eBook
Available on Compatible NOOK devices, the free NOOK App and in My Digital Library.
Related collections and offers
Overview
Renowned today as one of the most important architects of the twentieth century, Bruce Goff (1904–1982) was only twelve years old when a Tulsa architectural firm took him on as an apprentice. Throughout his career he defied expectations, not only as a designer of innovative buildings but also as a gifted educator and painter. This beautifully illustrated volume, featuring more than 150 photographs, architectural drawings, and color plates, explores the vast multitude of ideas and themes that influenced Goff’s work.
Tracing what he calls Goff’s “path of originality,” Arn Henderson begins by describing two of Goff’s earliest and most significant influences: the architect Frank Lloyd Wright and the French composer Claude Debussy. As Henderson explains, Goff embraced from a young age Wright’s ideal of organic expression, where all elements of a building’s design are integrated into a unified whole. Although Goff’s stylistic dependence on Wright eventually waned, the music of Debussy, with its qualities of mystery and “discipline in freedom,” was a perpetual source of inspiration.
Henderson also emphasizes Goff’s identification with the American West, particularly Oklahoma, where he developed most of his ideas and created many of his masterful buildings. Goff served as a professor at the University of Oklahoma between 1947 and 1955, becoming the first chair of its School of Architecture. The new studio course he introduced was a pivotal development, ensuring that his ideas were imparted to the next generation of architects.
Part biography of a well-known architect, part analysis of Goff’s work, this book is also a finely woven tapestry of information and interpretation that encompasses the ideas and experiences that shaped Goff’s artistic vision over his lifetime. Based on scores of interviews with Goff’s associates and former students, as well as the author’s firsthand study of Goff’s extant buildings, this volume deepens our appreciation of the great architect’s lasting legacy.
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9780806158297 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | University of Oklahoma Press |
| Publication date: | 04/27/2017 |
| Sold by: | Barnes & Noble |
| Format: | eBook |
| Pages: | 312 |
| File size: | 78 MB |
| Note: | This product may take a few minutes to download. |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
Bruce Goff
Architecture of Discipline In Freedom
By Arn Henderson
UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA PRESS
Copyright © 2017 University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Publishing Division of the UniversityAll rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-0-8061-5610-1
CHAPTER 1
FOUNDATIONS
I try to forget music because it obscures my perception of what I do not know or shall know tomorrow. Why cling to something one knows too well?
CLAUDE DEBUSSY
I learned more about architecture from music than I did from other architects.
BRUCE GOFF
At the age of twelve, Bruce Goff began his extraordinary odyssey of learning the art and science of architecture. His first task was one of tracing the classical orders, but as his skills in drawing developed he soon tired of copying the work of others and began to design houses for hypothetical clients. His discovery of an office copy of the 1908 issue of Architectural Record with an illustrated article of Frank Lloyd Wright's "In the Cause of Architecture" had a great impact on him. He wrote an admiring letter to Wright, who responded with a cordial note and a giant portfolio published by Wasmuth in Berlin, the now-famous 1910 Ausgeführte Bauten und Entwürfe von Frank Lloyd Wright of drawings. This was the beginning of a lifelong friendship.
Another early discovery shaped Goff's life and career when, in his adolescence, he discovered the music of Claude Debussy. The music of Debussy, with its freedom and quality of mystery, initiated a sustained source of inspiration for Goff with his realization that the overlapping tonal patterns and harmonic relationships with unresolved dissonance had a unique quality of originality. Articles and books about Debussy further influenced Goff's emerging philosophy of aesthetic ideals, and Debussy's music inspired Goff's architectural vocabulary with the ideas of "composition" and "discipline in freedom" becoming central to his practice.
FRANK LLOYD WRIGHT AND LOUIS SULLIVAN
Frank Lloyd Wright sought to develop architecture that expressed American democratic ideals. Rejecting historicism — architecture that drew its inspiration from historical recreations — Wright stated in his manifesto in Architectural Record that there "should be as many kinds of houses as there are kinds of people and as many differentiations as there are different individuals." This declaration ultimately became central to Goff's values, as did his axiom of integration of all elements into an organic whole.
However, Goff's early stylistic dependence on Wright waned with the 1914 second installment of "In the Cause of Architecture," in which Wright expressed disdain of imitators who had little understanding of his underlying design principles. Even though his theoretical ties to Wright continued, Goff sought alternative sources for inspiration. In 1920, he wrote to Louis Sullivan, who responded with a friendly note of encouragement for Goff's enthusiasm, "which is quite splendid in one so young, and to extend the hope that you never outgrow it." Sullivan, the principal mentor of Wright, also adamantly rejected the resurgence of classicism in American architecture and sought to create forms that were true to their purpose. His conceptualization of architecture embraced an integration of form, function, and structure with imaginative ornament derived from nature. Goff was particularly attracted to Sullivan's small banks with designs of ornament that combined elements of symmetry and asymmetry.
