous hazy days. At With its hinged fabrication the building serves as a machine, first glance, the viewer realizes that Gehry’s use of titanium for the purpose of building machines. The fabrication repre- reflects the misty light, accentuating the silvery gray of the sents the function of the building. The AEG factory then, would building’s metallic skin. The color transformations that occur nearly fit within the parameters of Naumann’s statement, ex- in the titanium sheathing are unique to that material, and a cept that the building also expresses Classical and Gothic ref- perfect echo for the area’s atmosphere. The originally pro- erences in its façade. Therefore, the AEG building with all of posed stainless steel would have been crisply brighter and its intricate mechanistic fittings, is clearly not a new form for harsher, whereas the titanium offers subtle variations of color the “spirit” of an industrial time. from reflective light, varying from dusty silver-grays to dusty More complex to the issue at hand is that in our contem- oranges in the changing light. However, as the viewer walks porary society the idea and, therefore, connotation of technol- the periphery of the structure, it becomes apparent that the ogy, has been transformed from industrial to electronic. I main-

9 Jürgen Tietz, The Story of Architecture of the 20th Century (Cologne: International Style buildings of the Weissenhof Seidlungung, 1927, Köneman, 1999) 37. In 1918 the Weimar Republic had to address the se- Stuttgart, and the Siemensstadt, Berlin, 1931. vere housing shortage caused by the war. As a result, Berlin architects Martin Wagner, , , , and 10 Heskett 106. Bruno Taut created several housing schemes. These projects included the

96 THE 1914 WERKBUND DEBATE RESOLVED: THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE OF FRANK O. GEHRY’S GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, BILBAO

tain that the Guggenheim Bilbao is the first modern building tual origins. In effect, Hi-Tech buildings use exposed materi- to represent technology as it subsumes the idea of industry. als that serve as a sign (whether consciously or unconsciously) This transfiguration of technology is fundamental to the the- of their highly industrial creation, and not as a symbol of their sis that Gehry has presented us with a paradigmatical shift in hidden engineering. A prime example of this paradoxical situ- architecture, resulting from what is now commonly being re- ation can be found in Renzo Piano and Richard Rogers’ ferred to as electronic technology (e-technology). Furthermore, Georges Pompidou Center in Paris, 1977 (Figure 7). Gener- I assert that the forms realized through this electronic means ally regarded as exemplary of the High-Tech style, it actually require a new term to describe them. I prefer to use a term I functions as the symbolic end of the machine age, with its coined—techno-morphic. The building has been formed completely industrial mechanism turned inside out, and ap- through technological means. This idea is closely aligned with parent to the viewer. The twentieth century’s love of the ma- Naumann’s statement of using “industrial methods of produc- chine is fully exposed both figuratively and literally in this tion. . . to create new forms expressing the spirit of the times.”11 unique building. However, with the shift of early modern ideas of industry This is not the case with the Guggenheim Bilbao. Of im- to late twentieth century technology, the technomorphism portance to us is that Gehry’s Guggenheim surpasses the High- found at the Guggenheim Bilbao represents the transforma- Tech style by mutating technology into an expressive monu- tion of an industrial society into a post-industrial society. Ac- mental sculpture that subverts its technological origins while cordingly, we see that the term techno-morphic is not simply openly proclaiming a technological future. For example, the a stylistic denotation. Instead, the term can be applied con- Guggenheim appears sleek, and futuristic, but does not dis- ceptually, tectonically (through its fabrication), and stylisti- play any evidence of computerized manufacture. Portions ap- cally to the Guggenheim Bilbao. Therefore, the building rep- pear to be hand-crafted due to the architect’s manipulation of resents a synthesis of expressive e-technological form and e- quilted-looking rectangular panels. The viewer recognizes the technological fabrication. The style exemplifies the technique, use of sleek metallic paneling resembling the skin of a rocket and both reify the concept. In effect, Gehry’s building defies ship, but is confounded by the hand-crafted appearance of the much of our former architectural vocabulary and thereby com- panels (Figure 8).12 Yet, the association with rocket ships makes mands us to create a new term for this type of architecture. I it undeniably futuristic because the future is generally inter- have chosen to use the term, e-technoarchitecture. Gehry has, preted as being technologically advanced. The Bilbao therefore, created a new form within architecture and subse- Guggenheim, therefore, both reveals and hides its technologi- quently, a new type of architecture. Concurrently, with this cal origins. historic event, came the resolution of an earlier historic event— Further paradoxical resolutions can be understood in the the Werkbund debate of 1914. Guggenheim Bilbao through the transposition of the architect’s Certainly, the twentieth century’s technological resolve hand-rendered sketches into a computerized program. Spe- has melded into a quotidian acceptance of things electronic. cifically, Gehry uses the French aerospace computer program Yet, architecture, for all of its technological engineering did known as CATIA.13 By using the software program to help not advance beyond an industrial look before Gehry’s realize his designs, Gehry superceded the commonplace tool Guggenheim Bilbao. For example, the so-called High-Tech of architects—Computer Aided Drafting systems that focus style, widely touted as the style of the end of the technological primarily on rectilinear figures, based on planes in space. twentieth century, is in fact, what I would term High Indus- AutoCAD systems are mainly automatic assistance to planar trial. With its exposed I-beams, rivets, bi-axial cable, and re- design and do not possess the precision and range that the lated joinery, these buildings blatantly display their industrial aerospace program provides. Furthermore, with CATIA, the fabrication. Examples of this style include much of Sir Norman shell is formed before the skeletal system. In terms of design, Foster’s work, among others. For instance, in Foster’s Lloyd’s Gehry’s use and modification of CATIA is unprecedented. Building in London, 1978-86, there is truth in materials (a CATIA was designed to accommodate subtle and grand curves, early modern concept) where the façades and interiors offer and surface variations found in airplanes. Therefore, CATIA the viewer a proliferation of steel, cable, and sleekly manufac- enabled the architect to transform his sketchy ribbon-like tured industrial materials (Figure 6), but, the real technology sketches into computer graphics, and then translate them into is buried within the engineering schema. Because we accept fabricated metals. The plasticity offered by the program al- engineering as technology, we can understand that the build- lowed Gehry to manifest an architectural style only dreamed ings in question are Hi-Tech, although their industrial ap- about by the German Expressionists in the early decades of pearances are incongruent with their technological concep- the twentieth century. The extreme accuracy of the computer

