Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Lebbeus Woods, John Johansen, Lebbeus Woods - Nanoarchitecture - A New Species of Architecture-Princeton Architectural Press (2002)
Lebbeus Woods, John Johansen, Lebbeus Woods - Nanoarchitecture - A New Species of Architecture-Princeton Architectural Press (2002)
007 Preface
009 Introduction: Kevin C. Lippert
022 The New Species of Architecture
024 Partners in Spring
Projects
028 Froth of Bubbles
048 Web
068 Mag-lev Theater
088 Space Labyrinth
090 Metamorphic Capsule
096 Air Quilt
100 Floating Conference Center
116 Floating House
132 Molecular Engineered House
140 Multistory Apartment Building
Although I have spent my career engaged in the practice of an architecture that deals with reali-
ties, the works presented here are, in a sense, not real. That does not make this a book of science
fiction. The projects that follow apply emerging building technologies, some not yet in common
use, others barely in the processes of research and development. These investigations use the
power of the imagination in a search for an architectural expression that naturally evolves from
each of these building technologies.
Some architects envision the future by concerning themselves with cultural change, demo-
graphics, functional accommodation, or a new aesthetic. I find my way into the future by seeking
out newly developing building technologies. I am firmly of the opinion that architecture is, ipso-
facto, structure, and that architecture, distinct from the other arts, is a “service art”; it is an art only
insofar as its aesthetic expression draws from how it is built and how it serves.
In each of my projects there is, as well as a new structural system, a purpose and program of
functional performance. As opposed to those architects who proceed in their designs from a
preconceived final image to uncertain methods of construction—design from the top down—
I insist on designing from construction to image. On the strength of these basic principles, there
emerges a new aesthetic with a corresponding emotional impact. This aesthetic often makes
reference to primordial and timeless spatial symbols, expressed in the updated terms of the
new technologies.
Some of the projects included here demonstrate advanced applications of technologies al-
ready familiar to architects, such as hydraulics and pneumatics. Others borrow from more radical
fields of technology: thin fiberglass shells (used in large boat hulls); kinetic structures (developed
by NASA for use in space); electromagnetics; molecular engineering. Speculations as to when
these technologies might come into common use vary from ten to one hundred years.
While we must wait for the realization of such proposals, we may contemplate or conceive of
the nonexistent as possible. Imagination is sparked by an eager desire to know; by curiosity or
inquisitiveness. It has been said that “much of yesterday’s fiction is now reality, and that much
of today’s fiction may be the reality of the future.” It is the human imagination that leads us.
007
John Johansen’s
Restless Spirit
Kevin C. Lippert
On first meeting, John Johansen is classmates, including Paul Rudolph,
an unlikely prophet of a new millen- Philip Johnson, Edward Larrabee
nial architecture based on the latest Barnes, and I.M. Pei, Johansen’s
revolutions in science and technol dedication to the modernist gospel
ogy. Now in his mid-eighties, slightly was not deep-seated, and even
stooped and hard of hearing, it early on he proved himself a restless
seems a more propitious moment for experimenter.
him to bask in the current admiring In truth, alternative voices were
rediscovery of midcentury modern- never entirely exiled from Harvard:
ism, including many elegant houses Le Corbusier was a frequent visitor,
he built in the 1950s, than and the venerable Frank Lloyd Wright
to be taking to the pulpit of experi- urged students in his lectures—from
mental design based on nanotech- which faculty were excluded—to
nology, bioengineering, magnetic “leave Harvard immediately” before
levitation, self-regulating structures, they were corrupted. The influence
composite materials, and other devel of Alvar Aalto’s organic romanticism
opments more likely to be found in could also be felt moving up the
the pages of Popular Mechanics Charles River from MIT. The young
than the newsletter of do.co.mo.mo. Johansen was attracted to it all: in a
It’s a surprising twist for an octage- kind of Borgesian catalogue he lists
narian and former outspoken de- as early influences Wright,
fender of the high-modern faith. the “haunting austerity” of Gropius
But the career of John MacLean (who was to become his father-in-
Johansen, born 1916, the son of two law), the “humble, almost childlike
successful New York studio painters, innocence” of Marcel Breuer, and
has been nothing if not full of surpris- the sculptural elementality of Le
ing twists and turns. A 1942 graduate Corbusier’s Ronchamp. To this list he
of Walter Gropius’s Bauhaus-in- later added: the thin-shell structures
Boston Harvard Graduate School of of Félix Candela and Pier Luigi Nervi,
Design, Johansen began his career the strut construction of R. Buckmin-
at the apogee of American modern- ster Fuller, the rationalism of Mies
ism. However, unlike most of his van der Rohe’s steel frames, Andrea 009
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, where
he worked “on loan” on the United
Nations project under Wallace Harri-
son. In 1948 Johansen moved to New
Canaan, Connecticut, where several
other Harvard colleagues—including
Breuer, Johnson, Eliot Noyes, and
Landis Gores—were already en-
camped. This loose-knit circle, more
social than professional, came to be
known as “The Harvard Five.”
