on paper - national building museum · 2017-03-20 · on paper, it all makes sense the national...

20
blueprints NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM Volume XXV, No. 3 in this issue: Summer 2007 On Paper , It All Makes Sense The Art of Drawing: An Interview with David Macaulay THE TELL-TALE DRAWING: An Interview with Marco Frascari Seeing by Drawing: A Pictorial Essay museum news: Creative Partnerships

Upload: others

Post on 04-Apr-2020

1 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

blueprintsNatioNal BuildiNg MuseuMVolume XXV, No. 3

in this issue:

Summer 2007

On Paper, It All Makes Sense

The Art of Drawing:An Interview with David Macaulay

The Tell-Tale Drawing:An Interview with Marco Frascari

Seeing by Drawing: A Pictorial Essay

museum news: Creative Partnerships

Page 2: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

In 2001, in conjunction with an exhibition on the work of Cesar Pelli, the National Build-ing Museum invited the archi-tect to create a special drawing of our historic structure to be reproduced in limited num-

bers and sold through the Museum Shop. Cesar graciously accepted the invitation, and soon created a colorful and distinctive rendering of the building’s main façade. The high-quality prints made from this original were a big hit, and sold out very quickly.

Given the success of Cesar’s drawing, I thought, why not turn this idea into a new tradition?

Toward that end, I am pleased to announce that Antoine Predock, recipient of the AIA Gold Medal for 2006, has created the second of what we expect will become an ongoing series of original drawings commissioned by the Museum. Antoine has spoken at the Na-tional Building Museum several times, and his work has been featured in our exhibi-tions. He draws beautifully and evocatively, and I immediately thought of him as an ideal

choice to produce a new drawing for us—and for you, the Museum’s members and friends.

As expected, Antoine’s finished drawing, showing a view of the Great Hall, is stun-ning. We expect limited-edition prints of the drawing to go on sale in the Museum Shop on [DATE?]. Check our website or visit the shop for more information as that date approaches.

In another development, famed glass artist Dale Chihuly has offered to donate one of his signature sculptures to the Museum for the purpose of raffling it off to raise funds for the exhibition David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture. Dale was inspired to make the do-nation because he and David are both gradu-ates of the Rhode Island School of Design. The piece is valued at $20,000 and raffle tickets are available for $100 each. For more informa-tion, contact Melissa Slaughter at 202.272.2448, ext. 3200 or [email protected].

Our sincere thanks to both Antoine Predock and Dale Chihuly for their generosity!

Sincerely,

Chase W. Rynd

From the Executive Director

On Paper, It All Makes SenseThe National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture, is the springboard for the theme of this issue of Blueprints. Macaulay has consistently used drawing as a tool for telling stories—not just about the history and technol-ogy of buildings themselves, but also about the people who create and use those buildings. As the major features in this issue demonstrate, there is often much more to architectural drawings than meets the eye.

Drawing of the Great Hall. © Antoine Predock.

left to right: Worm’s Eye View of Skyscraper, Underground, c. 1976. One-point Perspective Sketch, Underground, 1976. both images © David Macaulay; photo by Christopher Benson.

in this issue

Dale Chihuly’s sculpture, Cobalt Basket Set with Poppy Red Lip Wraps (2001)Photo by Scott Leen.

Adding to Your Collection

Page 3: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

2 6 129 17

summer 2007 blueprints 1

The Art of Drawing ArchitectureIn an interview with guest curator Kathleen Franz, David Macaulay talks about the accidental genesis of his fabled career as an architectural illustrator and explains the process behind his popular books.

The Tell-Tale DrawingArchitect and scholar Marco Frascari discusses the sometimes hidden meanings of drawings and what they reveal about those who drew them.

Seeing by Drawing: A Pictorial EssayMost architectural drawings are intended as straightforward depictions of existing or proposed buildings. Others, however, serve primarily as vehicles for visual analysis and the exploration of imaginary environments. This pictorial essay offers a sam-pling of historic and contemporary drawings that go well beyond direct representation.

Collections CornerDrawings from the Northwestern Terra Cotta Collection hold the “key.”

Museum News: Creative PartnershipsReports on a few of the exciting Museum programs and initiatives made possible by strategic collaboration with other organizations.

Museum Support• Profile of a loyal donor.• List of recent donors—with thanks!

Mystery Building“Clock Watch.”

13

9

16

62

17National Building Museum Editorial Board

Catherine Crane Frankel, Director of Exhibitions and Collections Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education Bryna Lipper, Director of Marketing and Communications G. Martin Moeller, Jr., Senior Vice President and Curator Chase W. Rynd, Executive Director Shar Taylor, Vice President for Development

Blueprints

Editor-in-Chief, G. Martin Moeller, Jr. Managing Editor, Johanna DunkelDesigner, Jennifer Byrne

Blueprints is the quarterly magazine of the National Building Museum. Subscriptions are a benefit of Museum membership.

Blueprints ©2007. All rights reserved. ISSN 0742-0552

Paper contains 50% recycled content including 25% post-consumer waste.

The National Building Museum explores the world we build for ourselves—from our homes, skyscrapers, and public buildings to our parks, bridges, and cities. Through exhibitions, education programs, and publications, the Museum seeks to educate the public about achievements in architecture, design, engineering, urban planning, and construction.

The Museum is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations, foundations, associations, and public agencies.

shop NBM!Why do things work the way they do?

Why does a car move faster when going down a steep hill? How do ma-chines move heavy loads? With The Way Things Work, a game based on David Macaulay’s best-selling book of the same title, children, 10 and up, learn to solve these and other mechanical problems as they play. Featuring hands-on activities and chock full of engaging materials for curious kids, this game of science and

engineering combines physi-cal experimentation with a board game, allowing children to discover the workings of gears, levers, fulcrums, ramps, scales, and other simple machines.

$22.50 Museum members / $25.00 nonmembers. Visit the Museum Shop during Museum hours or call 202.272.7706.

12

The Way Things Work Game. Photo by Museum staff.

Page 4: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

by Kathleen Franz

An Interview with David Macaulay

Kathleen Franz is guest curator of David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture. She is assistant professor and director of public history in the Department of History at American University.

since 1973, David Macaulay has delighted readers with his accessible and often humorous illus-trated stories of architecture and engineering history. Author of more than 20 books, Macaulay

has won numerous awards for his unique visual narratives, including a Caldecott Medal for Black and White (1991). In 2006, he was awarded the prestigious MacArthur Fellowship for his “exceptional creativity.”

Macaulay’s work defies simple classification, occupy-ing the creative intersections between illustration and architecture, history and archeology, storytelling and criticism. His most recent architecture book, Mosque (2003), treats readers to unexpected and often breath-taking views of a fictional sixteenth-century landmark. Macaulay not only explains the construction of a classical Ottoman mosque, but also engages the reader through a historical narrative and stunning illustrations.