11 Heskett 106. 13 Coosje van Bruggen, Frank O. Gehry: The Guggenheim Museum Bilbao 12 Gehry, like (who was a primary influence), confounds the (New York: The Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation, 1997) 157. Van viewer by making disjunct associations between techniques, materials, and Bruggen is among the first authors to discuss Gehry’s unprecedented use of styles. These disjunctions serve as the media through which he conveys his an aerospace software for architectural design. message of paradoxical reconciliation.

97 ATHANOR XX IRENE NERO

program provided Gehry with more design latitude, which Due to his use of the computer to create modular sculp- resulted in a building fabricated from highly complex, curved tural buildings, the concern has arisen that his designs will and double-curved screen walls. The architect himself admits become ubiquitous with no regard for culture or site. Again, to being surprised when he saw the construction of his be- at the core of the 1914 debate was the concern that industri- loved curves—he was not certain they could be realized. ally-driven designs would become established type-objects that Simply said, Gehry would not have been able to manu- would lead to the “cookie cutter” syndrome in architecture. facture the form of his benchmark building, if not for the use The architect as creative form-giver would be lost to repeti- of highly specialized technology employed during the incipi- tion of template designs. The subsequent standardization was ent stages of design. Gehry approached the use of technology seen by many as having the potential for creating interna- in an artistic manner, and conversely, approached architec- tional blight. This early modern fear can be translated as one tural design with a fresh technological foundation—the result of our contemporary fears—McDonaldization of building is a marriage of art to industry. styles. Do we want titanium-clad double curves in every town? In terms of design, there are several source examples that In the case of Gehry’s work, this issue has been reignited, we can refer to within the architect’s own work. For example, because he has shown us that the potential for easily recreat- the Weisman Museum of Art (1990-93), Minneapolis, Min- ing his computerized designs exists. nesota, can be considered the earliest design prototype of the However, Gehry’s stance on strong site-specificity has in- Guggenheim (Figures 9, 10). In terms of the use of materials dicated that his buildings will not be repeated verbatim—at and its river site, this museum is the closest in form and spirit least, not by him. The architect is sensitive to densely urban to the Bilbao Guggenheim. In Prague, the Nationale- settings, as exemplified in his European buildings. Because Netherlanden office building (referred to as “Fred and Gin- he sees himself as an artist, he has no intention of ger” because of its sweeping style, 1992-96) can be seen as a McDonaldizing. Admittedly his buildings possess strong de- move to a more lyrical, less prosaic vocabulary, and therefore, sign features which have become his signature, yet, each of as a partial design prototype of the Bilbao Guggenheim. In Gehry’s buildings is also site specific. Paris, the Cinematic History Museum (formerly the Ameri- In conclusion, we can see that Gehry’s technomorphic can Center, 1988) is testament to Gehry’s attention to site speci- architecture is the result of a marriage of art to industry. The ficity and his prodigious ability to weave adventurous new single act of creating the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, construction into the fabric of a densely urban nineteenth-cen- Spain, closed the door on the unresolved 1914 Deutsche tury setting. Exquisite in their subtlety, Gehry’s historical quo- Werkbund debate. Gehry’s artistic