Drawing on architecture: the socioaesthetics of architectural drawings, 1970-1990

422 Pages·2015·27.76 MB·English

DRAWING ON ARCHITECTURE: !SuL
Cl)C
THE SOCIOAESTHETICS OF ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS, 1970-1990
by C,*%J
gco
-
I L1
JORDAN Sconr KAUFFMAN
M.A. Architectural Association School of Architecture, London, 2004
B.A. Architectural Studies, Hobart and William Smith Colleges, 2002
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN HISTORY AND THEORY OF
ARCHITECTURE
AT THE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
FEBRUARY 2015
2014 Jordan Kauffman. All rights reserved.
The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce
and to distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this
thesis document in whole or in part in any medium now
known or hereafter created.
Signature redacted
Signature of Author:
Department of Architecture
g7 September 12, 2014
Signature redacted
Certified by:
Mark Jarzombek
Professor of the History and Theory of Architecture
Signature redacted Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by_
Terry Knight
(I
Professor of Design and Computation
Chairman, Committee for Graduate Students
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
2
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
Dissertation Committee:
Mark Jarzombek, PhD
Professor of History and Theory of Architecture
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Chair
David Friedman, PhD
Associate Professor of the History of Architecture, Emeritus
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
K. Michael Hays, PhD
Professor of Architectural Theory
Harvard University
3
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
4
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
Drawing on Architecture:
The Socioaesthetics of Architectural Drawings, 1970-1990
by
Jordan Scott Kauffman
Submitted to the Department of Architecture on September 12, 2014 in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History and Theory of
Architecture at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology
ABSTRACT
This dissertation examines a period in the late twentieth century when architectural
drawings provoked a profound re-evaluation of architecture. It does so through novel
research of the individuals, galleries, institutions, and events-and the networks that
originated therefrom-that drove this reappraisal by shifting the perception of
architectural drawings.
During the 1970s and 1980s, for the first time, architectural drawings became
more than an instrument for building. Prior to this period, except for scattered instances,
buildings were considered to be the goal of architectural practice; architectural drawings
were viewed simply as a means to an end. However, through a confluence of factors
architectural drawings emerged from this marginal role. Drawings attained autonomy
from the architectural process and were ultimately perceived as aesthetic artifacts in and
of themselves.
No attention has been given to this shift, and recovering this period's forgotten
history reveals a rich and complex tapestry. Research unearths interrelated individuals,
galleries, institutions, and events outside of practice that impacted the perception of
architectural drawings during this period. This reveals the uniqueness of this period, for
at no other time was debate generated in the same way, since at no other time did the
necessary structures exist to support this change. During this period, architectural
drawings became the driving force of architectural debate, not for what architects put in
them, but for what others asked them to be and saw in them.
Through exhibitions that emphasized drawings in and of themselves, through
collectors and galleries, through the development of a market for architectural drawings,
and through the interrelation of these, all of which this work reconstructs for the first
time, the role and perception of drawings fell between and among aesthetic, artistic,
architectural, commercial, conceptual, cultural, and historical understandings. It was this
shifting that drove questioning during this period of nearly all facets of architecture.
Thesis Supervisor: Mark Jarzombek
Title: Professor of History and Theory of Architecture
5
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First and foremost, I would like to express my heartfelt thanks to my dissertation committee.
My advisor, Mark Jarzombek, deserves utmost thanks for his steadfast support and
unwavering encouragement. David Friedman's persistent enthusiasm for this project and his
constant questioning of it were indispensable to this work. Michael Hays' comments
sharpened the focus of this work more than once. Discussions and conversations with these
three helped push this project further than I imagined it could go.
I would also like to thank other faculty in the HTC program who supported this work in
various ways. At times, Caroline Jones, Stanford Anderson, Kristel Smentek, and Nasser
Rabbat discussed this work with me and offered their thoughts. Each helped to push this
work forward.
There were a number of people who were willing to share their experiences with me, and for
that I am extremely grateful. These individuals and their experiences form the backbone of
this work and, without the breadth and richness they provided to this work, it would not have
been complete. I am indebted to (in alphabetical order) Emilio Ambasz, Pierre Apraxine,
Ricky Burdett, Gail Davidson, Elain Evans Dee, Julia Elton, Richard Feigen, Kristin Feireiss,
Sven Gahlin, Angela Giral, John Harris, Charles Hind, Niall Hobhouse, Barbara Jakobson,
Antonia Jannone, Kirsten Kiser, Phyllis Lambert, Jill Lever, Timothy Lingard, Andrew
MacNair, James Miller, Henry A. Millon, George Negroponte, Judith York Newman, Janet
Parks, Barbara Pine, Vicki Porter, Max Protetch, Margaret Richardson, Luce van Rooy,
Bernice Rose, Femke Speelberg, Wilfried Wang, Jan van der Wateren, and Priscilla
Wrightson.
Not enough can be said about the generosity and friendship of John and Eileen Harris. Their
openness and kindness was inspiring. John was instrumental in making many of the
connections that allowed me to complete this project.
