Logo

The American Richard Buckminster Fuller has been variously labeled architect, engineer, author, designer-inventor, educator, poet, cartographer, ecologist, philosopher, teacher, and mathematician throughout his career. Although not trained professionally as an architect, Fuller has been accepted within the architectural profession, receiving numerous awards and honorary degrees. He thought of himself as a comprehensive human in the universe, implementing research for the good of humanity. Born in Milton, Massachusetts, on 12 July 1895, he was the son of Richard Buckminster Fuller, Sr., and Caroline Wolcott (Andrews) Fuller. His father, who worked as a leather and tea merchant with offices in Boston, died when Fuller was 15 years of age. Fuller’s first design revelation came to him when, in kindergarten in 1899, he built his first flat-space frame, an octet truss constructed of dried peas and toothpicks. As a boy, vacationing at his family’s summerhouse on Bear Island, Maine, he became an adequate seaman and developed an appreciation of nature’s provision of principles of efficient design. He followed the philosophy of Pythagoras and Newton, that the universe comprises signs, or patterns of energy relationships, that have an order to them. Fuller used the term “valving” for the transformation of these patterns into usable forms. According to Fuller, these patterns in nature were comprehensive and universal. “Synergy” was the name that Fuller gave to the integrated behavior patterns discovered in nature.

Fuller attended the Milton Academy (1904–06) and Harvard University (1913–15) and was expelled twice while at Harvard. He worked in a few industries and then enlisted for two years of service in the U.S. Navy (1917–19). This experience in industry and with the Navy helped him gain knowledge of technical engineering processes, materials, and methods of manufacturing, which he would apply this knowledge to future inventions. When one of his two daughters, Alexandra, died of influenza at age four (1922), Fuller became obsessed with her death. Five years later, on the brink of suicide, he decided instead to devote the rest of his life to helping humanity by converting ideas and technology designed for weaponry into ideas for “livingry.” At the age of 32, he started an experiment, Guinea Pig B (the “B” stood for “Bucky,” his nickname), to discover how an individual with a moral commitment and limited financial means could apply his knowledge to improve humanity’s living conditions by technological determinism. This experiment continued until his death at age 88. Thus, his technological and economical resources belonged to society. He believed in the same moralistic drive to develop better housing for the masses through mass production that many of the European modernists did, but Fuller’s forms and design principles were quite different.

Among the proliferation of books that Fuller published during his life, the first, (1928), propagated his lifetime philosophy. The term “4D” meant “fourth-dimensional” thinking, adding time to the dimensions of space to ensure gains for humanity instead of personal gains only. The first patent of the 4D designs was a mass-production house, first known as 4D and later as the Dymaxion House (1927 model; 1928 patent). A hexagonal structure supported on a mast, the house was to be air deliverable and based on his strategy of “design science,” which sought to obtain maximum human advantage from minimum use of energy and materials. Using the analogy of airplane technology, he chose materials such as steel- alloy cables and the Duralumin mast. After developing the Dymaxion House, Fuller was to engage in developing prototypes of the Dymaxion Vehicles (1937) and the Dymaxion Bathroom (1940). Later he developed the Dymaxion Deployment Unit (1944), a lightweight corrugated-steel shelter made from modified grain bins. Thousands of these units were bought by the U.S. Army Air Corps for use as flight crew quarters. The Dymaxion Deployment Unit became the basis for Fuller’s Wichita House (1946). These houses were built to be used as full-size family dwellings, weighing four tons each, and were to be assembled on aircraft production lines built during the war. Another of Fuller’s Dymaxion inventions was the Dymaxion Airocean World Map (1946). This map transferred the spherical data of a globe onto a two dimensional surface.