Dedicated to pen and ink, rather than computer programs, Macaulay argues that hand drawing is a tool for enhancing visual literacy, promoting careful obser-vation, curiosity, and recognition of the complexity

of everyday things. He uses drawing to deconstruct buildings and other large-scale structures, to render city streets transparent, to take readers below the surface of things, and to explain the invisible workings of the built world.

The National Building Museum’s current exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture [on view through January 21, 2008], examines the artist’s creative process as a form of visual archeology—a metaphor for excavating past architectural practice through drawing. Featuring a substantial number of sketches, sketchbooks, and finished drawings, the exhibition explores Macaulay’s use of drawing as an integral part of his process for researching, record-ing, and explaining architecture.

In conjunction with the exhibition, I recently discussed Macaulay’s work with him.

Drawing Architecturert ofAThe

2 blueprints summer 2007

below: David Macaulay sketching the fourth floor of the National Building Museum’s historic home. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

Page 5: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

summer 2007 blueprints �

Kathleen Franz: You describe yourself as an explainer of things. How so?

David Macaulay: Well, it’s what I ended up doing. I don’t think it was my intent from the beginning at all. But as I was steered into architecture books, I realized that I was making architecture—old and new—accessible through drawings. To make architecture accessible, you have to offer a fairly full explanation of how things come about, why things end up looking the way they do, why we feel the way we do about certain pieces of architecture. It meant figuring out how to [identify] those things that really needed to be explained, that were essential to understanding the process and the finished form, and then making the buildings come alive somehow. So, yes, as a teacher either in book form or in the classroom, I’m always explaining.

Franz: How were you steered into doing architecture books?

Macaulay: I realized after graduating from architecture school that I wanted to illustrate books. . . but [not] about architecture. I had a quite different direction planned—a much more playful, fantastic career of purely imaginative picture books. And the first idea that had any kind of merit was a story about gargoyles set in the Middle Ages.

It looked to me like people in the children’s book world were having a good time. I thought I wanted to be part of that group, but I didn’t know much about anything other than what I had learned in architecture school. So, there was a natural tendency for me to move towards something that I felt some kind of kinship with.

Franz: So your work marries architecture to storytelling?

Macaulay: Right. In retrospect it doesn’t seem surprising. I set a story in a medieval town where a cathedral was being built so I would have these background images and it would [provide] a reason for gargoyles to be carved. So, what my editor, Walter Lorraine [at Houghton Mifflin], did was very adroitly suggest that I forget the gargoyles and concentrate on the building because what he saw in those background scenes was something that he had not seen anyone trying to do. And he thought

it would be much more interesting to have a children’s story about architecture than one about gargoyles.

Franz: What drew you to architecture school in the first place?

Macaulay: When you’re a junior in high school and know almost nothing and they tell you that pretty soon you’re going to have to go somewhere else and, in theory, you should be thinking about the rest of your life, your career…. I was in Cumberland, Rhode Island, 20 minutes from the Rhode Island School of Design. So I thought, as someone who had always drawn and was curious about how things were made, it seemed sensible to study architecture. I got accepted and I went off to study architecture, [but] by my fourth year I knew I didn’t want to be an architect.

Franz: Why not?

Macaulay: Well, there was a formal apprenticeship that followed graduation; you worked in an office with a bunch of people. How frequently you actually got a chance to work on something really interesting would be the big issue. I decided I wanted to work on some-

Drawing Architecture

top: With his latest book, Mosque (200�), Macaulay used the medium of great architecture to help foster a deeper understanding of Islam. © David Macaulay; photo by Alan Sprecher.

Page 6: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

� blueprints summer 2007

thing more personal. So once I graduated, I did a bunch of stuff: I taught art in public school and I did some freelance illustration work and began to think more about this book idea. And then there I was, three years later in 1973, with the publication of the book Cathedral, coming back to architecture.

Franz: When you draw, you are rebuilding the building on the page.

Macaulay: Absolutely. From the very first presentation I made, when I was sidetracked by what I knew would be a classic story of gargoyles, the first thing I did was go back and start re-reading some of my architecture books. Then I made a set of drawings on tracing paper that started with nothing—just a site. In fact, [I started with a story of] a town, with an old church that had burned down. Then I drew as if I was recording a process that was actually happening out my window.

It’s sort of like stop-motion photography. The thing that makes it interesting and engaging is that you don’t always put the camera in the same place. The reader is being shown what it feels like to be part of the process of putting the building together.

Franz: You do a lot of historical research for your books. Could talk about the research process for Mosque?

Macaulay: I had been to Istanbul to do some filming for public television and was reacquainted with the buildings. As we looked at the Blue Mosque and Hagia Sophia, I thought, these are wonderful pieces of architec-ture. And then September 11th happened and I thought, it’s time to explain one of those buildings as a kind of window into a culture that we don’t know enough about. So, I approached it by reading everything I could get my hands on and, in this case, reading about Sinan the architect of the Golden Age of the Ottoman Empire and

his work for the Suleymaniye. It took me into the technology and the stone-cutting and how Ottomans built vast structures in an environ-ment which is prone to earthquakes, but then there was [also the question of] the whole reason for [the buildings’ creation]. Wealthy Ottomans were basically encouraged to put their wealth into these foundations that would build not only a new mosque, but also a school and a soup kitchen and a public bath and basically the kinds of things that could bring a devastated neighborhood back to life.

Franz: The sketchbooks for Mosque seem almost interrogative; you’re asking questions and then using the sketchbook to answer them.

Macaulay: The great thing about sketching is it forces you to really look at things, to stop and pay attention. Things aren’t necessarily self-explanatory. I might see under the eave of the roof, for instance, bricks coming out at a particular angle. Now I can’t tell whether they’re square bricks that are set deeply into the wall with just these little triangular corner points coming out or whether they’re triangular bricks made just for that purpose and so on. But I wouldn’t even have thought about that if I hadn’t sketched it, if I hadn’t started to look at the details.

Franz: You created a paper model to help envision the mosque. Why?

Macaulay: Yes, the first reason for the paper models is to get the proportions down. Once you’ve got the model then obviously you can rotate it in front of you. You can move your eye up and down it and observe the change in perspective as you move from, let’s say, the corner of the top of the wall down to the base of the wall. The models are very simple. They’re not pretty models, but they’re very useful models.

Franz: Why not just use a computer?

Macaulay: My heart just did a little flutter there. Because I want to be in control and I don’t want someone else’s program telling me what I can and cannot do. There’s too much to be learned. In building a model, you’re learning about the proportions, you’re not thinking about how to draw a line or an edge using your mouse or your stylus.

Franz: How did Great Moments in Architecture, which melds humor and architecture, come about?

