The Ideology of Space

THE IDEOLOGY OF SPACE A study in the psychology of space in the urban realm AR548 MODERNISMS MAHAM NEHA ANDALEEB ANSARI

WORD COUNT: 3033

"The space must be a kind of showcase, a stage, on which the pictures make their appearance as actors in a drama." -El Lissitsky1 Although the definition of ‘space’ is not a fixed one and is subject to change with the course of time, it became an integral part of modern architecture by the mid-1920s.

The articulation of space, however ambiguous, allows for the free movement and ‘unfolding’ of everyday life without any physical constraints. The relationship formed between the inside and the outside by the mere introduction of a space such as a public square and the integration of a building with its cultural context was the main aim of my Adapt & Extend design project. The theme of ‘space’, therefore, was a key element in the design process. While in retrospect, it is easy to suggest that the term ‘space’ changes ‘according to the circumstances, tasks entrusted to it’ 2 and its interpretations. However, a closer look at the use of the term in architectural practice gives us a more nuanced understanding of the concept of ‘space’ and the role it played in the development of my Adapt & Extend design project.

THE DYNAMICS OF SPACE – THEORIES & INTERPRETATIONS The concept of space in architectural theory could be divided into three main categories according to Adrian Forty 3 . The first was the idea of spatial enclosure where provision of space had to be marked by a physical boundary, whereas the material factors were less significant. The German word for space was ‘Raum’, which signifies a material enclosure and a physical concept. This viewpoint was very close to Gottfried Semper’s4 idea of space, who claimed that “the wall is that architectural element that formally represents and makes visible the enclosed space as such” He was also responsible for the introduction of space into the principal theme of modern architecture. The second type of space was said to be space as ‘continuum’ – the idea that inside and outside spaces were everlasting and immeasurable, which was considered one of the most innovative aspects of the definition of ‘space’ in the 1920s. This was the definition of space which Kiesler5 followed when he designed his ‘City is Space’ installation (Fig. 1) at the Austrian Pavillion of the 1925 Paris exhibition. This was the first expression of space as a ‘gravity-free, non-material element of urbanism’ – Kiesler described it as:

1

(Wolf 2015) (Forty 2000) 3 (Forty 2000) 4 Gottfried Semper – German Architect of the 1800s and author of the book ‘The Four Elements of Architecture’ 5 Austrian-American architect, designer, theorist, artist and sculptor 2

1

“A system of tension in free space A change of space into urbanism No foundation no walls Detachment from the earth – suppression of the static axis In creating new possibilities for living, it creates a new society.”6 The third definition of ‘space’ was to perceive it as the imagined extension of the body within a certain volume. Siegfried Ebeling 7 described this type of Fig1. Keisler’s ‘City Is Space’

space as ‘a membrane, a protective covering, like

the bark of a tree between the man and the world’.8 This space was informed by man’s daily activities and balanced man’s relationship with the outside world. This concept of space negated the earlier definitions of space as just enclosed spaces as Semper had believed, and as mere shelters or fixed structures. Instead it defined space as a natural element informed by everyday experiences.

It was this definition of space that Mies van der Rohe followed in his work in the mid-1920s. He was an architect with ‘the ability to reduce every problem to a kind of essential simplicity – a simplicity that continues to give rise to conflicting interpretations of his work to this day’9, for it is the most simplistic work that is in fact the most challenging to achieve. In his work, Mies exploited to the maximum, the capabilities of skeleton construction to achieve ‘a spatially free and open architecture’10. Mies’s interaction with the ‘avant-garde’11, which included filmmakers, artists and writers such as Hans Richter & El Lissitsky12, led to a shift in style from a derivative eclecticism to Constructivist13 concepts. In 1922, the journal ’G: Material to Form’ was founded by Richter and El Lissitsky which gave Mies a platform to publish his early Constructivist projects together with short criticisms such as when 6

(Forty 2000) Siegfried Ebeling – teacher at the Bauhaus; looked at defining architecture as a ‘material envelope’ – His research was praised by Mies van der Rohe, who was said to be influenced by Ebeling’s idea of space.

8 (Forty 2000) 9 (Colquhoun 2002) 10 (Hugh Honour 2005) 11 ‘Avant-garde’ – Work or artists that are innovative, introduce or explore new forms or subject matter.

12 El- Lissitsky was a Russian born artist, designer and architect whose ideas were influential in the Bauhaus and in the Constructivist art movement.

13 Constructivism – A movement where it was believed that architecture began with construction. It emphasized abstract geometric shapes in design.