Construction plan of the geodesic dome

Fuller, however, is best known for inventing the geodesic dome (1954), a triangulated space-enclosing technology. According to Fuller, this type of structure encloses the maximum internal volume with the least surface area. Designs such as the domes were based on synergy and its connection with mathematics, using such forms as the tetrahedron, octahedron, and icosahedron. Fuller brought into the dome structure ideas concerning the dome’s tensile ability by introducing a new structural geometry and advancing mechanics into the dome form. He tried to emulate in this structure the atom’s form, including the compound curvature trussing of its dynamic structure. Although this domical design was not new in its elementary form, it was new in its manner of employing these principles in a human-made structure. Numerous domes have appeared all over the world for domestic as well as large-scale industrial use, including the Union Tank Car Company (1958), Baton Rouge, Louisiana; the Climatron Botanical Garden (1961), St. Louis, Missouri; the U.S. Pavilion (1967) at Expo ‘67, the World’s Fair,  Montreal, Canada; and the Spruce Goose Hangar (1982), Long Beach, California.

As noted by architectural historian Kenneth Frampton in his book, (1980), Fuller has influenced future generations of architects, most notably the Japanese group the Metabolists, the British group Archigram, Moshe Safdie, Alfred Neuman, Cedric Price, and Norman Foster. A few semiotician scholars liken him to Joyce, but whereas Joyce sought to obscure language intentionally, Fuller sought to emphasize a precise meaning. Often he would invent words for this purpose, as displayed in his numerous writings and lectures. Later in life, he entered into partnership with Shoji Sadao in New York and Sadao and Zung Architects in Cleveland, Ohio (1979–83). Fuller died on 1 July 1983 in Los Angeles, California, from a massive heart attack; his wife died three days later.

Architect, Austria and United States

The Austrian-born architect Raimund Abraham has played an influential role in architectural discourse and education over the last four decades. His challenging oeuvre of unbuilt work, consisting almost entirely of seductive architectural renderings, delineates a complex architectural position revolving around subversion, metaphor, and a fascination with archetypal forms. His recently completed high-rise in Manhattan for the Austrian Cultural Institute is the most recognizable of a portfolio of built work that has brought together many of the philosophical themes that have preoccupied this enigmatic architect over a prolonged period.

Raimund Abraham was born in Lienz, Austria, in 1933 and was educated at the Technical University in Graz, graduating in 1958. In the early sixties Abraham followed in the footsteps of avant-garde groups such as Archigram, the Metabolists, and fellow Austrians Coop Himmelb(l)au in offering proposals for technology-driven Utopias providing modular living environments capable of embodying the future requirements of civilization. In these early projects, Abraham imagined cellular capsules that would be inserted into vast organic communities comprising monolithic megastructures and colossal bridges. These early idealistic visions demonstrated Abraham’s mastery of drawing and collage that would suffuse his later work.

In 1964 Abraham moved to the United States to further a career in architectural education, taking up a position as assistant professor at the Rhode Island School of Design. Since 1971 Abraham has been involved in education at a range of major international universities, holding professorships at the Cooper Union, the Pratt Institute, and the graduate schools of Yale and Harvard. In 30 years of academic life, he has also held visiting professorships at the University of California, Los Angeles; the Architectural Association; and various other North American and European universities.

Abraham’s attitude to education, and his architectural practice, is subversive, and his position is often critical of the architectural establishment and its compliance with the principles of modern architecture. Abraham sees in modern architectural discourse a rupture with history that has prevented architects from understanding completely the elemental process of architecture. For Abraham, the 20th-century preoccupation with fashion and style has prevented a thorough understanding of the principles of building and the clarity of thought that they demand. Abraham urges a return to the a priori principles of construction concerned with the nature of materials, site, and program. Abraham posits architectural drawing as an equivalent means of expression, where the paper becomes a site for the poetry of architecture. The intellectual act of building surpasses the ultimate physical product. For Abraham, built architecture is often endemic to the forces of compromise.

