Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750

Barry Bergdoll, Philip Johnson Chief Curator of Architecture and Design at New York’s Museum of Modern Art and professor of modern architectural history at Columbia University, will present the 62nd A.W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts Series. The Mellons are among the most prestigious art history lecture series in the world and have been delivered annually since 1952 at the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. For this year’s series, Bergdoll will present “Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750.”

More about the lecture series after the break…

The sequence of the six lectures evolves through time, discussing the challenges and techniques of exhibiting architecture and how these ideas have been developed since the mid-18th century. Bergdoll will address the importance of these techniques and how they have been crucial to architecture’s stake in evolving the discourse of modernity.

The lecture series will take place every Sunday at 2:00pm from April 7th through May 12th in the East Building Auditorium of the National Gallery of Art, Washington DC. They are free and open to the public. To read more about the lecture series, click here.

Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750 originally appeared on ArchDaily, the most visited architecture website on 06 Apr 2013.

send to Twitter | Share on Facebook | What do you think about this?

Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750

Barry Bergdoll, Philip Johnson Chief Curator of Architecture and Design at New York’s Museum of Modern Art and professor of modern architectural history at Columbia University, will present the 62nd A.W. Mellon Lectures in the Fine Arts Series. The Mellons are among the most prestigious art history lecture series in the world and have been delivered annually since 1952 at the National Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C. For this year’s series, Bergdoll will present “Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750.”

More about the lecture series after the break…

The sequence of the six lectures evolves through time, discussing the challenges and techniques of exhibiting architecture and how these ideas have been developed since the mid-18th century. Bergdoll will address the importance of these techniques and how they have been crucial to architecture’s stake in evolving the discourse of modernity.

The lecture series will take place every Sunday at 2:00pm from April 7th through May 12th in the East Building Auditorium of the National Gallery of Art, Washington DC. They are free and open to the public. To read more about the lecture series, click here.

Out of Site in Plain View: A History of Exhibiting Architecture since 1750 originally appeared on ArchDaily, the most visited architecture website on 06 Apr 2013.

send to Twitter | Share on Facebook | What do you think about this?

FBI’s Brutalist Hoover Building Faces Serious Makeover

“Originally seen to reflect the democratic attributes of a powerful civic expression – authenticity, honesty, directness, strength – the forceful nature of Brutalist aesthetics eventually came to signify precisely the opposite: hostility, coldness, inhumanity. [...] Separated from its original context and reduced in meaning, Brutalism became an all-too-easy pejorative, a term that suggests these buildings were designed with bad intentions.” - “BRUTAL”/“HEROIC” by Michael Kubo, Chris Grimley and Mark Pasnik

Brutalism, an architectural movement that peaked in the 1960′s, inspired the development of countless governmental buildings in Washington DC as well as across the world. Though Brutalism’s original intentions may have been good, many believe that the actual manifestation of these buildings was not and consider them to be little more than an eyesore on the District’s landscape. One such concrete structure, the FBI’s J. Hoover Building, is currently facing possible redevelopment as the government has decided to relocate FBI headquarters and given the private sector the rare opportunity to transform this so-called “monolith” into a new kind of monument.

More on the Hoover Building after the break…

Gregory Hoss, a partner at David M. Schwarz Architects, writes: “Instead of a monolith that has no connection to the cityscape, no rapport with people in and around it, and no relationship to its place on that grandest of all American boulevards, Pennsylvania Avenue, we can exercise an almost unheard-of prerogative to create something worthy of respect for generations to come.”

This is the vision that Hoss and other designers and developers have for the site of the Hoover Building – to create something “vital, vibrant and economically satisfying,” now that the General Services Administration and the District have stepped aside and put the building’s future into the public’s hands. It is indeed a unique chance to take a very large and complex building and re-imagine it into something new and worthy of its important location.

Hoss warns, however, that we must be careful to not design a building that meets or barely exceeds contemporary norms. As an example, he sites the repetitive glass and steel structures that have popped up along DC’s K Street within the past 10 years, all indistinguishable from each other and all equally uninspiring. He also explains that designers and developers will have to face challenges with the building’s enormous size and its re-integration into the existing neighborhood fabric, taking care to re-establish dozens of obliterated retail outlets. This would create a truly multi-functional and well-integrated space where people could live, work and be entertained.

But what does this mean for the futures of other Brutalist buildings? Will the development of the Hoover Building create a new trend of remodeling the Brutalist buildings of the world? And how can we be so sure that Brutalism is an invaluable movement that should be erased entirely?

References: The Washington Post 

FBI's Brutalist Hoover Building Faces Serious Makeover originally appeared on ArchDaily, the most visited architecture website on 31 Mar 2013.

send to Twitter | Share on Facebook | What do you think about this?