Macaulay: Actually it was done to provide artwork for an exhibition. It was supposed to be just a collection of drawings for a show that I was invited to have in New York [exhibiting and selling] drawings from Cathedral, City, and Pyramid. But I didn’t want to. So, I decided to

above: Centering for Central Dome of Mosque, Mosque, 200�. © David Macaulay; photo by Christopher Benson.

right: This exploded view of the St. Paul’s Cathedral dome for Building Big (2000), demonstrates how Macaulay’s illustration lift the exterior off a building to reveal how it was construct-ed. © David Macaulay; photo by Christopher Benson.

Page 7: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

summer 2007 blueprints 5

above: Macaulay frequently uses drawing to re-imagine the built environment, as seen here in this unpub-lished sketch commissioned by The Washington Post (c.1982–198�). © David Macaulay; photo by Christopher Benson.

create a kind of phony art history book and I drew them pompously and I did all the cross-

hatching and all that sort of stuff to give them a sort of integrity, but underneath it all was just total nonsense. I really love working those two things together, make it look serious, with plate

numbers, sketch numbers, notes at the back—I mean, really turn it on its head and making the im-ages themselves undercut the seriousness of the

overall appearance.

Franz: Was Great Moments a pastiche of the 18th-century draftsman Giovanni

Battista Piranesi?

Macaulay: Oh yes, absolutely. The space and the volume and whatnot in Piranesi’s images is so fantastic

and part of my desire in making those drawings with all the pen and ink and the

cross etching was to do some of that kind of Piranesi stuff, and create some big spaces and turn relatively modest structures into imposing ruins.

Franz: A strong archeological thread runs through all of your work. Is this just fun

for you, or is it also a way to critique architecture?

Macaulay: I think it’s mostly fun. [For example, the book called] Unbuilding was a way of present-ing architecture that was a little

different. I didn’t want to build another building from the

ground up. So I thought, well, just take it apart. It’s the first [of my subjects] that was a real building. It’s the first time I actually did have to pay attention to people’s names and dates and things of that nature. But with the archeology, I just always thought that was really fun—discover-

ing things, and then having to figure out what the connection is between them be-cause there’s no one

there to tell you anymore. [In Motel of the Mysteries], I just thought it would be kind

of playful to take something that we could look at now, and then seeing how somebody at some distant time might misinterpret and misrepresent it.

We take all that stuff for granted and once things are presented to us in so-called history books written by scholars, we assume this must be the truth. And I think it’s always wise to be a little skeptical and be willing to ask questions. How did they know that? Why did they decide that? Why did they call it sacred?

Franz: After drawing for some 30 years are there still challenges for you?

Macaulay: Oh man, that doesn’t change. I mean the books take me longer now than ever because I think I’m more demanding—I have higher expectations. On the good side I think I’m getting better at it but I’m not getting faster. So the projects take longer and longer. It’s supposed to work the other way, isn’t it?

Franz: Your next book is on the human body. Will it be similar to the architecture books?

Macaulay: Well it is bound to be similar in certain ways. But in the end it’s about how we work. We start with cells and then move into circulation and respiration and then digestion and then into the brain, which is a long section. I started it because I felt completely ignorant of the subject. I’m getting older and things will start breaking down. I’m going to start feeling a little more pain here or there. But where is it coming from? And why? And how? So I was sort of driven by my realization of my own happy ignorance.

It has been the hardest thing I’ve ever done. The level of complexity here is way beyond anything I’ve tackled in the past. Now maybe that’s why the books are taking longer because I’m open to those kinds of things now.

Franz: Will you write a book on your own creative process?

Macaulay: I think it has to be done by somebody else if there is to be one, but every one of my books is about my creative process in a way.

Franz: But now you can rest on your laurels ….

Macaulay: I can’t find my laurels.

Franz: What about the MacAr-thur award?

Macaulay: Well the interesting thing about the MacArthur is that it gives you a chance to do something that you’ve al-ways wanted to. I can’t think of anything I would rather do than what I’m doing. The MacArthur has allowed me to relax a little bit on the body book, not have to crank it out to meet some kind of artificial deadline. That’s what the MacArthur has done for me, which is an extraordinary gift. •

above: Created as a companion to the documentary film series of the same name, Building Big (2000) focused on de-sign problems and solutions behind common, yet large-scale, constructions such as bridges and skyscrapers; such as the Commerzbank in Frankfurt, pictured above. © David Macaulay; photo by Alan Sprecher.

David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture is made possible by American Society of Civil Engineers; Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP; Dale Chihuly; Lamy writing instruments; Beyer Blinder Belle Architects & Planners, LLP; Edward W. Rose III Family Fund of The Dallas Foundation; STUDIOS Architecture; Turner Construction Company; Blick Art Materials; Sunrise Foundation; The American Architectural Foundation; and other generous contributors.

Page 8: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

6 blueprints summer 2007

by Martin Moeller

Martin Moeller: How did you become interested in the theoretical implications of architectural drawing?

Marco Frascari: It started when I was working with Carlo Scarpa and seeing how he used drawing as a form of communication with both students and outsiders. His drawings were performances.

Scarpa probably had synesthesia [an unusual condition in which normally distinct senses or per-ceptions overlap—e.g., the association of a particular flavor with a specific color, or of a certain sound with an abstract shape]. For him, the purpose of a drawing was not just to depict what any human could see, but somehow to convey the totality of what we feel. Students in his class would make drawings in which, of course, the trees were green and the bricks were red, and so on. But Scarpa did not like this. He was not interested in a drawing as a representation of a real building; for him, the drawing should express some essence—some perceptual presence of an architectural idea—rather than just pretending to be a photographic substitute.

Marco Frascari is a practicing architect and the director of the School of Architecture at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. A na-tive of Mantua, Italy, he studied in Venice under the famed modernist Carlo Scarpa (1906-78) before coming to the United States, where he received a master’s degree from the University of Cincinnati and a doctorate from the University of Pennsylvania. He subsequently taught at several universities in the U.S. and Europe. Frascari’s scholarly interests include the history and theory of architectural drawing and the potential of good design to enhance human happiness.

left: TK MARTIN

Tell -TaleThe

An Interview with Marco Frascari

Page 9: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

summer 2007 blueprints 7

I did not understand all this at the time. Later, when I discovered synesthesia and its implications for design, I learned that all children are synesthetic, but we lose it just by growing up. Consequently, architects have to rediscover these child-like qualities and, by using draw-ing, have to perceive all dimensions, because we design buildings for totality—acoustics, smells, and so on are all part of the architectural design. What a drawing can do, by color or by manipulation of ink, is to achieve for the architect not only a visual rendering, but also an under-standing of other perceptions that you don’t visualize.

Moeller: Did such complex drawing techniques carry through to Scarpa’s actual construction documents?

Frascari: You had to produce some credible drawings in order to bill the client. Scarpa would sometimes start a project by saying, “I have to have a door like this,” even before deciding on the basic design of the building. Well, if you have a client who is expecting a house, you can’t just show a sketch of a beautiful door and expect to get paid. Scarpa often did not bill until the end of the project, because it was not until then that he actually had something real to show.