Throughout the 1970s, Abraham galvanized his theoretical position by undertaking an extensive series of unbuilt houses concerned primarily with Heidegger’s notion of dwelling. Abraham maintains that “collision” is the “ontological basis of architecture,” offering as an example the horizon as the most basic junction between the earth and the sky. Abraham defines the process of architecture as either digging into the earth, or reach-ing for the sky—all building is intrinsically related to these primordial elements. These elements become central to many of Abraham’s designs of the period, such as House for the Sun and House with Two Horizons. The abstract house designs sought to strip architecture down to its most essential state, arranging architectonic elements within a formal language of rectilinear forms often embedded within the topology of a generic natural site. Presented largely in rendered axonometric projection, the designs crystallized complex theoretical principles into simple spatial meditations, as is evidenced by titles such as House without Rooms, House with Three Walls, and House for Euclid.

In the 1980s Abraham’s attention turned toward monuments, concentrating on historic European centers such as Venice, Berlin, and Paris. Abraham’s unbuilt projects from this period interweave themes of juxtaposition and subversion to arrive at a new monumentality capable of questioning the historical significance of architectural form. The instability inherent in Abraham’s immersion within the historical landscape is most evident in his projects for the city of Venice, the Les Halles Redevelopment in Paris, and the competition entry for the New Acropolis Museum in Athens (for which he was short-listed).

One of the most poignant projects from this period is the Monument to a Fallen Building, completed in 1980. The project commemorates the collapse of the Berlin Congress Hall in the same year, proposing a prism-like vault in which traces of the former structure are symbolically revealed. Similar themes are inherent in his 1981 project for a Monument to the Absence of the Painting Guernica, which mourns the loss of Picasso’s masterpiece from its provincial base to another larger museum in Spain. Abraham also addresses the issue of ownership in his project of 1982 for a monumental church that would straddle the Berlin Wall, bringing a transcendental spirituality to the contested space of the wall. All of Abraham’s projects from this period deeply question the foundations of architecture and languish after a lost or forgotten meaning in architectural discourse.

As well as his portfolio of unbuilt work, Abraham has also contributed important buildings both in America and in his homeland of Austria. These include individual houses, low-cost housing, and several commercial buildings. The completed buildings demonstrate a fascination similar to his unbuilt work, using archetypal forms, layering, and concision to question conventional architectural form.

In 1988 Abraham was runner-up to Daniel Libeskind in the competition for the extension to the Jewish Museum in Berlin. Two years later, he successfully won the commission to build the New Austrian Cultural Institute in Manhattan (other nominees included Hans Hollein and Coop Himmelb(l)au). The recently completed 20-story tower rises in the shape of a dramatic wedge from a narrow and heavily constrained site obscured almost entirely by neighboring buildings. The front facade is layered with a sloping curtain of cascading planes of glass punctuated by solid elements. Celebrating the link between earth and sky, the powerful form of the tower and the heavy plinth of the podium reinforces Abraham’s intention to return architecture to its most basic and primeval elements.

Abraham’s challenging and often confronting work occupies an important place within architectural discourse, fostering principles of resistance and legislating against mediocrity. His attempts to return architecture to its philosophical origins in both built and unbuilt projects are intrinsic of a position that attempts to blend the disparate forces of philosophy, poetry, and architecture.

Selected Works

New Austrian Cultural Institute in Manhattan, New York City, United States, 2002

raketenstation hombroich, neuss, germany

Architect, Finland

Hugo Alvar Henrik Aalto, whose architecture is often described as organic and close to nature, is regarded as one of the most significant architects of the 20th century. The majority of historians and critics emphasize three aspects in Aalto’s architecture that set it apart from any other architect’s work and explain his importance: his concern for the human qualities of the environment, his love of nature, and his Finnish heritage.

It seems that Aalto’s architecture is a socially refined reflection of Le Corbusier’s work, a masterly connection of avant-garde culture with traditional values. Despite being well integrated into the art world, apparently Aalto did not hesitate to include in his designs unfashionable issues that were dismissed by other architects of his time: individuality in mass housing, social equality in theaters, and his foible for details, such as extreme, carefully planned light systems in public buildings. From this angle, Aalto turns out to be a pure dissident of the avant-garde, emphasizing the complexity of architecture by leaving aesthetic values behind him.

