Building as an Onion
 |
| Portman: Atlanta Marriott Marquis (1985) |
 |
| Tehrani (NADAAA): Melbourne School of Design (2014) |
As an architect-developer, John Portman designed spectacular atria in hotels all over the world. His spaces embody the ‘commercial sublime’ direction of the capitalist-centric late 20th century. The grandiose hotel atrium was loaded with consequences, first and foremost: it was responsible for siphoning public space from the city. A city’s public space became air conditioned cocoons and elitist; Rem Koolhaas referred to the spaces as “containers of artificiality.”
Years later the architectural profession is evaluating Portman’s work with a different lens. We are learning to praise the audacity and dynamism of Portman’s spaces, regardless of his irresponsible, over-controlling, neo-futuristic spaces.
So, I pose the question of how can we learn from Portman today? I think Nader Tehrani provided a valuable answer last fall when he lectured here at Clemson. He said something along the lines of:
“Be selective in celebrating a part of the building that can contribute to the intellectual discourse of architecture. A building should be like an onion, its complex space should radiate into normalcy.”
In other words, Tehrani is urging architects to not lose the spectacular potential of architecture, but to be responsible in the venture. If the most important space is going to swallow up design effort and budget, it’s okay for the rest of the building to be functional and ordinary. I think we can benefit from studying Portman’s ostentatious spaces and should learn to distill his dynamism into a more responsible language of design that can coincide with the industry’s push for carbon-zero footprints.
John Portman has been an inspiration to many great architects today, thankfully much of the inspiration seeps out of the atrium spaces of commercial chain hotels. I tend to wonder how Portman's philosophies will translate into the new era of sustainability where we are just scratching the surface of nature within architecture and not surrounding it. Considering DSR and their global work, the park they constructed in Germany creates small environment under a huge canopy that is reminiscent of a tall atrium space. Although the intended use of the spaces and what the users use it for are complete polar opposites it still creates a great conversation for designers in the future.
ReplyDeleteI don't recall the architecture-to-union analogy, but I think its appropriate, especially from John Portman. I grew up outside of Atlanta and whenever I think back to when I'd go into the city as a kid, I can't help but remember with huge indoor atriums (CNN center in particular). I never saw them as architectural wonders or anything, abut after talking about John Portman in class I want to revisit those spaces with a new appreciation for its spatial experience. But as cool as they are inside, the building's exterior discourages vibrant street life.
ReplyDeleteI certainly agree the we can learn from Portman's grandiose hotel atrium as an architectural move and then subsequent consequence. I think regarding the push for carbon neutral, sustainable buildings, the conversation has changed. Instead of creating a sustainable building through additive processes such as adding solar panels and a windmill, contemporary architecture is moving toward projects that are inherently sustainable. For instance, instead of focusing on solely a dynamic atrium, rather the entire building works together as a system to achieve its goal.
ReplyDelete