Moeller: How did your study of architectural drawing proceed beyond Scarpa?

Frascari: I became interested in understanding the full potential of drawing. There was one amazing set of draw-ings that captured my eye early. It was done in 1590, in Venice, by Giovanni Antonio Rusconi. He created unique drawings showing the process of construction of a particular building in different phases and at different mo-ments. The idea was borrowed from Vessalius’s famous anatomical drawings of that period. Rusconi gives the viewer a very peculiar understanding of the structure because he can show what is not visible in the finished building.

There was also Mario Ridolfi, who was a very good friend of Scarpa. He did many drawings on tracing paper, but he used both sides of the paper. Unlike Scarpa, Ridolfi was an ink pen guy—his fingers were always covered with ink. He had an ability of sketching that was very close to the process of making a building.

Moeller: You talk about Scarpa, Rusconi, Ridolfi. As an Italian you may be biased, but do you think the concept of drawing as an ana-lytical tool is a peculiarly Italian phenomenon?

Frascari: There is a particular tradition of analytical drawing in Italy. Contrary to what you might expect, this was even evident well before the Renaissance. Of course, the major achievements in drawing in the Gothic period were all French and German, and there were relatively few from Italy, but the Italian ones, rather than showing the finished building, tended to show the construction process. The scaffolding used to build the structures, for instance, often would appear on the draw-ings. The character of the drawings themselves actually suggested a building under construction.

As for why this tradition might be so closely associated with Italy, I think there may be a linguistic explanation. The word “design” comes from the Italian word disegno, and you might assume that that word derived from Latin, but in Latin there was no such word. Rather, the Italian word slowly arose within the field of architecture—not the other fine arts—and it was related to what was called “designa-

“If I want to see things, I do not trust anything else. I put them in front of me, here on paper, to be able to see them. I want to see, and for this I draw. I can see an image only if I draw it.” — Carlo Scarpa

above: TK MARTIN

Tell -TaleDrAwINg

Page 10: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

8 blueprints summer 2007

tion” (disegnare equals designare). If you think about it, the designer is the one who “designates” where things go. In the pre-Renaissance era, one might draw a “plan” of a building by putting poles in spots “desig-nating” the corners of the actual structure to be built. “Design” was much more broadly understood to be a craft—an ongoing and circular process—than it is now, when it is generally associated with a finished object that may be regarded as a work of art. Gradually, the modern sense of the word emerged, and became understood as l’arte del disegno—the art of design.

Moeller: You have written about the idea of “the well-tempered drawing,” alluding to Johann Sebastian Bach’s collection of musical compositions titled The Well-Tempered Clavier. What do you mean by that term with respect to drawings?

Frascari: The phrase “well-tempered” has to do with word “temperature.” In Italian, the word “tempo” means both “weather” and “time.” The drawing process takes time, and once it is completed, the drawing itself must also weather. A good building should grow more beauti-ful as it weathers. In the same way, a well-tempered drawing is one that has weathered well. It is not just the gradual change in color of the paper and ink, but even the change in humidity in the room where you are work-ing will have an influence. For me, there is the setting of a powerful synesthetic condition between the weather-ing of a drawing and the weathering of a building.

Real architectural drawings are very dirty. Scarpa’s drawings were on the table for a long time, and they show a building up of layers. This is true even in ink drawings, but the ink drawing in the end looks very clean like a building does at end of construction, but even on the ink drawings you can often see traces of the “con-struction” of the drawing, which can be very revealing.

Moeller: You also wrote an essay on the “tell-tale detail,” arguing that study of the smallest elements can inform our broader understanding of buildings. Some of the most interesting drawings throughout history have been details.

Frascari: I was reading an article in which [Richard] Rogers was talking about his experience with [former business partner Renzo] Piano, who was the son of a builder. Piano, he said, would always start the design process with details. Rogers would always start from totality. Either method can lead to beautiful architec-ture, but I think it is extremely important to recognize that both exist. And each requires its own kind of drawing. Erich Mendelsohn, for instance, started from totality, but Otto Wagner started from detail, and they produced radically different drawings. Mendelsohn represented shadow and form, and not the tectonics of construction; Wagner was the opposite. But eventually the two meet in the middle.

Moeller: How would you assess the impact of the digital revolution and changes in architectural practice?

Frascari: Modern computer drawings are so ascetic. They look like the “clean environments” where they make chips and computer equipment.

The authority of hand drawing has been lost a bit. Now, with computers, someone has to do a translation between the image constructed by the architect and the actual building to be built. [The engineering firm] ARUP does a very good job of this, transforming the architect’s drawing so it can represent the real act of construction. They do these amazing drawings—the construction to allow the construction, as it were.

When architectural drawings became merely legal documents, they lost most of their power. But, com-

continued on page 12

top: TK MARTIN

above: TK MARTIN

Page 11: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

summer 2007 blueprints 9

The Round Tower, Plate IIIFrom the Carceri Series (1749)

Giovanni Battista Piranesi

Trained in architecture, engineering, and printmaking, Giovanni Piranesi gained fame in the 1740s for his highly romanticized etchings of ancient and contemporary Roman buildings. Thanks in part to their exaggerations of scale and often fanciful compositions, these etchings fueled the popular fascination with classical antiquity and inspired the burgeoning neoclassical movement in architecture.

Today, Piranesi is best known for another series of images called the Carceri d’Invenzione (Imaginary Prisons). The fantas-tical and ominous interior spaces of the Carceri constituted an unreal yet believable world, powerfully represented in two dimensions on paper.

A Pictorial Essay

The following images constitute a brief essay illustrating the use of architectural drawing as a tool for analysis or imagination over the past few centuries.

by Drawing by Martin Moeller

Seeing

Page 12: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

Perpendicular Section of an Underground Chamber of the Gothic House. . . (after 1814)

Jean-Jacques Lequeu

Jean-Jacques Lequeu was, along with Claude-Nicolas Ledoux and Étienne-Louis Boullée, one of the great French “vision-ary” architects of the late 18th and early 19th centuries, notorious for often utterly impractical, absurdly overscaled, but visually stunning schemes for buildings, monuments, and infrastructure. Of the three, Lequeu produced the strang-est body of work, including both architectural renderings and numerous drawings of the human form, whose character ranges from quasi-scientific to unabashedly pornographic.

The drawing reproduced here shows the interior of a struc-ture that Lequeu called “the haunt of the magicians.” In its surprising visual juxtapositions and obvious—though not necessarily comprehensible—symbolism, this rendering presages the work of the surrealist movement.