7

2

he claimed the “We know no forms, only building problems. Form is not the goal, but the result of your work.” and that we should be aiming to create architecture that “bring(s) nature, houses and human beings together into a higher unity”14 In some of Mies van der Rohe’s work, two main themes were seen repeatedly that set his work apart. The first was the attempt to enclose utility in a cubic container which did not cater to any particular functions and the second was the expression of the building in the uncertain nature of life. His initial constructivist work includes the Concrete Country House (1923) and The Brick Country House (1924). A comparative illustration of the plans of these houses, along with plans of the Lessing House project of 1923, put together by Colquhoun in his book ‘Modern Architecture’ was an example (Fig.2) of the development process of Mies’s work where the progressive fragmentation of spaces could easily be pointed out. In the Concrete Country House (Fig.3), a cube is dissolved into a solid form with strict boundary walls; in the Lessing House a cube is split into smaller cubes, intertwining within each other; and by the time Mies designed the Brick Country House (Fig.4), the cubes are replaced by a system of planes. This progressive fragmentation and expression of space, in which the exterior of the house hints at its internal planning, shows how the design of each house, became more open to catering for the ever-evolving lifestyle of their

Fig2. Fragmentation of Spaces in Mies’s designs (L to R) Concrete Country House, Lessing House and Brick Country House

Fig 3. Model of Concrete Country House

14

Fig 4. Axonometric of the Brick Country House

(Fritz 1991)

3

occupants and to integrating with their context.

Mies had adopted a process of constructivist nature, with which forms could create spaces flexible enough to respond to any possible circumstance, every building forming a unique configuration while being made from similar elements. Mies then designed the Tugendhat House (1928) (Fig.5) and the Barcelona Pavilion (1929) (Fig.6), where the roofs were supported by a grid of free standing columns which marked the boundaries of a space free for movement and activity that was not restricted by any physical mass, as Ludwig Hilbersheimer remarked, ‘one must move in this space, its rhythm is like music’15.

‘Space’ to Mies van der Rohe, was the pure essence of modern architecture and he expressed this in his later work such as the Neue Nationalgallerie (Fig.7), which exemplified the vitality of an open space. Again a solid roof supported by free standing columns on a larger scale, wrapped with glazing that established a formal boundary between the inside and the outside spaces, while also giving an opportunity for the two to integrate. He had abandoned the house as a single pavilion and broke it down to its core elements - reduced it to an architecture of ‘skin and bones’ 16 , which gave the spaces he created, the ‘essential kind of

Fig5. Tugenhadt House

Fig6. Barcelona Pavilion

Fig 7. Neue Nationagallerie 15 16

(Fritz 1991) (Forty 2000)

4

simplicity’, desired to form a relationship between man and the external world.

THE URBANISM OF SPACE – EFFECTS & EXPERIENCES For space to act as a ‘membrane’ and form an understanding between man and the external world, the integration of the built environment and the social environment is necessary. Time has its effects on the configuration of the social environment that is informed by the full context of political, social and economic factors that could transform the built environment. As Harvey says, “Urbanism maybe regarded as a particular patterning of the social process as it unfolds in space, and cities are the tangible expression of that process in the form of a physical built environment which exists in geographic space” 17.

It is the introduction of ‘space’ as a public realm in an urban environment that can transform cities, environments and lifestyles. Such spaces, however, are ‘not a lifeless product of the social environment. They are, in a manner, the stage on which the social environment unfolds its drama, and it has its own dynamics, which reflect on the social environment.’ 18 From actual physical constraints and enclosure of space that Semper suggested in his definition of the term; to the ‘gravity-free, nonmaterial element of urbanism’ as defined by Keisler; to the idea of space as a protective covering put forward by Ebeling, the concept of ’space’ contributes to the development of the social environment. This kind of an environment may be adopted, adapted, improved or demolished, but which ever path is taken, the existence of an opening in the densely populated urban environment, are opportunities that offer an environment for the exchange of new ideas and community expression. Urban public spaces, if designed well, ‘are thriving spaces that invite people to linger and interact and connect’19.

In a dense urban setting, public spaces and squares could epitomise a welcome opportunity to relax or just enjoy a distraction from the intensity of the daily routine.

As Marcel Breuer says, “Because the outside world of today affects us in the most disparate ways, our way of life is changing more rapidly than in previous times. It goes without saying that our surroundings will undergo corresponding changes. This leads us to layouts, spaces, and buildings of which every part can be altered, which 17

(Harvey 1972) (Vandal 2006) 19 (Austrailian Government Department of Health and Ageing 2009) 18

5

are flexible and which can be combined in different fashions20”. Therefore, the mere introduction of public spaces converted a short walk or a short trip to a surrounding area, into an entertaining and rewarding social experience.

