Hello Everyone:
There's no crying for Argentina as they advance to the final round on Sunday against Germany. Congratulations to the Netherlands for a well played game. Maybe the real Brazilian national team will show up on Saturday for the third place game, not my eight-year-old nephew's little league soccer team. Alright, as promised, the latest and the greatest on Peter's Zumthor's vision for the Los Angeles County Art Museum.
 |
| Modified plan for the Los Angeles County Museum of Art latimes.com |
If you recall, last week (June 30, 2014) I posted a piece on the proposed modification to Peter Zumthor's design for the Los Angeles County Museum of Art. The proposed modification intends to span across Wilshire Boulevard instead of encroaching on the La Brea Tar Pits. This modification was hailed by Los Angeles Times architecture critic Christopher Hawthorne as a bold decision observing, "the new location will change the character of the building in ways that Zumthor has only begun to grapple with." Now it seems that Mr. Hawthorne may be having second thoughts. Surprising to read from the person who last year was leading the cheering section for the new plan. Mr. Hawthorne writes, "The more I think about the plan's newly attenuated form, stretched like a piece of black bubble gum across Wilshire, the more I wonder if the architect's basic reading of Los Angeles could use an update."
Spanning a major street is not something novel. The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and The Louvre in Paris are two examples. The Sackler Museum at Harvard University considered spanning a major street in Cambridge, Massachusetts but the neighbors objected and the designed was altered. Therefore, we can conclude that Peter Zumthor's modification proposal does have precedent. Yet, Mr. Hawthorne expresses some misgiving about the proposal he called a bold decision. He now, clarifies this declaration, "In truth the gesture by LACMA and its architect, Peter Zumthor, is the product not so much of boldness as a combination of diplomacy and fidelity-perhaps misguided-to certain elements of his original design." While Mayor Eric Garcetti and other elected officials were excited about this proposed modification, Mr. Hawthorne confesses his own complicated feelings about the project and ponders if Mr. Zumthor's reading of Los Angeles could use an update.
When LACMA director, Michael Govan accepted his position nearly ten years ago, Mr. Govan said that one of the first calls he made was to Mr. Zumthor's office in Switzerland. As they began to collaborate, both gentlemen took usual precautions to insulate the design proposal from political and financial pressures that often water down architecture. The design scheme was not show to the public nor a fundraising campaign started until the plan was fully developed. They didn't even allow major donors to have their say in the matter. The design that was ultimately revealed in 2013 "was beautifully and powerfully strange-not only different from any piece of architecture in L.A. had seen in decades but a departure, in what Zumthor calls its 'freely undulating shape,..." It was also, at this stage, the proposed new design was untested and unveted. Problems emerged right from the start.
An minor outcry was raised over the demolition of the four original buildings to clear a path for the new building. However, the neighboring George C. Page Museum was left out of the loop by Messrs. Govan and Zumthor. The Page Museum had (has) very real concerns the new museum would damage the ecologically sensitive Tar Pits, during construction and by casting shadows over one or more of them. Once Messrs. Govan and Zumthor agreed to scale back the building and give the tar pits more room, the ones they proudly claimed that the design was inspired by the tar pits it threatened, the gentlemen had a problem. Decreasing the footprint of the proposed design would result in less gallery space by 25% or more. An additional second story is not an option because the original design proposal relied its visual effect "on exaggerated, pancake-like flatness."
Boxed in to the east and north by the tar pits; to the west by twin Renzo Piano gallery buildings, the new wing had only one place to go, the giggle provoking "dog-leg bend to the southeast, across the boulevard and touch down down on a piece of property owned by the museum and now used as a parking lot..." Like, the stretching of The Louvre and Rijksmuseum, the thought of the museum crossing the road to get to the other side is not new. In 1922, Aurele Vermeulen, a landscape architect, offered up an ambitious plan supported by Los Angeles Times publisher Harry Chandler to line the boulevard with triumphal arches, monuments, and fountains. Hard to imagine. A set of nine triumphal arches were planned at major intersections as well as major buildings spanning the boulevard at each end. The plan was shelved after Beverly Hills and Santa Monica refused to sign on and it was never made clear how the project was going to be paid for.
Museum have also jumped across major streets. For example, the Louvre in Paris, France, the galleries cross intersections at opposite ends of the Place du Carrousel and the Rijksmuseum spans a section of roadway that is only open to bicycle traffic. In Denver, Colorado, a covered pedestrian bridge spans across 13th Street to join the wings of the Denver Art Museum. In the eighties, a proposal was floated to connect James Stirling's newly built Sackler Art Museum with Fogg Museum. At the St. Louis Science Center, visitors can stand on a pedestrian bridge stretching Highway 40 and target passing cars with radar guns. This could make for an accident inducing moment.