Construction of Trylon and Perisphere (c. 1938)

Hugh Ferriss

Few non-practicing architects have had as profound an influence on the profession as Hugh Ferriss. His iconic renderings of landmark buildings helped to define public perceptions of early modern architecture, and his series of drawings exploring the compositional implications of New York’s 1916 zoning law directly shaped the city’s skyline and set the tone for skyscraper design until the Great Depres-sion.

Ferriss produced several renderings of the theme struc-ture—commonly called the Trylon and Perisphere—for the 1939 New York World’s Fair, including this heavily stylized depiction of the two giant forms under construction. The drawing includes a number of people, some of whom are obviously working while others are merely standing around as if admiring the audacity of the project.

10 blueprints summer 2007

Sugar Daddy (1992–95)

Daniel Castor

The rather dour Amsterdam Stock Exchange, designed by Hendrik Berlage, has been unpopular with the Dutch public since it opened in 1903. But it has long intrigued the American architect Daniel Castor, who was awarded a Fulbright scholarship in 1992 to study the complex structure.

In order to convey the fascinating intricacies of Berlage’s design, Castor developed a series of innovative drawings that depict solid forms and voids si-multaneously. These “jellyfish drawings,” which render walls transparent and give spaces substance, help to explain the building’s convoluted circulation paths and other eccentricities. Shown here is a drawing called Sugar Daddy—so named because the area illustrated is relatively rich with ornament—which traces the elaborate spiral path between an exterior entrance and the vestibule to the Chamber of Commerce above.

Page 13: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

summer 2007 blueprints 11

Gabriel Façade, Place de la Concorde (1997)

Ron Witte

The Gabriel Prize, named for the 18th-century French architect Ange-Jacques Gabriel and presented annu-ally by the Western European Architecture Founda-tion, provides the winning individual with a stipend to spend three months studying architecture and landscape in France. Each winner is required to produce three renderings of an appropriate subject of his or her choice.

Gabriel’s works included the façades of two buildings lining the north side of the Place de la Concorde in Paris. The 1997 prize recipient, architect and teacher Ron Witte, created renderings showing the façades of these palatial buildings in stark isolation. The draw-ings, while revealing the extent of Gabriel’s design, also allow a simultaneous reading of the façades as the skins of individual buildings and as the coherent edge of a large outdoor space.

New American City— Sky Harbor Airport (2006)

Wellington Reiter

Many a great city derives character and identity from its relationship to a river, lake, or sea. With no such body of water nearby, Phoenix has long suffered from a certain placelessness. Inspired by the name of the city’s airport, Sky Harbor, Wellington Reiter, who is dean of the College of Architecture and Environmental Design at Arizona State University, created a series of drawings exploring the possibility of turning the transportation hub into an urban focal point, serving the same purposes as aquatic harbors elsewhere.

Reiter’s drawings exhibit a clear debt to Piranesi, with heavy line work yielding a literal and figurative darkness evoking strong emotional responses. The Sky Harbor images offer both utopian and dystopian visions for the proposed civic center, in which the airport is not only an exciting urban gateway, but also an instrument of surveillance and control.

Home of Norma DesmondFrom the Movie Sunset Boulevard (2007)

Mark Bennett

At first glance, artist Mark Bennett’s translations of fictional set-tings from television shows and movies into precise architectural plans may appear to be nothing more than campy celebrations of pop culture. After all, it is hard for the viewer not to laugh after recognizing some telltale element that evokes a strong memory of a favorite episode or scene.

In fact, Bennett’s drawings are remarkable achievements. They are the products of skillful analysis of diverse and sometimes contradictory visual clues, turning imagined forms and spaces into credible architectural environments. His work thus repre-sents the full potential of drawing as a medium to present ideas, visions, and information that would be difficult to convey by other means.

Page 14: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

12 blueprints summer 2007

t he largest and most significant holding in the National Building Museum’s

permanent collection is the 50,000-drawing Northwestern Terra Cotta Collection. At the beginning of the 20th century, architectural terra cotta was the preferred material for detail-ing commercial structures. The Northwestern Terra Cotta Company (1877–1956), headquar-tered in Chicago, was one of the nation’s leading manufacturers of this specialty product—a mix of clay sculpted or molded into a custom design and then fired in a kiln or furnace.

To direct production and instal-lation, the company’s drafts-men transformed architectural blueprints into comprehensive “shop drawings” that provided instructions for the company’s sculptors and mold makers. Ev-ery project necessitated the cre-ation of a “key” drawing which outlined the building’s form and identified the intended location of the terra cotta cladding or ornament. For quick and easy reference, the terra cotta was often rendered in color. Each key drawing also pinpointed the secondary drawings where specifications and exact dimen-sions were detailed.

Ironically, the key drawing—often the first drafted—remained incomplete until all of a project’s terra cotta elements had been scaled on secondary drawings. Only then could the final references and page assignments be transferred to the key.

The drawings reproduced here are for the Holy Family Church in Cincinnati, Ohio, designed by J.F. Sheblessy. On the key drawing, “Sheet 10” is listed as the page relating to the church’s bell towers, and section JB identifies the urns at the corner base of each tower. On Sheet 10, each section of the urn is further delineated. Notice, for example, how the urns are supported by tripods—a refinement not shown on the key. Together, these layered, puzzle-like drawings reveal the complex, labor-intensive process behind construction with architectural terra cotta. •

collections highlights

top: Key drawing of the West Elevation, Holy Family Church, Cincinnati, Ohio; 191�. Ink-on-linen shop drawing drafted by Mr. Bergmann, Northwestern Terra Cotta Company. Gift of Edward J. Mertes.

above: Detail of Towers (Sheet 10), Holy Family Church, Cincinnati, Ohio; 191�. Ink-on-linen shop drawing drafted by B. Hey-den, Northwestern Terra Cotta Company. Gift of Edward J. Mertes.

Key Drawings in the Northwestern Terra Cotta Collectionby Chrysanthe B. Broikos, Curator

puter or not, one thing is true today that has always been true—the architect rules construction with the use of well-constructed and well-weathered graphic representations.

I once designed a villa close to Verona, Italy, which included a spiral stairway. One day I got call from the contractor. “Architetto,” he said, because in Italy we are addressed with our professional title just as a doctor would be in the U.S., “we don’t have wings; we cannot fly.” At first I did not understand, but then he explained. You see, when I did the design for the stair, I started from the main floor, and projected ev-erything down and up from there as necessary, and it turns out that the contractor could not physically get to these key points, which were on the second level, to use as baselines in construction. “Oh, you’re right,” I responded. Clearly, through the act of construc-tion, he had discovered something that I had not considered while creating my drawing. That’s fine, as long as we have a system for working through these things when they arise.

Moeller: As a professor and director of an architec-ture school, how are you integrating hand drawing into the curriculum?

Frascari: It is very important that we are teaching drawing. I want students to discover the possibility of synesthesia, and discover the tactility of the drawing. The digital world is so far away—you use only two fingers (at least I do). It is another dimension away from the real act of drawing.