FBI’s Brutalist Hoover Building Faces Serious Makeover

“Originally seen to reflect the democratic attributes of a powerful civic expression – authenticity, honesty, directness, strength – the forceful nature of Brutalist aesthetics eventually came to signify precisely the opposite: hostility, coldness, inhumanity. [...] Separated from its original context and reduced in meaning, Brutalism became an all-too-easy pejorative, a term that suggests these buildings were designed with bad intentions.” - “BRUTAL”/“HEROIC” by Michael Kubo, Chris Grimley and Mark Pasnik

Brutalism, an architectural movement that peaked in the 1960′s, inspired the development of countless governmental buildings in Washington DC as well as across the world. Though Brutalism’s original intentions may have been good, many believe that the actual manifestation of these buildings was not and consider them to be little more than an eyesore on the District’s landscape. One such concrete structure, the FBI’s J. Hoover Building, is currently facing possible redevelopment as the government has decided to relocate FBI headquarters and given the private sector the rare opportunity to transform this so-called “monolith” into a new kind of monument.

More on the Hoover Building after the break…

Gregory Hoss, a partner at David M. Schwarz Architects, writes: “Instead of a monolith that has no connection to the cityscape, no rapport with people in and around it, and no relationship to its place on that grandest of all American boulevards, Pennsylvania Avenue, we can exercise an almost unheard-of prerogative to create something worthy of respect for generations to come.”

This is the vision that Hoss and other designers and developers have for the site of the Hoover Building – to create something “vital, vibrant and economically satisfying,” now that the General Services Administration and the District have stepped aside and put the building’s future into the public’s hands. It is indeed a unique chance to take a very large and complex building and re-imagine it into something new and worthy of its important location.

Hoss warns, however, that we must be careful to not design a building that meets or barely exceeds contemporary norms. As an example, he sites the repetitive glass and steel structures that have popped up along DC’s K Street within the past 10 years, all indistinguishable from each other and all equally uninspiring. He also explains that designers and developers will have to face challenges with the building’s enormous size and its re-integration into the existing neighborhood fabric, taking care to re-establish dozens of obliterated retail outlets. This would create a truly multi-functional and well-integrated space where people could live, work and be entertained.

But what does this mean for the futures of other Brutalist buildings? Will the development of the Hoover Building create a new trend of remodeling the Brutalist buildings of the world? And how can we be so sure that Brutalism is an invaluable movement that should be erased entirely?

References: The Washington Post 

FBI's Brutalist Hoover Building Faces Serious Makeover originally appeared on ArchDaily, the most visited architecture website on 31 Mar 2013.

send to Twitter | Share on Facebook | What do you think about this?

New Bill Hopes To Stymie Gehry’s Eisenhower Memorial (Again)

20memorial-articleLarge (1)

The battle continues. The controversy over the $142 million Dwight D. Eisenhower memorial designed by acclaimed architect Frank Gehry escalated on Tuesday at the Congressional hearing regarding the project. According to the New York Times, Representative Rob Bishop, a Republican from Utah, proposed a legislation calling for a new design competition and the elimination of nearly $100 million in financing to complete the memorial. Read more!

gehry-eisenhower-mermorial-5 (1)

The Bishop Bill has divided Congress and encouraged many members of the design community to speak out. On Friday the American Institute of Architects chimed in, submitting a letter to the subcommittee, opposing the bill. “It is nothing more than an effort to intimidate the innovative thinking for which our profession is recognized,” said Robert Ivy, the association’s chief executive. In contrast, Justin Shubow, the president and chairman of the National Civic Art Society, who spoke on Tuesday, called the design “not salvageable.”

When Gehry’s design was selected in 2010, construction was planned for August 2012. The memorial honoring that former president would be at the base of Capitol Hill. But, as we know, the schedule has been repeatedly delayed.

Members of the Eisenhower family and others continue to stymie the Eisenhower Memorial Commission, who have already spent $9 million on the design process thus far. Opponents objected to Gehry’s initial designs,  as well as his redesigns, claiming that they were an inept representation of the five-star general and 34th  president’s significant achievements.

2011_0131_eisenhower2-3

On the (slightly) brighter side: Representative Rush D. Holt Jr., a New Jersey Democrat, pointed out that even the Vietnam Memorial underwent similar road bumps, and now it’s arguably the most popular, revered memorial in Washington.

Ultimately, the debate comes down to what defines a memorial. Though, on one hand it’s unfortunate that to have the role of government impose on the innovation of art, on the other it’s fascinating to see civic art as a relevant topic of debate in Congress.

We hope that conflicts can be solved soon—if only for the elderly WWII and Korean War veterans, who don’t have much time left and would like to see their former president get his due. Get it together, Congress!

Images: Eisenhower Memorial Commission

FBI Headquarters Is About To Get Fabulous, But Without The FBI

Image courtesy of Gensler

Last fall Gensler floated a concept for revamping the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the FBI’s much-groused-about Brutalist fortress in Washington, DC. When the firm released renderings for a futuristic office-retail playground crowned with a rooftop soccer field, the building wasn’t yet on the feds’ chopping block. But, as the New York Times reports, the government has begun courting developers who want to snag the Hoover’s prime location in the now-swanky Penn Quarter neighborhood. The bureau’s thousands of workers, who arrived at the previously un-fabulous Pennsylvania Avenue back in 1974, will once again be shunted off to no-man’s-land (the suburbs!) while the winning development team gets a once-in-a-decade shot at the glamour-chasing game of prime urban place making. Read more!