Correspondences with Brett Littman and Dita Amory were also invaluable in learning more
about the history of The Drawing Center. Conversations with Joao Ribas at the early stages
of this project led to many productive avenues of exploration. A late conversation with Barry
Bergdoll helped frame some information about the Museum of Modern Art.
I would like to thank the staff at the archives of the Museum of Modern Art, the Archives of
American Art, the University of Pennsylvania Archives, the Institute of Contemporary Art,
the London Archives, the Architectural Association Archives, the Royal Institute of British
Architects Archives, the Royal Academy Archives, Christie's archives, and Sotheby's
archives. Fiona Orsini at the RIBA, Edward Bottoms at the Architectural Association, and
Gregory Herringshaw at the Cooper-Hewitt archives deserve special mention for their
generosity.
The research required for this work would not have been possible if not for grants from MIT,
the Canadian Centre for Architecture, the Institute of Historical Research, School of
Advanced Study, University of London, and the Drawing Institute at the Morgan Library and
Museum. Each created a wonderful environment in which to conduct research. At the CCA,
special thanks go to Alexis Sornin, Janet Abrams, Colin MacWhirter, Renata Guttman, and
6
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
Genevieve Dalp6. My colleagues at the CCA, Aliki Economides, Andr6 Tavares, Diogo
Seixas Lopes, Nathalie Chabiland, Elizabeth Essaian, Julia Tischer, and Enrique Ramirez
were extraordinarily supportive. At the Institute of Historical Research, Oleg Benesch and
Justin Biel were very helpful in forming early articulations of this project. Linda Wolk-Simon
at the Drawing institute was integral to my success in interviewing Max Protetch. Also at the
Drawing Institute, Isabelle Dervaux was extremely helpful in framing thinking about
drawings. My colleagues there, John Hawley and Veronica White, also provided fruitful
discussions.
In London, I was fortunate to have Penelope Haralambidou as an academic advisor.
Conversations with her at the British Library were influential in shaping the ways I thought
about architecture's relationship to the market.
My colleagues in the HTC program have been central to my time at MIT. Karin Oen,
Christian Hedrick, Razan Francis, Ben Matteson, and John L6pez were a constant source of
support and inspiration. Conversations with other colleagues, such as Nicola Pezolet, Azra
Aksamija, Michael Osman, Lucia Allais, Mechtild Wildrich, Alla Vronskaya, Igor
Demchenko, Rebecca Uchill, and Michael Kubo helped shape my experience at MIT. Rixt
Woudstra deserves special thanks. Without her, I would not have been able to interview
Kristin Feireiss. Nisa Ari cannot be thanked enough for letting me use her computer when the
inevitable finally happened.
Anne Deveau and Kate Brearley deserve my deepest thanks for their support throughout my
tenure at MIT.
Brian Whalen and Geoff Palmer supported me throughout this process. They are more than
my friends; they are family. Thanks also to Yasmine Chien, Morgan Ryan-Wynhoff, Pat
Martin, Larissa Graeber, Sean and Liz Arrasmith, Lydia Pecker, Betsey McGee, Mark
Pecker, Fakhry Akkad, Jose Carrizosa and Carolina Lega, Andrew and Yukie Wit, Alix
Lawrence, Frances Mikuriya, Steve Preston, Susanne Bauer, and Amy Weidner-LaSala and
Joe LaSala.
I do not know how to say thank you enough to my mother, Robin Davis, and my stepfather,
Jay Hooper, for their unfailing support and encouragement. They have edited most of this
work, and any eloquence in its prose belongs to them. My father, Michael Kauffman, my
stepmother Sharon Kauffman, and my grandmother Rhoda Kauffman supported me in more
ways than can be expressed. Thank you.
Special gratitude is given to my grandparents, Samuel and Selma Elkin, who instilled in me
the importance of education. My deepest pride arises from having had my grandmother as
part of my life. Her strength, kindness, and understanding provided inspiration to me
throughout this project and continue to influence me throughout my life. My deepest regret is
that she was not able to see the completion of this project. This work is dedicated to her.
Finally, the CCA deserves another special thank you for introducing me to my wife. Marie-
though it is great to finish this dissertation, the best thing that happened during the entire
experience was meeting you. Thank you for everything.
7
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
8
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TIM ELINE OF EVENTS ............................................................. 13
DIAGRAM S OF NETWORK ......................................................... 16
INTRODUCTION .................................................................. 19
CHAPTER ONE:
FROM PROCESS TO OBJECT:
DRAW INGS AS DRAWINGS ......................................................... 29
CHAPTER Two:
FOUNDATIONS FOR ART:
THE AUTONOMY OF ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS .................................... 88
CHAPTER THREE:
THE CHANGING NATURE OF ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS:
THE LEO CASTELLI GALLERY SHOWS ............................................. 166
CHAPTER FOUR:
NORMALIZED PRACTICE:
ARCHITECTURE IN THE GALLERIES ................................................. 277
CONCLUSIONS ................................................................... 342
A DDENDUM ..................................................................... 358
INTERVIEW S ..................................................................... 385
CORRESPONDENCE / DISCUSSIONS ................................................ 389
A R C H IV E S ....................................................................... 390
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................. 391
9
Jordan Kauffman, MIT
10