There is a beautiful description in Cesariano’s 14th-century translation of Vitruvius’s De architectura [now commonly known as The Ten Books of Architecture] that says that, when you are drawing on a piece of paper on your table, the compass walks on the paper just as the architect walks on a field covered with snow. As you go around, the foot marks this and marks that; you can do that on snow, on plaster, or on paper. It’s like the joke about letting your fingers do the walking.

Really, we are exposing our students to the role of drawing in architectural thinking, helping them to understand that drawing is the best way to conceive a building. •

continued from page 8

Page 15: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

museum news

summer 2007 blueprints 1�

Witold Rybczynski Wins Prestigious Scully Prizeby Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education

Museum Honors Stanford Engineering Professor with Turner Prize by Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education

a contingent from the National Building Museum traveled to Palo Alto, California on February 1 to bestow the fifth Henry C. Turner Prize for

Innovation in Construction Technology on Dr. Paul Teicholz, founder of Stanford’s Center for Integrated Facility Engineering (CIFE). Teicholz, who has more than 40 years of experience in academia and the engineering industry, joined the ranks of previous Turner Prize recipients structural engineer Leslie E. Robertson; architect I.M Pei; engineer and builder Charles A. DeBenedittis; and the U.S. Green Building Council, the first institution to receive the prize. The Turner Prize was endowed by The Turner Corporation in 2002 and recognizes an invention, an innovative methodology, or exceptional leadership in construction technology by an individual, team of individuals, or organization.

Norbert Young, president of McGraw-Hill Construction and chair of this year’s Turner Prize jury, remarked that “[Teicholz] has created industry-wide improvements in modeling, project management, and business processes by integrating information technology with the architecture, construction, and engineering fields.”

The Museum thanks Stanford University for hosting the presentation and enabling Teicholz’s west coast colleagues, family, and friends to celebrate his accomplishments. •

on January 17, 2007, scholar, profes-sor, and architect Witold Rybczyn-ski was awarded the Museum’s

eighth Vincent J. Scully Prize, named in honor of the esteemed teacher and author who has spearheaded the debate about the future of American cities for more than 50 years. Mr. Rybczyn-ski joins an impressive group of past awardees comprising Scully himself, the late Jane Jacobs, Andrés Duany and Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, Robert Venturi and Denise Scott Brown, His Highness The Aga Khan, His Royal Highness The Prince of Wales, and Phyllis Lambert.

As David Schwarz, chair of the Scully Prize jury stated in his opening remarks at the award presentation, the prize re-cipients “have caused us to think about the places we live, and more impor-tantly, they have helped us learn to care about them. In doing so they help each and every one of us build a future that can be worthy of our past.”

Architect Moshe Safdie, in a tribute to Rybczynski, described him as a “voice of plain talk. He is not afraid to expose the nakedness of the emperor. His belief is [?] that architecture is measurable and that it can be understood and appreciated by the public at large.” Upon receiving the award, Rybczynski presented an original lecture on the history of urban planning, which was well received by the audience of more than 450 people. He concluded by exploring the intersections between city planning and economics, and in classic “plain talk” fashion, reminded listeners that, ultimately, it is the market that drives what gets built, and it is the role of architects and planners to offer the public the best possible options from which to choose. •

above: (from L to R) David M. Schwarz, Chair of Vincent Scully Prize Jury; Witold Rybczynski, Vincent Scully Prize winner; and Vincent Scully during the presenta-tion of the eighth Vincent Scully Prize. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

above: The 2006 Turner Prize recipient, Dr. Paul Teicholz discusses his research, career, and the future of the engineer-ing industry with Bob Tatum, Stanford engineering professor, during the Turner Prize ceremony. © Mike Abbott Photography.

Page 16: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

1� blueprints summer 2007

museum news continued

Taking L’Enfant on the Roadby Bryna Lipper, Director of Marketing and Communications

When Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bogotá, Colombia, delivered the second annual L’Enfant Lecture to an enthusiastic audience in

November 2006, the partnership between the National Building Museum and the American Planning Association entered an exciting, new phase. Held at New York’s Cooper Union, this was the first official Museum lecture program to take place outside of Washington, D.C. The third lecture in this traveling series is sched-uled to take place in Chicago in the fall of 2007.

The L’Enfant Lecture was established by the APA and the Museum in 2005 to enliven dialogue about urban and regional growth and to foster communities of lasting value. The inaugural speaker, Sir Peter Hall, set the tone for future programs with an ambitious and broad discussion of sustainable cities. Peñalosa built on this auspicious beginning by offering a candid presentation about initiating social change through urban policy and transportation. While the speaker for 2007 is yet to be announced, both partners anticipate an exciting program in Chicago—a city with an unparalleled legacy of urban and architec-tural design. •

i n 1866, when the first archi-tecture degree program was established at the Massachusetts

Institute of Technology, all of the enrolled students were, of course, men. Since then, university demo-graphics have changed dramati-cally, and now more than 50% of the students in U.S. architecture programs are women. Yet women currently account for only 11% of the members of the American Insti-tute of Architecture.

Why is there such a drastic drop off in numbers between academia and professional practice? A part-nership begun in 2006 between the National Building Museum and the Beverly Willis Architec-

ture Foundation is exploring this discrepancy and related questions. On March 15, in celebration of International Women’s Day, the Museum and the Foundation held the second annual program focus-ing on the achievements of women in the architecture profession, providing a forum for discussion of how this rich history can inform contemporary practice. This year’s program was moderated by Wanda Bubriski, director of the Beverly Willis Architecture Foundation, and included Museum curator Su-san Piedmont-Palladino, Columbia University professor Gwendolyn Wright, and Concordia University professor Cynthia Hammond as panelists. •

Women in Architectureby Jaime Van Mourik, Public Programs Coordinator

The National Building Museum eagerly pursues strategic partnerships with like-minded organizations in order to offer the most compelling programming possible. The brief articles in this section describe some recent activities that have been conducted in partnership with outside groups.

Correction Two images in the Museum’s 2006 Annual Report taken by Ann Elkington were incorrectly credited to F.T. Eyre and Museum staff. The photos were DAP 13 on page 19 and Design Apprenticeship Program on page 22.

above: 2006 L’Enfant Lecture on City Planning and Design speaker, Enrique Peñalosa, former mayor of Bogota, Columbia. Photo by TK.

1� blueprints summer 2007

Page 17: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

Framing a Capital City by Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education

W ashington, D.C. is distinct among American cities. From Pierre Charles L’Enfant’s revolu-tionary plan for the new capital in 1791, to the

audacious vision of the 1901–02 McMillan Plan, to more recent proposals to expand the scope of the National Mall, Washington has been shaped by a constant struggle to balance the permanence of monuments and memorials with the dynamic needs of a living city.