Over the next ten years, Johansen
built a series of elegant modern hous-
es typical of the period. Johansen
calls this his “Neo-Palladian” phase.
Certainly the possibility of European
travel after World War II provided a
source of inspiration and delight for
Johansen and his peers, especially
given the antihistoricist stance at Har-
vard. Johansen wrote in Architectural
Forum in late 1955 of “a new interest
Villa Ponte
(Warner
Palladio, Carl Jung’s theory of arche- in the architecture of the past,” and
House), types, Gaston Bachelard’s Poetics of of the “timeless importance” of the
New Canaan,
CT, 1957
Space, Italian Renaissance painting, abstract qualities of space and mass
systems theory, Japanese Metabo- that he found in the Italian Renais-
lism, chaos theory, and more. Through sance—qualities hardly inconsistent
out his career, Johansen has been with the kind of “domesticated” Yan-
a kind of architectural omnivore, kee modernism already pioneered
always fascinated by the stylistic, by Gropius and Breuer, and under
intellectual, and technological cur- further development in the hands of
rents that have swirled around him. Johnson, Rudolph, and others.1
In spite of his wide-ranging inter- The houses of this period—like the
ests, Johansen’s earliest works were Goodyear House of 1955 and the
nonetheless straightforward postwar Villa Ponte, or Warner House, of
modernism. After Johansen grad 1957—were formally inventive, en-
uated from Harvard he spent the gaged their sites in clever ways
remaining war years building wood- (Villa Ponte literally bridged a
frame Navy barracks and subse- stream), made use of luxurious ma-
quently working as a researcher for terials, and were accomplished in
the National Housing Agency. After their knowledge of the stylistic and
the war, he was employed briefly as tectonic developments of their day.
010 a draftsman for Breuer, and joined They were also well received—the
Warner House was a Record house in were similarly to be incorporated
1958—and Johansen’s residential into the structure itself. The great ad-
practice flourished. vantage of this construction process
Johansen found the simplicity, bal- was that no formwork was required,
ance, and order of these Neo-Palla- resulting in both more organic forms
dian designs “exhilarating,” so it than traditional poured concrete
makes the out-of-left-field appear- would allow, as well as lower cost. 3
ance of his “Spray-Form” projects— Although “gunite”—sprayed con-
thin-shelled concrete structures that crete—was invented in 1907 by Carl
resemble nothing if not flowers—that Ethan Akeley, who needed a way to
much more startling. Commissioned spray aggregate onto mesh to build
by the American Concrete Associa- dinosaur models, the technology
tion as part of an ongoing series of was, and is, more commonly used
demonstration projects, the British for building swimming pools. Le
critic Reyner Banham hailed them as Corbusier used it at Ronchamp (1950–
symbolic of a conversion to the reli- 55) with an effect on the architectural
gion of technology; Johansen remem- world as electric as Frank Gehry’s
bers them more as an effort to dis- Bilbao Guggenheim today, and
tance himself from “the modern box” was most likely the inspiration for
as well as experiments symptomatic Johansen’s explorations in crusta-
of his “insistent spirit of investigation.” 2 cean forms. It is also likely that
Spray House #2 of 1955 typifies Johansen was aware of the highly
these projects. Intended as a resi- publicized thin-shell structures of Félix