Because of the particular location of this span, Wilshire Boulevard in the Miracle Mile area, the proposed modification carries a different significance than the previous examples. The proposed modification would allow visitors to stand over a boulevard that "has long been the automative spine of L.A. looking down on passing traffic from a pedestrian bridge that will also hold gallery space. Mr. Hawthorne ponders if "the design fetishizes car culture? At the very least celebrate it in that genuine, often earnest way that Europeans have long viewed our vast grid of boulevards and freeways."
In a certain respect, the newly revised plan, Mr. Zumthor references an early version of the Broad Museum in Downtown Los Angeles. The plan called for a thick glass wall that would have permitted pedestrians to come in contact with patrons coming off the freeway into the underground garage. For mostly pragmatic reasons, this detail was reduced in later versions. In addition to stretching LACMA south, Mr. Zumthor has made one other significant change to this version. Mr. Zumthor punched holes into the roof of the museum so that the wide legs holding up the building, will house staircases, visible, and cafes all open-air.
However, in the year or so since the first models were put on display, the exact layout and scale of the spaces still remain a mystery. More so, Christopher Hawthorne poses a number of questions about how the building would work in an urban setting. What would it be like to walk underneath it? Would feel like walking through a freeway underpass? How will the underside be detailed and lit? Of equal importance, what does the current revision reveal about the architect's understanding of the LACMA site and Los Angeles. Peter Zumthor's first-hand knowledge of the city was mainly gleaned during the early eighties when he spent a year teaching at the Southern California Institute of Architecture. Since then, he's returned a number of times, however, Mr. Hawthorne observes, "...the initial impressions were powerful ones, at least to judge from the new version of the LACMA design and the enthusiasm it shows for framing the views of car traffic on Wilshire." This enthusiasm has more connection to the Los Angeles of Reyner Banham, Denise Scott Brown, and Ed Ruscha than a twenty-first century vision of Los Angeles.
The Wilshire Boulevard of the above notable individuals was two-dimensional. receding endlessly into the horizon in either direction. This image of the boulevard is echoed in the updated LACMA design. Currently, action along the boulevard takes place both at and below street level, where construction on a western extension of a subway line is finally underway. At street-level, increasing density is forcing a more vertically oriented architecture. Mr. Hawthorne speculates, "the case that there is something eternal and unchanging about the tar pits and the role they play in L.A.'s sense of its own prehistory. You can hardly say the same about the city's boulevards-especially at this moment, when the basic notions of mobility and scale along L.A. streets are so much up for grabs."
One original proposal's merits was the way the building was raised above the park-like surroundings of the site. A person could walk toward it and under it from any direction. The building was confined to one place, framed and given strength as an architectural object by the setting. If the museum crosses the road, these qualities will be lost. Therefore, where does this leave the architect and the museum, assuming LACMA's continued commitment to move forward? With a few options.
The Los Angeles County Museum of Art could stay with the sky-bridge plan and hope for some refinements-particularly a more clear understanding of the new building's relationship to Wilshire and the sidewalks. Mr. Hawthorne seems to believe that this is the most likely outcome "...given a) the new designs are preliminary; b) Govan has already publicly gone to bat for them; and c) Zumthor has remarkable track record of turning rough aspirational models into astonishing pieces of built architecture." Of course, the other option is to go back to the original design, situated north of Wilshire. The benefits of that would be avoiding the tar pits all together and keeping the lot on Wilshire and Spaulding free for a multi-story parking garage.
Then there's my idea. Forget the whole new building idea and take the money raised through private donations and public funds rehabilitate the current buildings and update the collection. After all, the average museum goer doesn't particularly go to a museum for the building, the average patron goes to commune with the contents. Then there's Christopher Hawthorne's colleague, art critic Christopher Knight's suggestion, rehabilitate an abandoned warehouse. Either way, the final outcome of all of this remains to be seen. Stay Tuned.
Like me on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/lenorelowen
Google+ http://plus.google.com/+LenoreLowen
 |
| Rijksmuseum Amsterdam, the Netherlands inhabitat.com |
Spanning a major street is not something novel. The Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam and The Louvre in Paris are two examples. The Sackler Museum at Harvard University considered spanning a major street in Cambridge, Massachusetts but the neighbors objected and the designed was altered. Therefore, we can conclude that Peter Zumthor's modification proposal does have precedent. Yet, Mr. Hawthorne expresses some misgiving about the proposal he called a bold decision. He now, clarifies this declaration, "In truth the gesture by LACMA and its architect, Peter Zumthor, is the product not so much of boldness as a combination of diplomacy and fidelity-perhaps misguided-to certain elements of his original design." While Mayor Eric Garcetti and other elected officials were excited about this proposed modification, Mr. Hawthorne confesses his own complicated feelings about the project and ponders if Mr. Zumthor's reading of Los Angeles could use an update.