Even before adopting the language of modernist architecture, the young Aalto was determined to be as avant-garde as possible, which in Scandinavia in the early 1920s meant a sophisticated and mannerist neoclassicism. His early work shows the influence of anonymous irregular Italian architecture and neoclassical formality as developed by 19th-century architects such as Carl Ludwig Engel, and these strategies were to remain important throughout his career. His most interesting buildings from this time are the Jyväskylä Workers’ Club (1925), the church (1929) in Muurame, and the Seinäjoki Civil Guard Building (1926) and the Defense Corps Building (1929) in Jyväskylä. Aalto organized the facade of the Workers’ Club like the Palazzo Ducale in Venice by setting a heavy, closed volume on airy Doric columns on the ground floor. The almost symmetrical facade is challenged by a Palladian-style window that is shifted to one side, marking the location of a theater on the first floor. The church in Muurame, which also recalls an Italian motif, namely, Alberti’s Sant Andrea at Mantua, is on the outside very much into the neoclassical tradition, whereas its interior emphasis on light anticipates later church designs, such as the churches in Imatra and Wolfsburg.

In 1924 Aalto traveled to Vienna and Italy with his wife and partner Aino Marsio, where he made several sketches that had a great effect on their later work. However, Aalto did not ignore the development in continental Europe, either, and his conversion to international functionalism can be traced back to the autumn of 1927, when he and Erik Bryggman jointly designed a modernist proposal for the Kauppiaitten Osakeyhtiö office building competition. Le Corbusier’s reputation among Scandinavian architects had been widely disseminated by a 1926 article in the Swedish magazine Byggmästaren by Uno Åhren, and Aalto’s first functionalist buildings, the Standardized Apartment Building in Turku (1928) and, more important, the Turun Sanomat office building (1929), demonstrated all of Le Corbusier’s five points.

The beginning of international recognition was marked in 1929, when Aalto was invited to join the newly founded CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne) and he attended the second congress of CIAM in Frankfurt on the theme of “Housing for the Existenzminimum.” Other masterpieces of functionalism were created by Aalto in the following years, including the Paimio Tuberculosis Sanatorium (1933) and the Viipuri Library (1935). During this time, Aalto started designing bent-plywood furniture, which he later developed into standard types. From 1942 Aino Aalto directed the Artek Company, which had been set up in 1935 for the manufacture of this furniture. These experiments also affected the architectural designs: in the mid-1930s, Aalto introduced the famous curved, suspended wooden ceiling as an acoustical device for the lecture room of the Viipuri Library. Although the functioning of this element is very questionable, curved walls and ceilings became typical of his later work.

In the 1930s, surprisingly enough, Aalto, who had until this point been known as the most modern of Finnish architects, began returning to the vernacular tradition. With the Finnish Pavilions to the World Exhibitions in Paris (1937) and New York (1939), he infused functionalism with his own organic alternative and radically parted ways with mainstream International Style. The critics appreciated this move, for they saw Aalto’s primitivism in connection with his origin in the exotic and unspoiled Finland.

Most important for Aalto’s architectural reputation was Sigfried Giedion’s analysis in the second edition of Space, Time and Architecture (1949). Giedion’s interpretation of Aalto’s work as Finnish, organic, and irrational helped Aalto to achieve worldwide fame after World War II. The integration of building and nature emerged as a central theme in Aalto’s work; this is exemplified in his designs for the Sunila pulp mill (1937) and the Sunila housing for employees (1939). In the engineering staff housing, the first fan-plan motif appears, which became a crucial element in his designs. Characteristic of this period is his interest in natural materials, such as wood, brick, and grass roofs, as he demonstrated in one of his masterpieces, the Villa Mairea (1939) in Noormarkku. The villa is often praised for its harmonious relationship with nature and reference to old Finnish farmsteads. However, Finnish critics did not originally recognize Aalto’s buildings as particularly Finnish but, rather, as Le Corbusiersian with Japanese touches. Gustaf Strengell noted that the interiors of the Viipuri Library exhibited strikingly Japanese characteristics in their use of light wood in its natural state. The Villa Mairea was originally a collage of Le Corbusian modernism with Japanese tearooms, African columns, Cubist paintings, and continental Heimatstil until it slowly became a paradigm of “Finnish” or “natural” architecture in the modern architectural discourse.