dence for Johansen and his family, Candela and the ferro-cimento struc-
the house was framed by steel rods tures of Pier Luigi Nervi. Whatever its
bent into shell-like shapes that were origin, the biomorphic appears as a
fastened together at a central point. liberation for Johansen, and, although
These rods were then covered with Spray House #2 was never built, he
smaller rods, and again with paper- used the idea for a series of projects
backed steel mesh. Concrete was that followed in rapid succession, in-
to be sprayed directly onto the ar- cluding the United States Trade Pavil-
mature, making a rigid shell approxi- ion at the International World’s Fair in
mately 8 inches thick; the resulting Zagreb (1956), a church in Norwich,
shell was to be coated outside with Connecticut (1957), and a restaurant
plastic for waterproofing, and inside and motel compound in Mt. Kisco,
with sprayed insulation and paint. New York (1957). It seems likely that
Clear plastic would fill gaps between his spray-form houses influenced the
the shapes to create windows. Floors, architect/artist Frederick Kiesler,
walls, and ceiling would form one who developed a series of versions
continuously smooth surface, like the of his own “Endless House,” a similar
inside of a seashell. Radiant heating biomorphic shell structure. Certainly
coils would be embedded in the Sanford Hohauser’s 1956 project for
walls; furniture, steps, and shelves a Beach House, also to be built with 011
gunite, closely echoes Johansen’s
earlier design. 4
Unlike Kiesler and Hohauser,
however, Johansen succeeded in
having one of his shell projects built:
the Zagreb Trade Pavilion. It was not,
however, a happy experience:
Johansen complained that the
Yugoslav concrete, and workers,
were of low quality, and the structure
consequently required secondary
support. Whatever the failings of the
project, it did attract attention in
Europe: in London, the Archigram
group went so far as to label Johan
sen’s “stomach-like” shapes “Bowel-
lism,” “For the boys in Archigram,”
wrote Archigram member Michael
Webb, “[Johansen] was our genuine
American hero: each successive
project a radical departure not only
from conventional practice, but
even from his own previous oeuvre.” 5
While Johansen’s experiments in
biomorphism garnered him notoriety
among the European avant-garde,
it was his reputation as a classical
modernist that procured him the
commission to design the American
Embassy in Dublin in late 1956. The
project went through six iterations, as
Johansen struggled to find a solution
that would be acceptable to a series
Spray House #2, 1955
of committees made up of techno
crats, architects, and politicians. The
final design, a three-story circular
tower, became a political football,
and was built only after the direct in-
tervention of newly elected President
John F. Kennedy, eager to improve
relations with Ireland. Even within the
simple parti of the drum, however,
012 Johansen could not resist a bit of
structural bravado: The embassy,
completed in 1963, is assembled
from a series of interlocking precast
concrete panels with twisted vertical
supports.
If Johansen was looking for the
Dublin Embassy to bring him institu-
tional commissions, his wish was soon
granted: on the heels of the Dublin
embassy followed Clowes Memorial
Hall and Opera House on the campus
of Butler University in Indianapolis
(1964), the Orlando Public Library
(1966), the Morris Mechanic Theater in
Baltimore, Maryland (1967), and the
Goddard Library of Clark University
in Worcester, Massachusetts (1968).