On April 10 and 11, the National Building Museum, in collaboration with the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts and the National Capital Planning Commis-sion, convened prominent scholars, designers, and policymakers to discuss the future of federal plan-ning for the city in the 21st century. The keynote to the symposium was delivered by David Childs, FAIA of Skidmore, Owings & Merrill. Childs’s presenta-tion, which explored the past, present, and future of planning in the capital, was the first annual Charles H. Atherton Memorial Lecture, commemorating the life and legacy of Charles Atherton, who served for almost four decades as secretary of the Commission of Fine Arts.

The following day’s symposium explored such critical issues as sustainability, the siting and design of me-morials, protection of public open space in an era of enhanced security, and the integration of the federal presence into the community.

Proceedings from the day’s events can be found on our website at www.nbm.org. •

top: (from L to R) Robert Ivy, Editor-in-Chief, Architectural Record; Lawrence J. Vale, professor of Urban Studies and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Judy Scott Feldman, chair of the National Coalition to Save Our Mall; and author Michael Z. Wise during the Commemoration and Symbolic Narrative session at the Framing a Capital City Symposium.

above: A session during the free, all-day Framing a Capital City symposium. Photo by F.T. Eyre.

How Can You Get

MORE Information About These Programs?

Would you like to hear one of the panel discussions from the Framing a Capital City

Symposium? Are you interested in learning more about past Scully or Turner Prize winners? Visit the National Building Museum’s website, www.nbm.org, where you can access transcripts, photos, and press materials for past events and

view a listing of upcoming public programs. Visit the website often for up-to-date

programming information.

summer 2007 blueprints 15

Page 18: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

The Museum thanks the fol-lowing individuals, companies, associations and agencies for gifts of $250 or more received from February 1 – April 30, 2007. These generous gifts provide essential support for the Museum’s exhibitions, educa-tion programs, and endowment funds. Some of the contribu-tions listed below are in partial fulfillment of larger pledges.

$25,000 and above

AnonymousThe Bayport Foundation of

Andersen CorporationMarilyn and Michael GlossermanMASCO Corporation

FoundationU.S. Department of Housing

and Urban DevelopmentWeiser LLP

$10,000–$2�,999

The Associated General Contractors of America

Bender Foundation, Inc.Boston PropertiesCarolyn S. BrodyFannie MaeGwathmey Siegel &

Associates ArchitectsDelon Hampton & AssociatesPaul Hastings

Hellmuth, Obata + KassabaumHinesHypo Real Estate Capital

CorporationIsland Capital Group, LLCThe JBG CompaniesLt. Col. & Mrs. William K. KonzeMeridian Investments, Inc.Neighborhood Investment Fund,

Office of the Deputy MayorO’Connor Capital PartnersJ.E. Robert CompaniesRobert A.M. Stern Architects

LLPSTUDIOS ArchitectureTaconic Investment Partners

LLCTurner Construction CompanyU.S. Department of Labor

Employment and Training Administration

Vornado Realty Trust

$5,000–$9,999

Baltimore-Washington Brick Distributor Council

BE+K Building GroupDavis Brody Bond AedasDesign CuisineGreenstein DeLorme & Luchs,

P.C.The Haskell CompanyHorning BrothersJMALouis Dreyfus Property GroupNational Cherry Blossom

Festival, Inc.Reed SmithMichael and Deborah Salzberg

Philanthropic FundStroock, Stroock & Lavan LLP

$2,500–$�,999

BOMA InternationalThe Broad Foundation

Hargrove, Inc.HRH ConstructionThe IDI Group CompaniesLafargeSteven L. McClain, President,

National Architectural TrustNATIONAL ASSOCIATION

OF REALTORS®

National Engineers Week Foundation

Emerson G. and Delores G. Reinsch Foundation

Restore Media LLCSkidmore, Owings, & Merrill LLPBob and Deby WulffZimmer Gunsul Frasca

Architects, LLP

$1,000–$2,�99

AkridgeThe American Architectural

Foundation

museum support

suman Sorg, president of Sorg & Associates, and her husband Scott have been generous contributors to

the National Building Museum since 2000. In addition to their philanthropy, Suman served on the panel in last year’s Women in Architecture symposium, sharing her experience with aspiring young architects, and also sat on the advisory board for the Museum’s D.C. Builds lecture series.

“Suman and Scott Sorg are gracious and enthusiastic friends of the Museum. We greatly appreciate their active interest in our programming, espe-cially considering that they manage an extremely busy practice involving high-profile projects around the world,” noted Chase Rynd, Executive Director.

Established in 1986, Sorg & Associates provides architecture, urban design, interior design, planning, and construc-tion phase services in both the private and public sectors. The firm’s recent projects include new U.S. embassies in Bridgetown, Barbados; Katmandu, Nepal; Kabul, Afghanistan; Surabaya,

Indonesia; and Kuwait. The firm’s portfolio also includes residential, educational, and civic buildings in the Washington, D.C. area and around the country.

When asked recently why she supports the Museum, Suman replied, “The National Building Museum is every-thing a museum should be and do; it informs, educates, preserves artifacts, and engages a wide variety of patrons ranging from local area residents to visitors to the District of Columbia who come here from all over the world. As an architect, I am delighted to have such an important venue in our nation’s capital that is focused on the built environment, an important aspect of our lives, whether we are laypeople or industry professionals.”

The Museum could not achieve its success without the annual support of our Corinthian members, the Board of Trustees, and staff are grateful to Suman, Scott, and Sorg & Associates for their ongoing support. •

Suman Sorg, Sorg & Associatesdonor profile

16 blueprints summer 2007

by Tim Carrigan, Donor Relations Coordinator

above: Suman Sorg, President of Sorg & Associates. Photo by Matt Houston.

Page 19: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

American Institute of Architecture Students

American Society of Landscape Architects

Bohlin Cywinski JacksonDavis A. Buckley, FAIACity of HelsinkiC.J. Coakley Co., Inc.Janet and David CurtisGenslerDon A. Hawkins, FAIAHickok Cole ArchitectsHKS ArchitectsHUMANITIES COUNCIL OF

WASHINGTON, D.C.Alexander H. and

Roberta R. JeffriesKimball Hill HomesWhayne S. Quin. EsqBarry Rice ArhcitectsSmithGroupBarbara SpangenbergTorti Gallas and Partners, Inc.Walter P Moore

Katherine Wolf and R. Beverly R. Webb

United Arts Organization of Greater Washington, Inc.