After the war Aalto was again commissioned by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to build a student dormitory, where brick was a typical material for the other campus facades. The Baker Dormitory (1949) was Aalto’s first experiment with brick, and throughout the 1950s his oeuvre was dominated by the use of red brick. Later, he used the brick as a metaphor for standardization, claiming that the cell was the module of  nature, and the brick would occupy an analogous position in architecture. His most important works of this period include the Expressionist House of Culture (1958) and the National Pensions Institute office building (1957), both in Helsinki. The House of Culture consists of a curvilinear theater and a rectangular office block, a typical Aalto arrangement of organic versus orthogonal shapes, where the public space is articulated in a free form and more private functions are placed in rectangular shapes. As in most of his designs, all elements including the apparently free form follow a hidden geometric grid, with the center being a fountain in the courtyard, where a giant hand presents a tiny model of the building. Inside the theater, he experimented again with the acoustic ceiling but also drew on references to the facade of Le Corbusier’s Villa Savoye. The Säynätsalo Town Hall (1952), another brick building, is a small version of the piazza theme that Aalto elaborated further in the town center of Seinäjoki (1956–69). After the death of Aino in 1949, Aalto married the architect Elissa Mäkiniemi, for whom he built the Muuratsalo Summer House (1953), or experimental house with an inner courtyard. The exterior walls are painted white, whereas the inner walls show brick patterns of various De Stijl compositions.

 Viipuri Library Lecture Hall, Vyborg,
Russia, designed by Alvar Aalto
(1927)

Although Aalto’s brick buildings from the late 1940s and 1950s won international critical acclaim, for his commissions in Germany—the Hansaviertel House (1957) in Berlin, the Neue Vahr Apartment building (1962), and the parish centers in Detmerode (1968) and Wolfsburg (1962)—he chose international white modernism while at the same time continuing to use brick in the Otaniemi (1974) and Jyväskylä (1971) universities. This choice may seem surprising, given that brick had a strong regional connotation in Hanseatic cities, whereas in Finland the dominant building material was wood. Hence, Aalto’s use of brick in Finland cannot be understood as primitive or regional, and he himself connected brick rather with Central Europe, whereas Finnish architects of around 1900 tended to view it as Russian. Aalto did not want to simply reproduce tradition, and so he worked in both Finland and Germany explicitly against tradition and concentrated more on the symbolic selfidentity of the community than on local traditions or building techniques.

The German project Neue Vahr, a slender skyscraper in a suburb of Bremen and the most daring use of the fan plan, is odd in another way. Although in 1934 he had proposed high-rise housing for Munkkiniemi, Helsinki, Aalto was generally known as an outspoken critic of tall buildings. He argued that high-rise apartments were, both socially and architecturally, a considerably more dangerous form of building than single-family houses or low-rise apartments, and therefore they needed a more stringent architectural standard and greater artistry and social responsibility. Despite these reservations, in June 1958 he was appointed to build the 22-story tower Neue Vahr and later the Schönbühl high-rise block of flats (1968) in Lucerne, Switzerland. However, his solutions were praised as outstanding examples of modern housing, and both the Hansaviertel House and the Neue Vahr supported his reputation as a humanist architect among his modernists colleagues.