These buildings fit neither the mod-
ern nor biomorphic molds of Johan
sen’s work to that point, but mirrored
new tendencies in the architecture
of the period, of which two stand out:
US Embassy,
First was the so-called New Brutalism, buildings of this epoch suggested Dublin,
pioneered by Le Corbusier, codified “no clear direction of design.” 6 1956-63
by the critic Reyner Banham, and im- The Library at Clark University is the
ported into the United States by Louis most successful of Johansen’s brutal-
Kahn and Paul Rudolph, under whom ist buildings. Johansen called it his
Johansen taught at Yale from 1955–60. “first modern building,” meaning the
The second was the bias toward en- first where he “presided” over the
gineering and systems theory seen in design of the building, “letting it
the work of Archigram, R. Buckminster exercise its growing confidence and
Fuller, and others. All were symptom- will and assert its purpose.” 7 The spir-
atic of the breakdown of modernism itual overtones were a direct nod to
and the expansion of architecture to Louis Kahn’s dictum “what the build-
include broader social, technologi- ing wants to be”—Kahn was on the
cal, and even political agendas. faculty at Yale with Johansen until
Johansen’s buildings of the immedi- 1959—as was Johansen’s strategy
ate post-Dublin period reflect these to let the form emerge through the
influences: like many of his peers— revelation of the constructional pro-
Eero Saarinen, often criticized for his cess.8 Writes Johansen:
eclecticism, comes immediately to
mind—Johansen was warily feeling On encountering the final form,
his way, and would later write that his there is a feeling that one has come 013
angled out on the west, carrels pro
truding on the east—were lavishly
praised at the time: Melvin Charney
heralded the “frank accumulation
of the parts.” Peter Blake concurred:
“[Here] Johansen places himself
firmly on the side of letting the unpre
dictable happen, without precon-
ceptions of order.” 11 Even the some-
times cantankerous Sibyl Moholy
Nagy found in the exteriors “a true
dynamism,” although she derided
Johansen’s description of the build-
ing as “a combination of rigidly pre-
determined, dehumanized solutions
of ‘electronic devices’ coupled with
an adolescent romanticism, addict-
ed to the unpredictable happening,
without preconceptions of order.”
It is at the Clark that we see the first
inklings of Johansen’s coupling of
scientific theory with his already
Morris
Mechanic
upon the various parts of the build- well-developed interest in structural
Theater, ing in the process of assembly or exhibitionism.
Baltimore,
1967
attachment. The form is evolving This interest in systematics found
and alive, not fully at rest. It is, in the freer expression in other, non-institu-
terms of systems theory, a configu- tional projects. The admiration of
ration: “an integrated whole whose Archigram was mutual, and Johan
ultimate value is greater than the sen felt that they, along with the Eng-
sum of the properties and functions lish-based Team 10 and the Japa-
of its parts.” 9 nese Metabolists, had “awakened
architecture to new ideas.” Founded
If the rhetoric derived from systems in 1960, Archigram shook the archi-
theory, the tectonic vocabulary was tectural world on both sides of the
pure brutalism: Johansen described ocean with its comic-book images
the elevations, admiringly, as “like of intricate architectural structures
the rear side of a Xerox copier with ranging in size from the personal to
the components and their connec- the colossal. Among these, founding
tions rigged on a structural chassis member Peter Cook’s Plug-in City
and simply exposed.” 10 The “push of 1963–64, infinitely changeable by
and pull” external aesthetic treat- plugging or unplugging habitable
ment, resulting in highly articulated capsules by means of cranes carried
014 facades—glass reading rooms on tracks across vast multistoried
structures, had special resonance for
Johansen.
If the Clark Library was conceptually
a building as frame, that is, a chassis
from which the “components” or
rooms would be hung and connect-
ed via “circuits” or halls, Johansen
House #2 (1972) was literally a chas-
sis. Thirty feet square, three stories
high with tapered sides, and hand-
built by Johansen, the house is a
steel frame with sixty-four “attach-
ment points” from which platforms
and living spaces are suspended,
braced by high-tension steel cables.
The entire house is covered by trans-
lucent plastic panels, giving
the appearance of a plastic tent.
Ductwork is intended to be ad hoc,
assuming “serpentine forms as they
wait to heat rooms in a future whose
location is yet to be determined.” 12
Goddard
This “plug-in/clip-on” strategy, a ing as scaffolding to provide travel, Library, Clark
direct nod to Archigram, allowed services, and clip-on buildings: as University,
Worcester,
great flexibility in reconfiguring living the new infrastructure developed MA, 1986
spaces and was economical to above the existing ground plane, the
build: Johansen intended to market old city could be removed, possibly
the house as a kit, and figured a reverting to “field and stream.”13
house could be constructed for a A smaller, and more realizable,
few thousand dollars. version of this idea resurfaced as
Johansen’s interest in the kinetic late as 1985 in Johansen’s proposed
dated back to 1960, when he de- Miami Beach Resort Hotel, where
signed a house with rooms mounted prefabricated guest rooms would
on railroad tracks to allow easy be attached to a pyramidal steel
reconfiguration, based on weather, framework.