$250-$999

Carolyn AlperCarolyn AltmanThe American Institute

of ArchitectsBaines ConstructionBeeryRio, IncBOE Architects, PLLCSara Ann BoundsCapstone Communications,

L.L.C.The Catholic University

of AmericaChernikoff and CompanyCHJ3 ArchitectureRay Colbert and Jeff SurprenantColePrevostGianne Conard, AIA

Robert CorcoranCox Graae + Spack ArchitectsSteve Dalton, Tishman

Construction Corp.Tiffany A. DelgadoDuany Plater-Zyberk & Co.Edge Construction, Inc.EnviroHomeDesignPhyllis FreedmanCris Fromboluti, AIAMark Giuliani, RAThomas GlassLewis J. Goetz, FAIA, FIIDBucky GreenGWWO, Inc./ArchitectsBruce Hayes and Jo FlemmingJosephine D. HearldHord Coplan Macht, Inc.Howard UniversityMary Ann C. HueyJ. Ford HuffmanAlana and Henry W.

Huffnagle, IVCatherine and W.T. Ingold

Johns Hopkins UniversityAndrew JoskowJoanne M. KellyC.M. Kling & Associates, Inc.Sue A. KohlerPeter T. and Maybelle KouBrian D. and Janine KraftBenjamin B. and Debra G. LacyDavid L. MillerGeorge H. MillerMiller, Miller & CanbyMueser Rutledge Consulting

EngineersPhilip D. Muse, AIAThe New York Community TrustRobert K. OaksCharles Pankow FoundationPIP PrintingPlants Alive! Inc.Andrew S. PottsRasevic Construction Co.William ReganDanielle Roberts InteriorsSGA Architects

Daniel K. Shogren and Jennifer L. Rise

SK&A Structural Engineers, PLLC

Joseph D. StellerPatti SwainKeene TaylorJohn ThomannTrace Inc.United Way of the

National Capital AreaVenturi, Scott, Brown

& AssociatesScott and Katy WeidenfellerAndrew S. WeinsteinDean Westman and

Andrea PutscherAnn L.B. and David WilliamsDoryan L. Winkelman and

Melanie FerraraMerrill Wright

Chair

Michael J. Glosserman

Executive Director

Chase W. Rynd

Secretary

David C. Evans

Treasurer

Robert H. Braunohler

Elected and Voting TrusteesWilliam B. Alsup IIIFrank Anton Thomas N. Armstrong IIIDavid S. BenderDeborah BerkeWilliam M. Brennan Carolyn Schwenker BrodyJoan Baggett Calambokidis Donald A. CapocciaKent W. ColtonDennis J. CotterGilbert E. DeLormeChristopher DorvalJohn P. Gleason, Jr.Mike GoodrichDelon HamptonGary P. HaneyPhilippe HardouinRobert W. Holleyman, IIJoseph F. Horning, Jr.Gerald M. HowardMercy Jiménez Frederick A. KoberA. Eugene Kohn Deryl McKissackHollis S. McLoughlin Melissa A. Moss Robert A. PeckWhayne S. Quin Stephen M. RossDeborah Ratner SalzbergStephen E. Sandherr Robert A.M. SternNorbert W. Young, Jr.

Founding Trustees

Cynthia R. FieldHerbert M. FranklinEdward T. HallNancy StevensonBeverly Willis

Honorary Trustees

Harold L. AdamsHoward M. BenderM. Arthur Gensler Jr.Thomas J. KlutznickStuart A. McFarlandRobert McLean IIIElizabeth B. MoynihanMarilyn PerryJames W. ToddMallory WalkerLeonard A. Zax

Ex Officio Trustees

Alphonso Jackson, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development

Dirk Kempthorne, U.S. Department of the Interior

Barbara Boxer, Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

James Oberstar, House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

Lurita Doan, General Services Administration

David L. Winstead, General Services Administration, Public Buildings Service

Stephen T. Ayers, Architect of the Capitol

Allen Weinstein, National Archives and Records Administration

James H. Billington, The Library of Congress

Cristián Samper, Smithsonian Institution

Richard Moe, National Trust for Historic Preservation

Christine McEntee, American Institute of Architects

Board of Trustees

this issue’s mystery...Previous Mystery Building Pretty Darned Mysterious

mystery building

summer 2007 blueprints 17

Clock WatchThis time, your challenge is to identify the building from which this photo was taken (not the building visible in the background).

Once again, responses will be accepted by e-mail or regular mail. To be eligible for a prize (reserved for the first five correct respondents only), send an e-mail to [email protected]. You may also respond by regular mail, though you will not be eligible for the prize. The mailing address is:

Mystery Building, National Building Museum, 401 F Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001

The spring issue’s Mystery Building challenge proved to be a toughie. Only one respondent correctly identified the pictured structure as the Kandahar International Airport terminal in Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Commissioned by the U.S. Agency for Internation-al Development (USAID), and designed by Pacific Architects and Engineers, Inc., the airport was dedicated in December 1962. With its audacious, repeating parabolic roofline and robust, buttress-like concrete arches at ground level, the terminal design is elegantly exuberant, yielding what would seem to have been a fashionable and quite memorable structure in its day.

Alas, the building was doomed to obscurity, thanks to its remote location and the fact that its raison d’etre—to provide a refueling stop for air routes through central Asia—disappeared with the advent of long-range passenger jets.

The Kandahar International Airport was correctly identified by Nathaniel Martin, of Washington, D.C.

?

Page 20: On Paper - National Building Museum · 2017-03-20 · On Paper, It All Makes Sense The National Building Museum’s latest exhibition, David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecture,

NatioNal BuildiNg MuseuM401 F street NW Washington, dC 20001202.272.2448 / www.nbm.orgRed line Metro, Judiciary square

Nonprofit OrganizationU.S. Postage PaidWashington, D.C.Permit No. 488

Reinventing the Globe: A Shakespearean Theater for the 21st Century

Extended until October 8, 2007

The exhibition Reinventing the Globe: A Shakespearean Theater for the 21st Century was launched with an opening reception on January 11, 2007. The event, like the exhibi-tion itself, was characterized by a melding of elements from Shakespeare’s era and the present day. Held in the Pension Commis-sioner’s Suite, the reception featured “mod-ern Elizabethan” fare, fanciful bouquets of wildflowers, and the contemporary folk music of the duo Flutar. More than 150 friends of the Museum attended, including several of the architects whose hypothetical 21st- century Shakespearean theaters were featured in the exhibition.

Described as “refreshing and insightful” by The New York Times, the exhibition has been extended until October 8, 2007.

Exhibition images clockwise from top left:

David Macaulay: The Art of Drawing Architecturethrough January 21, 2008

Reinventing the Globe: A Shakespearean Theater for the 21st Century extended through October 8, 2007

Cityscapes Revealed: Highlights from the CollectionLong-term

Washington: Symbol and CityLong-term

front cover: Floating Skyscraper, Underground, 1976. © David Macaulay; photo by Christopher Benson.

above: Curator Martin Moeller leads a tour of the Reinventing the Globe exhibition during the opening reception. Photo Museum Staff.

right (clockwise): © David Macaulay, photo by Christopher Benson; by permission of the Birmingham Shakespeare Library; collection of the National Building Museum; photo by Liz Roll.