 |
| Peter Zumthor dezeen.com |
When LACMA director, Michael Govan accepted his position nearly ten years ago, Mr. Govan said that one of the first calls he made was to Mr. Zumthor's office in Switzerland. As they began to collaborate, both gentlemen took usual precautions to insulate the design proposal from political and financial pressures that often water down architecture. The design scheme was not show to the public nor a fundraising campaign started until the plan was fully developed. They didn't even allow major donors to have their say in the matter. The design that was ultimately revealed in 2013 "was beautifully and powerfully strange-not only different from any piece of architecture in L.A. had seen in decades but a departure, in what Zumthor calls its 'freely undulating shape,..." It was also, at this stage, the proposed new design was untested and unveted. Problems emerged right from the start.
An minor outcry was raised over the demolition of the four original buildings to clear a path for the new building. However, the neighboring George C. Page Museum was left out of the loop by Messrs. Govan and Zumthor. The Page Museum had (has) very real concerns the new museum would damage the ecologically sensitive Tar Pits, during construction and by casting shadows over one or more of them. Once Messrs. Govan and Zumthor agreed to scale back the building and give the tar pits more room, the ones they proudly claimed that the design was inspired by the tar pits it threatened, the gentlemen had a problem. Decreasing the footprint of the proposed design would result in less gallery space by 25% or more. An additional second story is not an option because the original design proposal relied its visual effect "on exaggerated, pancake-like flatness."
 |
| Aerial view of LACMA model Peter Zumthor designboom.com |
 |
| The Louvre at night Louis Le Vau 1660 Paris, France impressivemagazin.com |
Because of the particular location of this span, Wilshire Boulevard in the Miracle Mile area, the proposed modification carries a different significance than the previous examples. The proposed modification would allow visitors to stand over a boulevard that "has long been the automative spine of L.A. looking down on passing traffic from a pedestrian bridge that will also hold gallery space. Mr. Hawthorne ponders if "the design fetishizes car culture? At the very least celebrate it in that genuine, often earnest way that Europeans have long viewed our vast grid of boulevards and freeways."
 |
| Broad Museum Downtown Los Angeles Diller, Scofidio+Renfro archpaper.com |
However, in the year or so since the first models were put on display, the exact layout and scale of the spaces still remain a mystery. More so, Christopher Hawthorne poses a number of questions about how the building would work in an urban setting. What would it be like to walk underneath it? Would feel like walking through a freeway underpass? How will the underside be detailed and lit? Of equal importance, what does the current revision reveal about the architect's understanding of the LACMA site and Los Angeles. Peter Zumthor's first-hand knowledge of the city was mainly gleaned during the early eighties when he spent a year teaching at the Southern California Institute of Architecture. Since then, he's returned a number of times, however, Mr. Hawthorne observes, "...the initial impressions were powerful ones, at least to judge from the new version of the LACMA design and the enthusiasm it shows for framing the views of car traffic on Wilshire." This enthusiasm has more connection to the Los Angeles of Reyner Banham, Denise Scott Brown, and Ed Ruscha than a twenty-first century vision of Los Angeles.
 |
| Back of Hollywood Ed Ruscha artlog.com |
 |
| Reyner Banham Loves Los Angeles DVD cover modcinema.com |
The Los Angeles County Museum of Art could stay with the sky-bridge plan and hope for some refinements-particularly a more clear understanding of the new building's relationship to Wilshire and the sidewalks. Mr. Hawthorne seems to believe that this is the most likely outcome "...given a) the new designs are preliminary; b) Govan has already publicly gone to bat for them; and c) Zumthor has remarkable track record of turning rough aspirational models into astonishing pieces of built architecture." Of course, the other option is to go back to the original design, situated north of Wilshire. The benefits of that would be avoiding the tar pits all together and keeping the lot on Wilshire and Spaulding free for a multi-story parking garage.
Then there's my idea. Forget the whole new building idea and take the money raised through private donations and public funds rehabilitate the current buildings and update the collection. After all, the average museum goer doesn't particularly go to a museum for the building, the average patron goes to commune with the contents. Then there's Christopher Hawthorne's colleague, art critic Christopher Knight's suggestion, rehabilitate an abandoned warehouse. Either way, the final outcome of all of this remains to be seen. Stay Tuned.
Like me on Facebook http://www.facebook.com/lenorelowen
Follow me on Twitter http://www.twitter.com/glamavon and on Pinterest http://www.pinterest.com/glamtroy
Instagram- find me at hpblogger
No comments:
Post a Comment