The J. Edgar Hoover Building today. Photo: Brendan Hoffman for the New York Times

The General Services Administration (GSA), which controls the property, wants to make a trade. Later this year the GSA will request proposals from developers who want to take over the Hoover site in exchange for building a new 2.1 million-square-foot FBI headquarters outside the Beltway. At a meeting for the building industry last month, the GSA outlined its needs for the new headquarters in front of more than 450 architects, developers, and consultants. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill was there, as was Tishman Speyer. Letters of interest are due March 24, with a formal request for proposals to follow sometime in 2013.

Gensler's proposed redesign for the J. Edgar Hoover Building

Image courtesy of Gensler

The Hoover Building suited the bureau’s purposes well when it was built almost 40 years ago, Daniel M. Tangherlini, acting administrator at the General Services Administration, told the Times. “It was developed as a giant file cabinet,” he said, “a disk drive before disk drives, to make storage and retrieval of paper easier. The F.B.I. is much less about that now; they’re stuck with a building representing the technology of a generation or two ago.”

[via the New York Times]

FBI Headquarters Is About To Get Fabulous, But Without The FBI

Image courtesy of Gensler

Last fall Gensler floated a concept for revamping the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the FBI’s much-groused-about Brutalist fortress in Washington, DC. When the firm released renderings for a futuristic office-retail playground crowned with a rooftop soccer field, the building wasn’t yet on the feds’ chopping block. But, as the New York Times reports, the government has begun courting developers who want to snag the Hoover’s prime location in the now-swanky Penn Quarter neighborhood. The bureau’s thousands of workers, who arrived at the previously un-fabulous Pennsylvania Avenue back in 1974, will once again be shunted off to no-man’s-land (the suburbs!) while the winning development team gets a once-in-a-decade shot at the glamour-chasing game of prime urban place making. Read more!

The J. Edgar Hoover Building today. Photo: Brendan Hoffman for the New York Times

The General Services Administration (GSA), which controls the property, wants to make a trade. Later this year the GSA will request proposals from developers who want to take over the Hoover site in exchange for building a new 2.1 million-square-foot FBI headquarters outside the Beltway. At a meeting for the building industry last month, the GSA outlined its needs for the new headquarters in front of more than 450 architects, developers, and consultants. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill was there, as was Tishman Speyer. Letters of interest are due March 24, with a formal request for proposals to follow sometime in 2013.

Gensler's proposed redesign for the J. Edgar Hoover Building

Image courtesy of Gensler

The Hoover Building suited the bureau’s purposes well when it was built almost 40 years ago, Daniel M. Tangherlini, acting administrator at the General Services Administration, told the Times. “It was developed as a giant file cabinet,” he said, “a disk drive before disk drives, to make storage and retrieval of paper easier. The F.B.I. is much less about that now; they’re stuck with a building representing the technology of a generation or two ago.”

[via the New York Times]

FBI Headquarters Is About To Get Fabulous, But Without The FBI

Image courtesy of Gensler

Last fall Gensler floated a concept for revamping the J. Edgar Hoover Building, the FBI’s much-groused-about Brutalist fortress in Washington, DC. When the firm released renderings for a futuristic office-retail playground crowned with a rooftop soccer field, the building wasn’t yet on the feds’ chopping block. But, as the New York Times reports, the government has begun courting developers who want to snag the Hoover’s prime location in the now-swanky Penn Quarter neighborhood. The bureau’s thousands of workers, who arrived at the previously un-fabulous Pennsylvania Avenue back in 1974, will once again be shunted off to no-man’s-land (the suburbs!) while the winning development team gets a once-in-a-decade shot at the glamour-chasing game of prime urban place making. Read more!

The J. Edgar Hoover Building today. Photo: Brendan Hoffman for the New York Times

The General Services Administration (GSA), which controls the property, wants to make a trade. Later this year the GSA will request proposals from developers who want to take over the Hoover site in exchange for building a new 2.1 million-square-foot FBI headquarters outside the Beltway. At a meeting for the building industry last month, the GSA outlined its needs for the new headquarters in front of more than 450 architects, developers, and consultants. Skidmore, Owings & Merrill was there, as was Tishman Speyer. Letters of interest are due March 24, with a formal request for proposals to follow sometime in 2013.

Gensler's proposed redesign for the J. Edgar Hoover Building

Image courtesy of Gensler

The Hoover Building suited the bureau’s purposes well when it was built almost 40 years ago, Daniel M. Tangherlini, acting administrator at the General Services Administration, told the Times. “It was developed as a giant file cabinet,” he said, “a disk drive before disk drives, to make storage and retrieval of paper easier. The F.B.I. is much less about that now; they’re stuck with a building representing the technology of a generation or two ago.”

[via the New York Times]