Viennese architect Camillo Sitte was a firm enthusiast of ‘spaces’ in urban design. In his book ‘City Planning According to Artistic Principles’, he claimed that urban design was the ‘art of spaces’21. This sort of an insight, that ‘space’ belong not only inside buildings, but also outside them, was crucial during the 1920s and with time, this idea transformed major cities, as today, the design and planning of public spaces is just as important as the planning of enclosed spaces. Sitte studied the importance of the inherent creative quality of an urban space and the early examples of urban spaces that he believed to be far superior to the new static cities, for example Greek spaces like the Agora22.

The success of public spaces exemplifies the need for such spaces and their importance as an extension of the body and mind. Examples of public spaces are seen in various time-periods, ranging from attractions such as Trafalgar square (Fig.8) from the late 1800s, to the 1920s popular public spaces Alexanderplatz & Potsdamer Platz in Berlin, to more recent examples of public spaces such as the slope roofscape of the Oslo Opera house (Fig.9) recently developed by Snohetta – each example acts as points of integration between the built environment and social environment where the community interacts and exchanges ideas.

Fig 8. Activities at Trafalgar Square

Fig9. Oslo Opera House roofscape public space

20

(Schnieder 2007) (Forty 2000) 22 Agora – Developed by the Athenians in ancient Greece, the most important public space in the city, where people would gather to discuss important aspects of the community.

21

6

THE DESIGN OF SPACE – ADAPT & EXTEND PROJECT It was this idea of the ‘space’ as a method of communication between social environment and the built environment that informed my design decisions for the Adapt & Extend Design project. The project brief was to design an exhibition space for the Canterbury Archaeological Trust by adapting and extending an existing brick building with a Tudor façade, located at Northgate in Canterbury city centre.

Following Mies van der Rohe’s policy of ‘Less is more’ and using the fragmentation of space using interlocking planes as a prototype, the exhibition spaces provided in the extension were planned so that they were divided across three storeys – the Temporary Gallery on the ground floor, the Permanent Gallery on the first floor and the Crypt that was located in the basement. These three exhibition spaces were connected by an atrium space with a ribbon staircase, under an aluminium roof system of closely repeated mullions following the pitched silhouette of the existing Tudor building. Apart from the exhibition spaces, the scheme had to include offices and a studio flat for visiting researchers of the Trust. My response to the brief kept these spaces in the existing building, making minimal changes to its structure. At the entrance, there was a small coffee bar and there was space on the first floor where lecture series, seminars and various activities involving the community could be held, thus turning the building into an environment where cultural exchanges took place, although in a space marked by physical constraints.

Fig10. Interior Perspectives (L to R): Temporary Gallery, The Crypt and the Atrium Space

The form of the extension of the building was a result of studies of the existing building’s silhouette and repeating a section of it, forming a saw-tooth roof. Its Glulam skeletal structure, clad with a profiled zinc sheet that followed the roof shape, left most of the extension spatially free and open to catering for various uses. The division of spaces was such that each room could be used for a number of events and activities and you could also eventually change, extend, add or remove areas – the exhibition spaces in particular, where objects like an 8-metre Viking boat were

7

on display. The roof-shape became a vital part of the environmental strategy that would further improve one’s experience of the exhibition spaces, while allowing inhabitants ‘free movement’ and the space to be informed by the visitors’ activities.

The main focal point of my design project was to weave in my scheme into the urban fabric of Canterbury, by providing a space for the public where the scheme could interact with the community and, instead of becoming a ‘lifeless product of its surroundings, become a stage where the drama of the social environment unfolds’23.

The public space was provided so that the current daily use of the space would continue to run uninterrupted – members of the community are occasionally seen setting up various stalls. It was noted that most of Canterbury is built up to the edge of the street and there were very few opportunities where the community could interact with its surroundings and each other. The provision of a public space in front of a museum for the Canterbury Archaeological Trust seemed to be the perfect opportunity for the community to have a place to stop and interact with the history of Canterbury – breaking the monotony of daily life. Therefore, the skeletal construction and fragmented planning of the extension building, with the glazing marking an informal boundary between the internal and the external spaces allowed for an opportunity for the society to interact with the design project.