In 1959 he received the commission for the Enso-Gutzeit headquarters on a prestigous site next to the harbor of Helsinki. In this work he referred partly to the notion of an Italian palazzo while at the same time responding to Engel’s neoclassical harbor front. With its location right next to the Russian Orthodox Uspensky Cathedral, the strange composition of the House of Culture is repeated: a rectangular modernist office building adjacent to a curved public brick building. Aalto’s public buildings of this time are in the tradition of Bruno Taut’s Stadtkrone: they are meant to support the identification of the individual with the community and—appropriate for monuments—are usually cladded with marble tiles. The striped marble facade of the Cultural Center (1962) in Wolfsburg is reminiscent of Siena, whereas the white Finlandia hall (1971) looks more like a snowy hill. Both the Finlandia and the Essen Opera House (competition 1959, completed 1988) are very much in the Expressionist tradition and seem to celebrate the social event of visiting a theater rather than responding to the functional needs of an opera.

Aalto’s image in crticism does not really reflect his sensitivity to region, nature, or the human being in an abstract sense but rather in the context of critical debates on the lack of regional, natural, and human qualities in international modernism. Thus, in Göran Schildt’s characterization of Aalto as the secret opponent within the Modern movement, the word “within” should be emphasized. Aalto did not undermine the cultural field of modernism but exercised his critique internally. Many of his 1950s buildings, for example, addressed the placelessness of modern architecture, which critics had complained about. His Rautatalo office building (Helsinki, 1955) in particular was singled out by critics as a successful example of contextualism because the brick corner pilasters could be read as minimal markers that indicated respect for the built context, the adjacent brick facade of the bank by Eliel Saarinen, without giving up the modern agenda.

Biography

Contextualism; Corbusier, Le (Jeanneret, CharlesÉdouard) (France); Finland; Helsinki, Finland; International Style; Paimio Sanatorium, near Turku, Finland; Villa Mairea, Noormarkku, Finland; Villa Savoye, Poissy, Franceoffice in Turku (1927–33); private architectural office in Helsinki (1933–76). Appointed visiting professor, Massachussetts Institute of Technology (MIT) 1940; returned to Finland 1941; returned to United States, Professor, MIT (1946–48); Chairman of the Association of Finnish Architects SAFA (Honorary Member 1943–58); married architect Elissa Mäkiniemi, 1952; Member of the Finnish Academy, 1955 (Emeritus Member since 1968); President of the Finnish Academy, 1963–68; died 11 May 1976 in Helsinki.

Selected Works

Jyväskylä Workers’ Club, Jyväskylä, Finland, 1925

Seinäjoki Civil Guard Building, Jyväskylä, Finland, 1926

Standardized Apartment Building, Turku, Finland, 1928

Defense Corps Building, Jyväskylä, Finland, 1929

Muurame Church, Muurame, Finland, 1929

Turun Sanomat office building, Turku, Finland, 1929

Paimio Tuberculosis Sanatorium, Paimio, Finland, 1933

Viipuri Library, Viipuri, Russia, 1935

Finnish Pavilion, World Exhibition in Paris, 1937

Finnish Pavilion, World Exhibition in New York, 1939

Sunila Pulp Mill, Kotka, Finland, 1937

Sunila Housing, Kotka, Finland, 1939

Villa Mairea, Noormarkku, Finland, 1939

Baker Dormitory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, 1949

Säynätsalo Town Hall, Säynätsalo, Finland, 1952

Muuratsalo Summer (Experimental) House, Muuratsalo, Finland, 1953

Rautatalo Office Building, Helsinki, Finland, 1955

National Pensions Institute office building, Helsinki, Finland, 1957

Hansaviertel House, Berlin, Germany, 1957

Expressionist House of Culture, Helsinki, Finland, 1958

Neue Vahr Apartment building, Bremen, Germany, 1962

Heilig Geist Parish Center, Wolfsburg, Germany, 1962

Enso-Gutzeit Headquarters, Helsinki, Finland, 1962

Schönbühl Apartments, Lucerne, Switzerland, 1968

House of Culture, Helsinki, designed
by Alvar Aalto (1952–58)