vision reflects Henry van tations sublimely reflect his awareness of site, purpose, and/ de Velde’s idea of artist as creative form-giver. Yet, his ability or symbolic function. to manipulate current technologies reflects Muthesius’ ideas In the Cinematic History Museum, Gehry wrapped his of artist as industrially informed. The architect’s new design fragmented container in a cream-colored travertine, echoing methodologies, new technology, and new materials have all the façades of its nineteenth-century French Classical neigh- allowed for a new architectural vocabulary and pedagogical bors. Additionally, he capped the multi-level roof line with model. With one single building Gehry has altered architec- sheets of silvery blue tin and lead, materials found in use for tural history by integrating the post-industrial world of e-tech- roof tops throughout Paris. Upon first glance, the building nology to the manufactured world of industrial design and tonally merges with its neighborhood. In terms of form, how- both to the creative process of architectural design. Because ever, the structure demands a second look. Its fractured forms of this e-technology, the Guggenheim Bilbao has become the tilt and tumble, appearing precariously placed, and invoking first true representation of our post-industrial society. Ironi- a sense of tension. We should note, however, that the street cally, we recall, it is situated on a former industrial site. Gehry façades reflect the areas facing them. That is, they resemble has shifted industrialization methods to e-technological ones, rectangular, planar surfaces with rectangular fenestration. It and thereby redirected architectural history. He found the re- is only on the front façade, which is the park façade, that the sources in our current technology to resolve the fundamental architect has placed the building’s unstable-looking features. issues that so perplexed our early modern architects, and Therefore, the Cinematic Museum displays elements of his- thereby closed a chapter on early . toric and modern architecture—deliberately juxtaposed, and in some cases, merged. This reconciling of paradoxes also appears in many of his other commissions, however, nowhere else is it as fully resolved as in the Guggenheim Bilbao. Florida State University

98 THE 1914 WERKBUND DEBATE RESOLVED: THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE OF FRANK O. GEHRY’S GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, BILBAO

Figure 1. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, river façade. Photo: Author.

Figure 2. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, entrance façade. Photo: Author. 99 ATHANOR XX IRENE NERO

Figure 3. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, river façade. Photo: Author.

Figure 4. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, river façade. Photo: Author. 100 THE 1914 WERKBUND DEBATE RESOLVED: THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE OF FRANK O. GEHRY’S GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, BILBAO

Figure 5. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, entrance façade. Photo: Author.

Figure 6. Sir Norman Foster, The Lloyd’s Building, 1986, London, England, interior lobby. 101 ATHANOR XX IRENE NERO

Figure 7. Richard Rogers and Renzo Piano, Georges Pompidou Center, 1977, Paris, France. Courtesy of Art Resource. Photo: Erich Lessing.

Figure 8. Frank O. Gehry, Guggenheim Museum, 1997, Bilbao, Spain, detail of paneling, river façade. Photo: Author. 102 THE 1914 WERKBUND DEBATE RESOLVED: THE DESIGN AND MANUFACTURE OF FRANK O. GEHRY’S GUGGENHEIM MUSEUM, BILBAO

Figure 9. Frank O. Gehry, The Weisman Museum, 1993, Minneapolis, Minnesota, river façade. Photo: Author.

Figure 10. Frank O. Gehry, The Weisman Museum, 1993, Minneapolis, Minnesota, river façade. Photo: Author. 103