Drawing from contemporary concepts of change as revealed in scientific theories of evolution, both architects developed philosophies of their craft imbued with an implicit belief in progress. In his book The Autobiography of an Idea, Sullivan acknowledged the influence of both Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer. Sullivan applied the Darwinian doctrine of natural selection to architecture with a conviction that not only was functional organization of a building the key to change but that architectural styles of the past were outmoded and hence unfit to survive. Furthermore, the idea of progress toward heterogeneity, revealed in the writings of Spencer, appealed to both architects. Spencer's theory stressed change as the most characteristic feature of all living matter and that such change was inevitable. Spencer maintained that discord would result from an organism's failure to adapt to environmental conditions. From this doctrine it was a rational extrapolation for Sullivan and Wright to suggest that only poor architecture would result when a building was not responsive to the specific aspects of an environment. Spencer also developed the idea that society itself was a social organism. It was this glorification of science, together with the general philosophic and artistic movement of Romanticism, which provided the intellectual framework for the ideals of Sullivan and Wright. For them organic expression included both a Romantic approach to architecture, with form organized in harmony with nature for emotional purposes, and a functionalist approach, derived from a scientific view, of form organized to accommodate the function.
In the writings of both architects there are general themes that expand this doctrine: architecture is concerned with the process of change; architecture must address the specific conditions of an environment; and the creation of architecture is a supreme act of individuality. The concept of change in architecture, reflecting a naturalistic and evolutionary thesis, was constantly reiterated by Sullivan and Wright due to their shared tendency to glorify the present and disregard the past. Sullivan, who rebelled at his classical training at the École des Beaux-Arts in Paris, castigated the French architectural educational system as continuing "to cram their confiding pupils full of trashy notions concerning the classic and utterly ignore their own land and people." Architecture, Sullivan believed, must reflect contemporary American society. It was an idea of continuous progress and is implicit in his comment that "the past is dead, and has been buried by a past that is dead." The same theme of evolution was echoed by Wright when he said that "we cannot have an organic architecture unless we achieve an organic society." For Wright, architecture must express society, and must therefore change over time.
Evolutionary change in Wright's expression is complex, as the distinctive periods of his long career are characterized by a marked difference in the appearance of buildings from one period to another. The initial houses in the Chicago suburb of Oak Park have no resemblance to either the later concrete block houses or the Usonian houses. Yet a continuity of design principles over an extended period of time, informed by his continual search for a "comprehensive order that might encompass both composition and construction," relates his buildings together. In his early Prairie period, the ensemble of form, space, and construction was determined with the use of a modular grid in floor plans of axial symmetry. Major living spaces, anchored by a central fireplace, were expanded with modulated geometric proportional units of smaller secondary spaces to define cruciform or pinwheel plan configurations. Spatially these configurations created a dynamic fusion of balance of interdependent volumes with an interplay of horizontality, relating to the earth, and verticality, belonging to the realm of sky.
In the middle years of his career Wright designed several houses with walls of patterned concrete block. Archeological publications of Maya architecture by the Division of Historical Research of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, beginning in the early 1920s, may have inspired his vision of an expression rich in texture and pattern, much like a tapestry. These "textile block" houses, too, relied upon a modular planning grid that reflected the size and shape of the building materials. The modest Usonian houses of the 1930s, constructed of brick and horizontal wood siding, also were determined by a planning grid even though they were asymmetrical in configuration, often with an L-shaped plan.
The notion of architectural design addressing the specific issues of an environment is another theme in the literature of Sullivan and Wright. Organic expression as a reflection of theories of evolution is revealed in Sullivan's often-quoted axiom of "form follows function." Derived from both Darwin and Spencer, the meaning of Sullivan's statement is that architecture must develop its visual expression from the specific attributes of function, client, and site. The conditions of the specific problem — physical, social, environmental — should therefore determine the design. Sullivan expanded this concept with the statement that the architect "must cause a building to grow naturally, logically, and practically out of its conditions." That Wright responded to variations of site, climate, and purpose is clearly illustrated with his combination studio–living quarters at Taliesin West, which is characterized by a sense of expansiveness and reflects the colors of the Arizona desert landscape. Wright's ideal was that a building should seem to grow organically out of its own particular environment.
Another theme revealed in the extensive writings of Sullivan and Wright on their philosophy is that the creation of architecture was a supreme act of individuality. This concept represents an amalgam of several ideas that includes theories of evolution, a general tendency of Romanticism to glorify the individual, and a belief in the importance of democracy. Evolutionary theories led to a concept of equating a building to a living organism wherein both the individual parts and the work as a whole result from a set of specific conditions. And since the conditions of any one building will differ from others, and will hardly ever recur in exactly the same form, architecture then becomes a unique event. In the view of Sullivan and Wright this sense of uniqueness should therefore be expressed. This belief provided the rationale for personal and individual interpretation of organic design. Glorification of the individual arose from the Romantic notion that a human is a creature of feelings, intuition, and imagination, which were natural and appropriate impulses. Therefore, works of art that arose from this view might display great variation of appearance. The sense of freedom of self-expression that is implied in this view was the essence of American democracy.
