Philip Johnson's 1949 iconic Glass House with the Donald Judd sculpture in the foreground.
What do a Chicago design architect, NPR host, dean of an internationally recognized architecture school, CEO of an international internet browser, professor of “game design”, director of an Ivy League rare books library, business magazine founder and author, a former Clinton cabinet undersecretary, CEO of a glass company, chief architect of the National Trust and the Director of Visitor Experiences all have in common? We spent 2 days together discussing transparency in today’s world at an iconic modern heritage site.
I spent a day and a half participating in a “Conversation” on transparency at one of our modern historic sites – Philip Johnson’s Glass House. The Glass House site is more than just the iconic “glass house.” There are 14 architectural structures on 47 acres which represent a tableau of one man’s life and art. For me, the site has become the perfect juncture for the 3 current major programs at the National Trust – the Sustainability Program, the Modernism & Recent Past Program and the Historic Sites Initiative.
Philip Johnson was legendary for his “salons” which have been described as the “longest running salon in America.” Sponsored by Oldcastle Glass, the program uses a theme to focus a day and a half of considering the context of the site, culminating in a four hour lunch and conversation among 12 invited thought leaders, about half of whom were not in the design field. Cliff Pearson, Deputy Editor at Architectural Record, moderated the conversation and prompted us with questions and challenges to move the dialogue.
Is the Transparency of Glass Democratic or Elitist?
Participants in the Conversation on Transparency, using the Glass House much like Philip Johnson, David Whitney and their friends used it.
Modernism was in many respects a revolt against the burden of masonry. It is ironic that a social and architectural movement intended to reflect the democracy of building buildings that were accessible (visible) to all have come to mean elitism to many. And let’s be frank, dinner at the Four Seasons followed by lunch in the Glass House hardly debunks that myth, as much as I enjoyed myself and the intelligent conversation. But do I feel badly about that? No. I’ve worked really hard to educate myself and pull myself out of middle class melancholia, so call me elitist if you want, it took me 20 years to pay off my student loans! And what a program like this does do is bring together people who might otherwise never be connected – establishing unlikely and singular ties, and opening up possibilities of expanded thinking. Expanded thinking can lead to creative inventions, and creative inventions can cross and improve the boundaries implied by social milieus.
I think what the ability to build glass buildings represented was the possibility of a new way of living and seeing. As one of the participants mentioned, “The difficulty in making glass buildings isn’t the glass, but making the frames.” Frames can mean actual steel frames, the trees and cultural landscape, the other buildings that provide a backdrop, and the social or cultural metrics that encourage the building of a transparent structure.
What is the Correlation Between Social Media, Politics, the Stimulus Package and Transparency?
The Brick House, as it faces the Glass House.
I have noticed in the past month or so, that nearly every meeting or social gathering I attend often includes discussions about Facebook and Twitter. This gathering was no different. We had a very heated discussion about the passive/aggressive nature of social networking. In many respects I see the Glass House as Johnson’s blog – a personal essay of his style. Transparency in politics and spending is bandied about today as the necessary approach to saving our economy from even further collapse. But is that really what we want? And just because we say we want to see through the congressional mumbo-jumbo, will that really help us all to participate more in our democracy? Much like the see-through nature of a glass house – just because we can see into it, do we understand what it means to live in it? And although the Glass House is transparent, it basically just represents one room of Johnson’s “house” which was spread out across 47 acres and had more opaque buildings (rooms) than transparent ones. We all show the world just what we want to – whether it’s in our “tweeting” or Facebook updates, or our glass houses…
The simple and elegant table setting for our Conversation luncheon in the Glass House.
A Four Hour Conversation and “Green” Not Mentioned Once
After four hours of heated discussion, examination of glass and brick, steel and frame – we suddenly realized that noone had brought up sustainability once. For me, it was a relief. Sometimes it’s overwhelming to always be thinking about how to save the world. And someone else noted that no one had mentioned “truth” either. But even though we may not have said “green” or “sustainable”, it did permeate the entire program. Our lunch used organic and local products. Even the centerpieces were edible – of glass (sugar) shards, flash frozen lime and orange slices, quail eggs and apples. Nothing went to waste. And after all, we were all there as an homage to an outstanding existing building (and the greenest building is the one that’s already been built, right? Even if that quote of Carl Elefante’s is starting to wear itself thin with me…)
A Brick House, Open Doors and Humidity Control
The Brick House and the Glass House, a study in contrasts.
The Glass House has a companion piece in the Brick House, the opaque building that complements and contrasts the transparency of the Glass House. Both were designed as one unit and are linked by an open-air grass forecourt. One doesn’t exist without the other. The Brick House has been closed for a year because of its toxic mold infestation. We are in the process of having a comprehensive evaluation completed on the building with restoration scheduled for next year. One of our Conversation participants commented that “The mission to preserve modern buildings could challenge preservation and engender a new culture.” The Brick House could be the place where we unravel this challenge, by figuring out what to do with a 1949 brick cavity wall and an oversized HVAC system which has apparently caused or significantly contributed to the growth of toxic mold. The Glass House has no air conditioning, instead using the centrally located doors on each elevation for passive cross ventilation (it has radiant heating in the floor). But the Brick House has non-operable windows and thus no passive ventilation. This project will be another model project of ours, looking at this complex issue of HVAC and sustainability in historic buildings (see my previous blog, Is Less More?)
Finally
A detail of the lunch table at our Conversation, complete with edible centerpieces.
So, we didn’t solve the world’s problems, we didn’t even solve the Glass House’s problems, but we did have a couple of great meals, and some really dynamic and thought-provoking discussions that let us each leave New Canaan with new friends and new ideas about glass, transparency, modernism, sustainability and conversation. And since part of the mission of the site is to be a catalyst for the preservation of modern architecture and to extend the legacy of Philip Johnson and his partner David Whitney, I think doing it one meal at a time, much like they did, will continue the spirit of the place.
Any questions or comments, as always, feel free to email me at barbara_campagna@nthp.org.
nice post Barbara
This sounds like a lovely experience, Barbara. When I visited the Glass House for the first time a year ago, I got the distinct impression that, ironically, for all its transparency the Glass House offered very little by way of insight into Philip Johnson or his life. I just got a sense of his tastes and talent, but not of him as a person. I think you hit the nail on the head in describing the Glass House as just one room in the larger “house,” almost like a formal living room that is hardly ever used and people don’t ever feel quite comfortable in. Anyway, I wish we all had more opportunities for intelligent, interesting conversations like this one!