lecture 1 transparency - Evans Notes

Notebook: CAF20_lectures_1_transparency
Created: 9/22/2020 11:00 AM Updated: 10/20/2020 3:54 PM
Author: stefanoppasseri@gmail.com

ASYMMETRY
antagonistic toward surroundings - 235
symmetry/asymmetry contradiction - 238
against both classical and modern - 239

RATIONAL STRUCTURE
contradiction about elements that perform structural work vs those that look
like they do - 239
image of rationality in Mies is not reliable  - 244
sublime rationality in M is only a "rumor"
two types of structure (1) load bearing/material (2) gridded abstract structure
these are distinct ideas of the word structure
everything gives the appearance of being implicated in transmission of
structural forces but it does not
lake shore drive - M conceals the load bearing work structure does
structure looks more like conceptual structure - important - 247
this ambiguity between notions of the word structure are present in all M
buildings

appearance/truth - Plato was wrong

EXTREMES OF VISION
pavilion is transparent but also creates impediment to vision - 250
M horizontality

PHYSICAL BUT BODILESS

M humor that is not funny - 255
BP beyond material/abstract dichotomy

THE HORIZON
symmetry emerges from asymmetry - but it's not classical vertical s - 258
pyramid v cube
plane of symmetry = horizon/eye level (onyx panels)
M uses material asymmetry to create optical symm

REFLECTIONS ON THE CRITICAL FUNCTION

many dismiss M reflection as accident
Hays/Tafuri take them seriously - reflection and confusion, shatter ordinary
perception - critical - 261
to Evans reflections act as a clarification device instead of confusing - create
coherence -  263

DISTRACTION
beauty and - 268
M arch of forgetting
M and interrupted symmetry (no center, ABA vs AA) - 270-1

the categories of literal and phenomenal transp coexist in Mies and form a
whole new set of strange hybrid conditions

Barcelona Pavilion (BP) is one of M most famous works (1929) yet it existed for
only 6 months (reconstructed in 1985) - became famous much later. How
come it took so long and in the absence of pavilion? 

"I began to see the pavilion as a mere phantom"

according to E, all these types of productive contradictions spring from M

interpretation of symmetry, which is closely related to lit and phen transp

symmetry/asymmetry contradiction

the overall composition is asymmetrical but wrt site and overall organization of
the plan
individual components display strong reflective symmetry 
asymmetry resides in the composition, symmetry in components 
is this a case of phenomenal transparency related to reflectivity? 
the result is a contradiction and deflection of reading/expectation

BP is both a reaction against classicism (asymmetry, literal transp)

and modernism (symmetry, reflectivity i.e. total lack of literal transp)

rational structure

the previous hybrid/contradiction that is played out very much in the terms of
literal and phenom transp, where the two coexist, extends to almost all aspects
of M work
another deep contr is between what we could call literal and phenom structure
(or conceptual)

M has long been known for his love of rationality in architecture

E argues that this image of struct rationality is unreliable and constantly
contradicted in the work

a structure that looks rational isn't necessarily so - the BP is portrayed as

supremely rational because it uses a certain language of planes, columns, etc.
But actually it is a study in contradict as we saw in the symmetry case below.
this also applies to the "work" the structure does in the project (i.e. the
columns are doing much less work than they look like etc)

a structure that doesn't look rational can be extremely so - Gaudi Guell chapel
might look irrational but is much more rational than BP

sublime rationality of M only rumor (244)

in fact, two types of contradictory structures are constantly played with and
conflated in M
(1) load bearing/material (2) gridded abstract structure - these are opposed

"At B, M could have divorced the structure from the enclosure. He did not do
so. Instead, everything in the pavilion gives the impression of being implicated
in the transmission of structural forces. We begin to lose track of what does
what..." (245)

lake shore drive (1948) is the opposite

here it is all about conceptual structure and things looking freed and
weightless from burden of physical structural work

mech structure of building is response to gravity

arch expression of mech structure should declare, not conceal transmission of
load
Yet here it is concealed in all ways

how did this bldg maintain reputation of struc truth and rationality?
by association with conceptual structure (appearance of structural rationality in
arch)
this is M phenomenal transp

to look like a conceptual structure, load-bearing struc must deny the fact of its
burden

"if M adheres to any logic, it is the logic of appearance"

E: appearance doesn't mean deceit an falsehood - in M appearance if final
arbiter