functional requirements, or simply These two influences—brutalism
whim. These ideas were transposed and systems theory—came together
to a larger scale in the Leapfrog in Johansen’s most successful project
City proposal of 1966, a theoretical of this period, the Mummers Theater
project exhibited at the Metropolitan (now Oklahoma Theater Center)
Museum of Art. Here Johansen in Oklahoma City (1965–70). In
imagined a structural latticework describing the building in an article
that would straddle New York, serv- for Architectural Forum, in May 1968, 015
Miami Beach
Resort Hotel,
Johansen was already taking pains “Architecture as we knew it,” con-
1985 to distance himself from “classicists” cludes Johansen, “is no longer effec-
like Johnson and SOM and “pictur- tive in its solutions, nor even compel-
esque designers” like Kahn and Ru- ling in its esthetic expression.” 14
dolph. He self-deprecatingly in- Certainly evocative of the antiestab-
cludes himself—at least his earlier lishment rhetoric of May 1968, and
work—in this category, and, willing inspired by his readings of media
to leave it all behind, states his “new critic Marshall McLuhan and cyber-
position,” one concerned “not with netics guru Norbert Wiener, Johan
gestural form and with masterworks sen declared his new Mummers
of architecture, but rather with pro- Theater “not a building as we have
cesses, with action, with behavioral known it, but a fragment.” Indeed,
patterns, and how most simply all Johansen found his formal inspiration
these may be accommodated. This in the complex beauty of electronic
new position is concerned with an circuit boards, with their “compo-
‘organizing idea’ or an ‘ordering de- nents and subcomponents” plugged
vice.’ The idea or device will into a “chassis” and connected by
derive from motivating processes— “circuiting systems” superimposed
processes of personal and of soci- at different levels to avoid cross-cir-
etal behavior, and of highly industri- cuits. The Mummers Theater reflects
016 alized building techniques.” these subdivisions by dividing its
component programmatic ele- if not frivolous—for example, the Pa-
ments— a school and two theater vilion of Earthly Delights, a “gravity-
spaces—with their “subcomponent” free spatial adventure” where
support spaces (offices, backstage), “rising passions set up an electro-
and joining these with “circuitry,” magnetic field that neutralizes
both circulation, such as ramps, stairs, gravity”—to the visionary, like the
and bridges, and mechanical sys- Simulated Cloud of 1985, proposed
tems, like ductwork and plumbing.15 first as a chapel for the Miami Beach
Materials reinforce these subdivisions: Resort Hotel and then as a “free-
component pieces are blocks of raw floating,” helium-supported confer-
poured-in-place concrete, while ence center—a clear antecedent to
subcomponents are of brightly paint- Diller + Scofidio’s much-publicized
ed sheet metal. It seemed to the Blur Building of 2001. 18
critic Michael Sorkin “a bubble dia- As early as 1966, Johansen wrote,
gram come to life,” and the resulting in The American Scholar, of “An
“ad-hocism” presages the neo- Architecture for the Electronic Age,”
expressionism of Hans Scharoun in which he identified numerous in-
and Frank Gehry, and certainly fluences of electronics on architec-
seems the progenitor of the color- ture. These included: the imitation
coded, inside-out Pompidou Center of electronic equipment in the forms
(1971– 76).16 of architecture; the adoption of the
The sense of spirit exhibited in the organizing principles of electronic
Mummers Theater all but disap- systems (as in the Mummers Theater
peared in Johansen’s work in the project); the use of computer graph-
period from 1973 to 1987, when he ics and image processing (which,
shared an office in New York with in hindsight, seems particularly pre-
Ashok Bhavnani; many of the build- scient); a communications explo-
ings of this time, such as his Roose- sion, leading to more dispersed soci-
velt Island housing projects (1975– etal and building patterns; the rise
76) were nondescript, and Johan- of television (and subsequently
sen, now in his sixties, clearly felt computers and electronic games),
betrayed by the “trivialities” of post- which have “retrained the percep-
modernism.17 But, perhaps not coin- tive habits” of younger architects;
Miami Beach Resort
cidentally, Johansen’s spirit of ex- and finally cybernetics, which can Hotel
perimentation seems to have taken eliminate the need for humans in
refuge in his sketchbooks, in a series certain roles. Almost twenty years
of conceptual, unrealizable projects. later, Johansen repeated his belief
Although many were no more than in a “technological imperative” for
doodles based loosely on scientific architecture, but now found in tech-
ideas, they provided the seeds for nology not only a practical or mimet-
the conceptually rich projects that ic function, but a poetic one as well:
followed. The sketchbook projects of it provides an “inspirational spin-off”
this period range from the whimsical, and “romantic excursions into tech- 017
The
no-esthetics and fantasies of the
Mummers
future” drawn from “science fiction, or Theater,
(Oklahoma
more correctly, technology-fiction.”19
Theater
By the late 1980s, Johansen was Center),
Oklahoma
trumpeting a “New Modernity,” one
City, OK,
based on a more holistic reading 1965-70
of science and technology. In an
eponymous article, published in 1989,
Johansen urges a rejection of the
mechanistic model of Cartesian and
Newtonian science in favor of a
“holistic and ecological” world view,
a “systems view of life.” Influenced
by his reading of systems theorist
Frijtof Capra, Johansen called for
an architecture where “all functions,
services, structures, equipment, and
aesthetic effects [are] designed as
an inseparable whole.” 20 The ma-
chine is replaced as a paradigm by
the organism: function is no longer
determined by structure, but struc-
ture is now determined by process.
