Comments on: How will the latest trend in preservation process and interest in Modernist buildings impact the threatened/saved Modern heritage of the world? http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/ Continuing the conversation. Thu, 23 May 2013 03:03:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Hannia Gómez http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1403 Hannia Gómez Sun, 15 Apr 2012 22:33:51 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1403 I would like to end with a last comment about Editing Degree Zero. And it refers to ideals in contemporary architecture. How would we have a practice in preservation of Modern architecture without this ideal? Landmarks and simply old buildings will always be there to be the subjects of our work, waiting in their variety to be brought back into life. It is, in my opinion, the continued background of the intervention spectrum, from Villa Planchart to Scarpa's Castelvecchio, inspiring our choices to remain more loyal to the art of Architecture. My gratitude to all of you and to The Glass House for this wonderful Conversation! I would like to end with a last comment about Editing Degree Zero. And it refers to ideals in contemporary architecture. How would we have a practice in preservation of Modern architecture without this ideal? Landmarks and simply old buildings will always be there to be the subjects of our work, waiting in their variety to be brought back into life. It is, in my opinion, the continued background of the intervention spectrum, from Villa Planchart to Scarpa’s Castelvecchio, inspiring our choices to remain more loyal to the art of Architecture. My gratitude to all of you and to The Glass House for this wonderful Conversation!

]]> By: carlosgomezdellarena http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1402 carlosgomezdellarena Sun, 15 Apr 2012 17:36:20 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1402 Two uneasy questions regarding the restoration and maintenance of Modern Architecture Landmarks, one about technical issues, the other about conceptual approaches. The vulnerability and short-term usable life expectancy of most modern constructions (compared to older architecture long-tern durability), and the use of industrial pieces and materials that rapidly get worn-out or are discontinued from production; poses a new and very difficult problem to solve for any modern restoration project. Many of our great building’s heritage are based on experimental or first uses of some specific materials or construction techniques that today are substituted or abandoned. (could we reproduce the many fixtures and façade glass elements on Wright’s Johnson Wax building ?) To solve this, we could force the creation of a new type of industry dedicated to manufacture construction elements at small scale for restoration purposes, with skilled workers covering a wide range of abandoned production techniques, becoming a laboratory on industrial archeology. The other question, conceptual approach to restoration, relates to the actual lack of objectives definition with any landmarks restoration, leaving too much leeway to the owner or professional in charge. There is a much defined set of rules (mainly by UNESCO) for the preservation and reuse of old monuments than we have for recent masterworks. And we have also the issue of the different languages of these modern masterworks whose restoration process should be also proceed in different manners. (should we restore a Wright, Corbu or Mies building with the same intellectual instruments? …with the same historical approach ? …what would today say a deceased modern Master about how to restore his decaying masterpiece? …did Rudolph have some ideas about this?) Two uneasy questions regarding the restoration and maintenance of Modern Architecture Landmarks, one about technical issues, the other about conceptual approaches.

The vulnerability and short-term usable life expectancy of most modern constructions (compared to older architecture long-tern durability), and the use of industrial pieces and materials that rapidly get worn-out or are discontinued from production; poses a new and very difficult problem to solve for any modern restoration project. Many of our great building’s heritage are based on experimental or first uses of some specific materials or construction techniques that today are substituted or abandoned. (could we reproduce the many fixtures and façade glass elements on Wright’s Johnson Wax building ?)

To solve this, we could force the creation of a new type of industry dedicated to manufacture construction elements at small scale for restoration purposes, with skilled workers covering a wide range of abandoned production techniques, becoming a laboratory on industrial archeology.

The other question, conceptual approach to restoration, relates to the actual lack of objectives definition with any landmarks restoration, leaving too much leeway to the owner or professional in charge. There is a much defined set of rules (mainly by UNESCO) for the preservation and reuse of old monuments than we have for recent masterworks. And we have also the issue of the different languages of these modern masterworks whose restoration process should be also proceed in different manners. (should we restore a Wright, Corbu or Mies building with the same intellectual instruments? …with the same historical approach ? …what would today say a deceased modern Master about how to restore his decaying masterpiece? …did Rudolph have some ideas about this?)

]]> By: carlosbrillembourg http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1401 carlosbrillembourg Wed, 11 Apr 2012 09:14:49 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1401 Sam and Hannia, I believe the re-use of historic structures not just the landmarked ones are very important in the re-vitalization of urban living in the United States where most so-called cities are like Los Angeles basically a group of neighborhoods tied by a network of highways. The example of Soho in New York is key to my understanding that restoration comes hand in hand with new use and new economics and curiously it is the use that changes the city. Can we consider the Soho of the seventies the same as Soho today even if the architecture is the same or renovated? The Chpperfield renovation of the museum in Berlin as preserving the aspect of ruin and producing a very interesting texture of the original with the traces of its ruination seem to me to be very in line with Violet le Ducs medieval fantasy architecture of the Carcassone or Notre Dame. I tend to agree there is no degree zero in iether editing or preservation somehow the present always steps in. Scarpa gave us a good way to do that in Verona. Sam and Hannia,

I believe the re-use of historic structures not just the landmarked ones are very important in the re-vitalization of urban living in the United States where most so-called cities are like Los Angeles basically a group of neighborhoods tied by a network of highways. The example of Soho in New York is key to my understanding that restoration comes hand in hand with new use and new economics and curiously it is the use that changes the city. Can we consider the Soho of the seventies the same as Soho today even if the architecture is the same or renovated?
The Chpperfield renovation of the museum in Berlin as preserving the aspect of ruin and producing a very interesting texture of the original with the traces of its ruination seem to me to be very in line with Violet le Ducs medieval fantasy architecture of the Carcassone or Notre Dame.
I tend to agree there is no degree zero in iether editing or preservation somehow the present always steps in. Scarpa gave us a good way to do that in Verona.

