Reorganizing and clearing archives in a basement closet is not what we all look forward to. But finding a vintage Progressive Architecture (PA), published in October 1989, was an unexpected delight, stimulating nostalgic juices in this senior Midwestern architect.
The now 25-year-old tomb was labeled a Special Issue with an unlikely vertical photograph of blue sky, containing an orthogonal grid of steel tubing and an airplane on the identical axis.
The image recalled the abstract quality of a cage with nothing to judge the scale of the assembly or to define it as human space, much less architecture. A commercial jet is caught on its landing path marked on the ground in a grand vision, rotated 12.5 degrees.
This grid, an extension of the city of Columbus street system, contrasts with the University’s own organizing geometry. A little confusing? And what value does this abstract pseudo-intellectual move bring to the clarity of the concept or quality of the architecture?
Yet the feature cover intrigued me and I wanted to like this challenging take on architecture, albeit a quarter-century old. Maybe I missed something 25 years ago? In the extreme lower right-hand corner, in the lightest typeface legible, appeared the iconic name Eisenman. Yes, that is the perverse nature of Peter Eisenman’s work at Wexner Center for the Visual Arts at the Ohio State University in Columbus.
Like a coming-out or graduation, PA assembled essentially a single issue to honor the architect who was known to think, to teach and to write. The provocateur had finally made it by completing a major commission. The project was shot to death, making it larger than life. Every architect covets being featured on the cover and having the full magazine — you can’t get better than that.
My contemporaries and I were not convinced that the work was that good or that it would stand the test of time. The exposed steel grid marking the main circulation felt like a one-liner and would become an ugly rusty frame a few years down the line.
The star-studded line-up of critics filled the pages with gushing praise and detailed analysis as though there was not enough ink to honor this superstar of architecture. Vincent Scully delivered a balanced review. R.E. Somol talked said, “The mutational design logic of Wexner makes it unproductive to fixate on any particular figure in the Eisenman/Trout assemblage.” Mark Taylor describes how the steel grid or ‘scaffolding’ confronts the adjacent buildings, creating an uneasy unity.
In the end, it is maddening to witness how the architect has been less than efficient, how he managed or not managed the state school budget. Although I like the description of the masonry towers recalling the old Armory building that burned years ago, I cannot justify the expense. Maybe it would be more palatable if these were real fragments of the building. So I remain interested yet weary of the overtly intellectual take on this “important building” 25 years later.
Ironically, this issue of PA featured a review of EIFS (Exterior Insulation and Finish System or “Dryvit”) with full-scale sections and colorful, stucco-looking buildings in warm weather locations. The nine-page review no doubt pointed out all the advantages and why Dryvit is the next wonder material, i.e. lightweight, water resistant, insulated, fast and easy to erect. And did I say cheap? It has become the go-to siding when over budget. We are all susceptible to employing this kind of product when budgets are thin, and we have spent too much on other parts of the building — like Armory fragments or steel scaffolding. Dryvit has not proven its worth over the last quarter-century.
Another article that caught my eye was the “Megamall in Minnesota.” The indoor amusement park and shopping mall was announced as the next rethinking of the shopping center, offering a storybook atmosphere of babbling brooks and balmy evergreens under a skylighted roof. The Minnesota Megamall planned for 800 specialty shops, four major department stores, an ice rink, a miniature golf course, an 18-screen movie theater, 100 restaurants and nightclubs, and a 7-acre amusement park.
What an obnoxious and overwhelming the concept. The Megamall has not advanced the quality of architecture. Perhaps the featured architect could have inspired some delight and meaning in this monstrous building type. Twenty-five years of maturing has kept Eisenman interesting, yet sadly the work remains void of human scale, richness of detail and interest in beauty.
Garret Eakin is an architect, author and adjunct professor at the School of the Art Institute.