The house is no longer a machine
for living, but lives itself. Johansen
imagines buildings less as “static
and lifeless mechanisms,” but more
as self-organizing and self-regulat-
ing, like “programmed walking
robots, approaching the nature and
characteristics of living systems.” To
do this will require new materials—
Johansen envisions carbon-plastic
composites, structural foams, and
sprayed-on membrane skins of
“adjustable permeability to light,
temperature, and air”—kinetically
controlled by a central nervous sys-
tem. Computers monitoring sensors
will allow self-regulating buildings,
up to and including structure: cables
supporting buildings might be ad-
18 justed in real time to accommodate
shifting loads. Alternately, traditional “molecularly engineered” projects,
structure—posts, beams, panels, et buildings that are developed from an
al.—could be phased out in favor of architect’s code—presumably a sort
“fused” enclosures of seamless con- of tectonic DNA—and then literally
tinuity. Gravity itself might be cheat- grown on site. The petal-like struc-
ed, via magnetic levitation: if Japa- tures clearly echo his earlier Spray-
nese passenger trains can hover, Form houses—and indeed, furniture
why may we not “fully expect to re- and equipment grow “as extensions
shuffle parts of our buildings”? 21 of the house structure itself”—but
While many of the technological now the building, responsive, adap-
elements Johansen envisions do in tive, self-sufficient, has intelligence
fact exist, the ten hypothetical proj- of its own, capable of learning from
ects illustrated in this volume have its environment and changing in re-
an overlay of science fiction. A boy’s sponse, “resulting in a higher state
model-making fantasy come true, than we now conceive of contextu-
Johansen’s models have a bric-a- alism and environmentalism.”
brac quality, courtesy of his collect- The architect has become simply
ing trips for surplus hardware and the parent who endows his creation
industrial parts on New York’s Canal with the seeds of his knowledge,
Street, and his use of scale figures and sends it on its way to grow and
and backdrops create a science fic- hopefully flourish in the world. While
tion, stage-set atmosphere. But Jet- some might see in this scenario the
sons-chic aside, most of the projects seeds of Dr. Frankenstein (what if
herein are based on the sophisticat- your new house gets hungry?) or a
ed—if currently unfeasible—techno- naïve oversight of the darker sides
logical concepts Johansen outlined of modern technology, it signals, in
in his “New Modernity” article of 1989. the view of Lebbeus Woods, a radical
The Froth of Bubbles posits per transformation of architecture:
meable, “living” membranes and
serpentine, magnetically levitated Composition is gone, because the
elevator capsules. The Web, a con- thing continually recomposes itself
ference center that would have been within an almost infinite range of pos-
suspended between the towers of sibilities. Function is gone, because
the World Trade Center, requires a it is unknown in advance. Struc-
self-regulating structural system to ture...is gone, because it is entirely
dynamically tension the supporting fluid-dynamic, nonlinear, even
cables in response to shifting wind or mathematically chaotic. All that re-
live loads. The Mag-Lev Theater ex- mains is an intimate and unpredict-
pands the flexibility of the Mummers able interaction between the in-
Theater to new heights, with either a habitant and the architecture.22
magnetically levitating stage or a
magnetically levitating audience. If Johansen’s built works seem in
But most radical are Johansen’s many instances emblematic of the 019
stylistic and intellectual concerns of
their time, it is these latest, most fan-
tastic, projects—many undertaken
in Johansen’s ninth decade—that
promise to be his most lasting con
tribution to the architectural canon.