Goff embraced the ideals of organic expression and was inspired by both the writings and buildings of Louis Sullivan and especially Frank Lloyd Wright. In a latter section of his 1932 prose poem "About Absolute Art," he pays homage to Wright with the passage:
One has shown the way for architecture organic with life
organic with materials
organic with Nature
organic with human-divinity
Frank Lloyd Wright
He has shown us how architecture may be absolute
The notion that an architect's solution must arise from the specific issues of an environment is another major theme in the writings of Sullivan and Wright. Goff, too, believed that great architecture must evolve out of the specific architectural problem to be solved, especially in the relationship of a building to its site and the needs of a client. Paraphrasing Sullivan, Goff wrote,
"The solution is within the problem," so if we are to have a beautiful result we must find beauty in the problem itself. We must recognize its potential in all of the requirements, in the nature of the site, materials, structure, etc., and through all of our aesthetic interpretations and solutions. Thus there can be no remembering of other solutions nor following of styles. Each thing we do will have its own style.
And,
Each time we do a building, it should be the first and the last. We must "begin again and again" if we are to solve our problems because all problems are different from each other, even if they may seem similar.
By disregarding tradition and experiencing only the present, the design of a building became an intense and personal act of creativity. Both architects were contemptuous of classical and Renaissance ideals and declared a belief in the creative artist as unique. This notion is an essential element of the Romantic doctrine of individuality — of the artist as "an intuitive mystic seer" who values intuition and imagination. Sullivan embraced, and extended, this fundamental axiom of organic expression when he wrote, "And why is he [the architect] a genius? Because he is a child of Nature" and "to create is an absolutely natural process."
Goff, in the same way, shared their view of the architect as a creative spirit when he wrote,
Organic solutions can be arrived at along many paths: there is never just one solution. The creative artist works intuitively and instinctively with the one he feels best with: it is a matter of choice from among many possible solutions. Our most spontaneous choice is usually best because it is more direct.
And,
Beauty bursts forth when it must because the Artist feels the drive within himself to produce it and no amount of discouragement can stop him. It does so through necessity because each of us has the human right to participate in this universal creative renewal. The craving for Beauty has existed in all mankind in all times and continues to do so. He is fated to continue his search for it so long as he exists and his finding it for himself has made his existence more worthwhile.
This Fatal Force drives the Artist to seek Beauty in unexpected places and he can find it in anything if he can only understand it. ... This force is a secret, the mystery of which he is ever endeavoring to discover.
CLAUDE DEBUSSY, FRENCH SYMBOLISM, AND GERTRUDE STEIN
Goff's 1932 prose poem is also significant in that it alludes to another individual who shaped his aesthetic ideals: Claude Debussy. The composer magnified many of the ideas of Sullivan and Wright. In the music of Debussy, the sense of impermanence and the indefinite quality to the compositions inspired Goff to draw parallels between music and architecture. Goff's recognition of the use of unresolved harmonic passages that eliminated a formal beginning and ending would later be assimilated into his ideas about architectural composition.
Goff's attachment to Debussy began when he was in high school. A pianist friend, Ernest Brooks, introduced him to the music of Beethoven, Bach, Chopin, and other classical composers. Goff was not impressed by what he heard. Brooks later played Goff a recording of Maurice Ravel's The Fountain, although he personally was bewildered as it "didn't obey the rules of composition he had learned." But Goff was fascinated and proclaimed that he had "heard music for the first time." His curiosity led to a search for more information about Ravel. A magazine article in the library mentioned that Ravel was "the inferior of Debussy," which expanded Goff's quest for knowledge. Goff bought several records of Debussy, including his Prelude to the Afternoon of a Faun. Although comprehending the piece eluded him at first, he appreciated it the more he listened. Years later Goff commented, "I have heard it hundreds of times. It is still very mysterious, and very wonderful to me. ... I have learned that I should never accept anything at face value or by snap judgments."
Goff's interest in Debussy relates his ideals indirectly to the Symbolist movement, as Debussy found inspiration through the French poets associated with that movement. As a counterpart of Romanticism, a "second flood of the same tide," Symbolist poets and artists placed great importance on emotions and sensations of the individual, retaining an emphasis on subjectivity. The inclination was to evoke or synthesize, rather than describe, with an ideal of intentional ambiguity. The major poets — Charles Baudelaire, Paul Verlaine, Arthur Rimbaud, and Stephane Mallarmé — all sought to communicate feelings through a complex association of ideas represented by "metaphors detached from their subjects." The premise of their art was based on the notion that every feeling or sensation one has at any moment of consciousness is different from every other and such feelings are unique to each individual. The poet must therefore seek to find a personal language that will express his feelings and his alone. The language must convey feelings through the use of symbols and images so as to suggest rather than describe. The poet Mallarmé defined Symbolism thusly: "To name an object is to do away with the three-quarters of the enjoyment of the poem which is derived from the satisfaction of guessing little by little: to suggest it, to evoke it — that is what charms the imagination."
(Continues...)
Excerpted from Bruce Goff by Arn Henderson. Copyright © 2017 University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, Publishing Division of the University. Excerpted by permission of UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA PRESS.
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.