The surface treatment of the public space was such that the concrete floor has a metal in-lay of the map of Canterbury, and the blocks of the sites of historical significance would come out of the ground to from stools of different shapes and sizes. Instead of providing benches and trees, it was decided that the public space should remain similar to its current status and act almost as a ‘blank canvas’ so that it could serve different purposes also being interactive and informative when there is no activity. One day there could be a food stall with its own seating arrangement, whereas the next day the space could act as a stage for an upcoming street performer and could also be a movie or documentary screening space by night, where the community comes together to exchange ideas and animate it with their dynamic presence.

23

(Vandal 2006)

8

Fig 11. Concept drawing showing how the spaces in the building spill out into the community

Fig12. Floor Plans (L to R): Basement, Ground Floor and First Floor

Fig13. Sectional Perspective showing the spaces inhabited

9

In Sir Denys Lasdun’s words, ‘space is the most luxurious thing anybody can give anybody,

in

the

name

of

architecture’

24

even

though

the

meanings

and

interpretations of the term ‘space’ are due to change over the course of time. By carefully

considering

the

concepts

of

both,

physical

space,

and

different

interpretations of space, my design project tried to bring to life, and tried to embody the idea that fragmented spaces that integrate the built and the social environment could have the power to inspire those who inhabit it, while also allowing for free movement and activity.

‘Fellowship in the open nurtures the growth of public life’ 25 , and therefore, the influence of different theories and meanings of space and public squares in an urban setting have played a significant role in the development of my Adapt & Extend design project. A city’s public spaces such as parks, streets, squares and general shared spaces are seen as a measure of the collective well-being of the a community, and as the experiences unfold, the public spaces become ‘vessels to carry positive communal meaning’.26 However, the success of a ‘space’, especially a public space in an urban setting, also relies on its inhabitants, the people using, maintaining and adopting the space. While a ‘space’ has the power to influence behaviour, it is an ‘extension of the body and mind’, continuously informed by the activities of man, forming a profound bond between man and the external world.

Fig 14. Exterior Perspective showing the metal inlay and public space 24

(Forty 2000) (Carr 1993) 26 (Carr 1993) 25

10

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Amin, Ash. Public Space. 2006. http://www.publicspace.org/en/textlibrary/eng/b003-collective-culture-and-urban-public-space (accessed January 18, 2015).

Austrailian Government Department of Health and Ageing. Healthy Spaces & Places: Urban Squares. 2009. www.healthyplaces.org.au (accessed January 17, 2015).

Carr, Stephen. Public Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993.

Colquhoun, Alan. Modern Architecture. Oxford University Press, 2002.

Forty, Adrian. Words and Buildings: A Vocabulary. Thames & Hudson, 2000.

Fritz, Neumeyer. The Artless Word: Mies van der Rohe on the Building Art. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991.

Harvey, David. Society, The City and The Space of Economy of Urbanism.

Commission on College Geography Resource Paper, Washigton DC: Association of American Geographers, 1972.

Hugh Honour, John Flemming. A World History of Art. Laurence King Publishing, 2005.

Schnieder, Tatjana and Jeremy Till. Flexible Housing . Oxford Architectural Press, 2007.

Tate. Tate Glossary. 2015. www.tate.org.uk/learn/onlineresources/glossary/a/avant-garde (accessed January 16, 2015).

Vandal, Pervaiz Vandal & Sajida. The Raj, Lahore & Bhai Ram Singh. Lahore: NCA Publications, 2006.

Wolf, Justin. The Art Story. 2015. http://www.theartstory.org/artist-lissitzkyel.htm# (accessed January 16, 2015).

ILLUSTRATIONS Cover Illustrations and Figs. 10, 12, 13 & 14 – Author’s Own images Fig. 1 – ‘City Is Space’ https://thepuppethomeproject.wordpress.com/3thewondercabinet/

Fig. 2 – Fragmentation of Mies’s Designs http://developingarchitecture.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-open-plan-in-thought-and-work-of.html

11

Fig. 3 – Model of Concrete Country House http://demasrusliarch1102.blogspot.co.uk/2010/10/precedent-studies-miesvan-der-rohe.html Fig. 4 – Axo of Brick Country House http://betonbabe.tumblr.com/image/4187162083 Fig. 5 – Tugenhadt House http://www.tugendhat.eu/en/about-thicom.html Fig. 6 – Barcelona Pavilion http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/Barcelona_Pavilion.html Fig. 7 – Neue Nationalgallerie http://www.iconeye.com/gallery/item/3855-neuenationalgalerie Fig. 8 – Trafalgar Square Photo by DAVID ILIFF. License: CC-BY-SA 3.0 Fig. 9 – Snohetta Oslo Opera House http://www.archdaily.com/440/oslo-operahouse-snohetta/

12