]]> By: Hannia Gómez http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1400 Hannia Gómez Tue, 10 Apr 2012 03:45:16 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1400 Talking about moving beyond houses, let's recall that the last World Monuments Fund/Knoll Prize for Preservation (2010) was given to the restoration of the Zonnestraal Sanatorium (J. Duiker, 1926-1931), "a little-known but iconic modern structure in Hilversum", restored by Bierman Henket and Wessel de Jonge (founders of Docomomo). I went to the award event at MoMA, and was fascinated by their explanation -and efforts- about finding the exact glass that would give the right color to the windows and the bulbs that would bring back the warm lightning of the building at the time of its opening, or reproducing out-of-production handles. I was also delighted seeing this happen at MoMA! So I went back home satisfied because that night I felt I witnessed the unveiling of a new form of Modern Art… but, alas, I know is much easier to restore a 1920s modern jewel than Paul Rudolph's library, amid all the global controversy on the preservation of Brutalist architecture. But a landmark is a landmark is a landmark, and what we do is restore them and preserve them. Renovations and improvements are for old buildings without any significance. The world is full of them. Talking about moving beyond houses, let’s recall that the last World Monuments Fund/Knoll Prize for Preservation (2010) was given to the restoration of the Zonnestraal Sanatorium (J. Duiker, 1926-1931), “a little-known but iconic modern structure in Hilversum”, restored by Bierman Henket and Wessel de Jonge (founders of Docomomo). I went to the award event at MoMA, and was fascinated by their explanation -and efforts- about finding the exact glass that would give the right color to the windows and the bulbs that would bring back the warm lightning of the building at the time of its opening, or reproducing out-of-production handles. I was also delighted seeing this happen at MoMA! So I went back home satisfied because that night I felt I witnessed the unveiling of a new form of Modern Art… but, alas, I know is much easier to restore a 1920s modern jewel than Paul Rudolph’s library, amid all the global controversy on the preservation of Brutalist architecture. But a landmark is a landmark is a landmark, and what we do is restore them and preserve them. Renovations and improvements are for old buildings without any significance. The world is full of them.

]]> By: sambatchelor http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1399 sambatchelor Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:34:50 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1399 There are no GUARANTEES in life or architecture :) But the "Zero Degree" editing you're advocating for is impossible. We're currently renovating Paul Rudolph's library at UMass Dartmouth (http://prudolph.lib.umassd.edu/node/4732) and to return the library to its original state would have rendered the building useless for the University. Our challenge was to preserve the IDEA of Rudolph's original inception, while also making it relevant for the university for the next 50 years. It's a particularly evident problem when you move beyond houses. Some houses have managed to warrant preservation as objects in their own right (The glass house, Tugendhat house, fallingwater, etc.), but larger buildings by the sheer financial investment required cannot be so preserved. The current debate over Rudolph's Orange County Civic center (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/08/are-some-buildings-too-ugly-to-survive) is a perfect example of how the lack of a clear ethic of how to preserve the ethos of modernism while addressing the relevancy of its technical issues leads to the unnecessary demolition of important landmarks. There are no GUARANTEES in life or architecture :) But the “Zero Degree” editing you’re advocating for is impossible.

We’re currently renovating Paul Rudolph’s library at UMass Dartmouth (http://prudolph.lib.umassd.edu/node/4732) and to return the library to its original state would have rendered the building useless for the University. Our challenge was to preserve the IDEA of Rudolph’s original inception, while also making it relevant for the university for the next 50 years.

It’s a particularly evident problem when you move beyond houses. Some houses have managed to warrant preservation as objects in their own right (The glass house, Tugendhat house, fallingwater, etc.), but larger buildings by the sheer financial investment required cannot be so preserved. The current debate over Rudolph’s Orange County Civic center (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/08/are-some-buildings-too-ugly-to-survive) is a perfect example of how the lack of a clear ethic of how to preserve the ethos of modernism while addressing the relevancy of its technical issues leads to the unnecessary demolition of important landmarks.

]]> By: Hannia Gómez http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1398 Hannia Gómez Mon, 09 Apr 2012 19:54:11 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1398 Dear Sam -and Carlos and Dung-, thank you for your interesting comments! I agree with Sam's idea about the "editorial process". But, as an editor myself, for me the Zero Degree of Editing -the "do not touch a single note", that Debussy wrote to Ravel about his Quartet in F major-, sometimes is the best choice. I also remind what Graziano Gasparini (Docomomo Venezuela's current President) wrote in his last book, "Listening to the Monument": the definite problem in architecture preservation is the quality of the architect involved in the process. Without his/her certified culture, vision, ability, knowledge, and, ultimately, taste, who can guarantee there would be any IMPROVEMENT? Dear Sam -and Carlos and Dung-, thank you for your interesting comments! I agree with Sam’s idea about the “editorial process”. But, as an editor myself, for me the Zero Degree of Editing -the “do not touch a single note”, that Debussy wrote to Ravel about his Quartet in F major-, sometimes is the best choice. I also remind what Graziano Gasparini (Docomomo Venezuela’s current President) wrote in his last book, “Listening to the Monument”: the definite problem in architecture preservation is the quality of the architect involved in the process. Without his/her certified culture, vision, ability, knowledge, and, ultimately, taste, who can guarantee there would be any IMPROVEMENT?

]]> By: sambatchelor http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1397 sambatchelor Mon, 09 Apr 2012 18:11:08 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1397 Carlos, you've hit upon the most important point, but the contradiction is even more inherent: Even if the new use is the same as the original, changes is technology, code, and safety require fundamental changes for continued use. We need to recognize that unless a building is becoming a museum to itself (e.g. Fallingwater), preservation is fundamentally an editorial process. Prescriptive guidelines prevent the worst interventions, but also the best. Architects need to acknowledge their role in the process, and have the courage of their convictions and undertake the research to understand the intentions of the original building so that they are willing to change, modify, and ultimately IMPROVE the original artifact. Carlos, you’ve hit upon the most important point, but the contradiction is even more inherent: Even if the new use is the same as the original, changes is technology, code, and safety require fundamental changes for continued use. We need to recognize that unless a building is becoming a museum to itself (e.g. Fallingwater), preservation is fundamentally an editorial process. Prescriptive guidelines prevent the worst interventions, but also the best. Architects need to acknowledge their role in the process, and have the courage of their convictions and undertake the research to understand the intentions of the original building so that they are willing to change, modify, and ultimately IMPROVE the original artifact.

]]> By: Hannia Gómez http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1396 Hannia Gómez Mon, 09 Apr 2012 16:41:19 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1396 In the Venezuelan heritage law there is a very interesting section -sadly hardly ever respected- that states that any new use of a designated landmark should be similar, or relative to its original use. When old and new uses have affinities, the enduring of architecture is easier. Should there be a regulated universal gradient for change with a line that marks when change is too much, and architecture becomes something other than the original? In the Venezuelan heritage law there is a very interesting section -sadly hardly ever respected- that states that any new use of a designated landmark should be similar, or relative to its original use. When old and new uses have affinities, the enduring of architecture is easier. Should there be a regulated universal gradient for change with a line that marks when change is too much, and architecture becomes something other than the original?

]]> By: carlosbrillembourg http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1395 carlosbrillembourg Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:03:08 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1395 The paradox of preservation is that in order to preserve the architecture the original use needs to change. This inevitably makes the architecture into something other than the original. The case of Philip Johnson's estate in New Canaan is not unlike Villa Planchart in this regard. The paradox of preservation is that in order to preserve the architecture the original use needs to change. This inevitably makes the architecture into something other than the original. The case of Philip Johnson’s estate in New Canaan is not unlike Villa Planchart in this regard.

]]> By: Hannia Gómez http://glasshouseconversations.org/how-will-the-latest-trend-in-preservation-process-and-interest-in-modernist-buildings-impact-the-threatenedsaved-modern-heritage-of-the-world/#comment-1394 Hannia Gómez Mon, 02 Apr 2012 01:35:00 +0000 http://glasshouseconversations.org/?p=2460#comment-1394 I think, Dung, as you well know, that the case of Villa Planchart was very unique. Gio Ponti took special precautions when he ended his work: he left in storage many boxes full of the different materials he employed in the construction, glass mosaics, marbles, etc. He also left behind a whole set of plans and drawings, close in number to the original collection he had in his studio in Milano, and an vast collection of letters that documents his design ideas. Such precautions were guidelines already, indeed: they were a message. But the Plancharts surely got it. Because they used the materials for replacements, and they had the intuition and respect to keep the documents intact with love for the rest of their lives. Ponti's guidelines can be enough to go on -ideally-, forever. Because that is the saga of this house, the architect's will and the will of the owners. History, in this case, leaves little to interpretation. I think, Dung, as you well know, that the case of Villa Planchart was very unique. Gio Ponti took special precautions when he ended his work: he left in storage many boxes full of the different materials he employed in the construction, glass mosaics, marbles, etc. He also left behind a whole set of plans and drawings, close in number to the original collection he had in his studio in Milano, and an vast collection of letters that documents his design ideas. Such precautions were guidelines already, indeed: they were a message. But the Plancharts surely got it. Because they used the materials for replacements, and they had the intuition and respect to keep the documents intact with love for the rest of their lives. Ponti’s guidelines can be enough to go on -ideally-, forever. Because that is the saga of this house, the architect’s will and the will of the owners. History, in this case, leaves little to interpretation.

]]>