They speak of a man who has tireless-
ly refused to abandon his optimistic
faith in the processes of science—
“search, exploration, invention,
deductive thinking, problem solv-
ing”23—undertaken in the pursuit of
transforming ourselves and the world.
“The task for architects today,” writes
Johansen, “is to seize hold of new
technologies, judiciously apply them
The Froth of Bubbles, 1988 to building, delight in the symbolic
potential, and endow them with
poetic expression.” If we take any-
thing away from this book, it should
be a healthy dose of this optimism.
021
The New Species
of Architecture
What are the grounds for my claim that a
new species of architecture is evolving?
First of all, it must be stated that species,
a biological term, is only an analogy. By
definition, a species is a category within
a system of classification of living organ-
isms, and new species are recognized by
their distinctively different characteristics.
This applies to a new breed of architecture
that takes advantage of the remarkable
capacities of electronic intelligence. The
popular term “smart building” can only
begin to explain the profound nature of
this architecture and the transformation it
augurs.
Indeed, the analogy between buildings
and organisms is only becoming more evi-
dent. Even today, buildings, in their content,
design, and performance, can meet the
definition of an organism: a whole with
interdependent parts (organs). In the case
of contemporary buildings, these organs
translate to vertical transportation, HVAC
(heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning),
and security systems, among others.
The new species of architecture, however,
will acquire attributes more directly anal
agous to those of living organisms, in four
general categories:
– First is self-organization, the interrelation
and interaction of the organism to its im-
022 mediate environment. Here, the organism
adjusts or adapts to surrounding conditions.
It responds to all manner of local, seasonal,
and daily, conditions.
– Second is self-regulation, by which the
organism coordinates the functions of its
independent organs to mutually advanta-
geous performance. In architectural terms
this translates to the constant monitoring
of the needs of the occupant and the
building itself, and in response to those
needs, the coordination of all services
and technical functions.
– Third is self-diagnosis of malfunction. The
system of the living organism is uniquely
equipped to perform in this capacity. Soon,
buildings will do so as well.
– Fourth is self-healing, the rebuilding of
deteriorated materials as the organism
replaces damaged tissue.
These four capacities until now have been
recognized as being faculties endowed
only to living organisms. As high-tech
buildings advance in sophistication, they
appear to incorporate, artificially, the pro-
cesses and performances of Nature
itself. To speak in biological terms is to see
buildings differently, and psychologically to
be liberated from outdated concepts and
experiences of buildings as we now know
them.
As we move into the future, the field of
molecular engineering represents a new
frontier for architecture. In the process of
computer coding, buildings will be de-
signed, grow, and perform just as living
organisms directed by their built-in DNA.
At some point the relationship between
the building and the living organism will
be more than the subject of analogy; they
will be one and the same.
023
Partners in Spring
(with reference to molecular engineering in the year 2199)
—John M. Johansen
028
Froth of Bubbles
This conference center grafts onto manually activated switch, but to the
the roof of another building. Its sup- changing climate and weather conditions
port structure is a self-extendable of the natural environment. The bubble’s
telescoping mast, delivered by heli- molecules could be aligned for selected
copter. Transfer of the central load levels of permeability in response to light,
of this mast is distributed by a space heat, and even insulation values. They
frame that connects to the structural would be “living membranes.”
system of the existing building. Another feature of this project is the “levi-
From the mast, lock-hinged brack- tator,” a replacement for the conventional
ets fold out to support the various elevator. In this device, capsules will carry
floor platforms of the center. Inflated people along a serpentine electromagnet-
“living membranes”—balloons— ic track powered by linear induction mo-
then enclose the platforms. Such tors. For both practicality and novel experi-
inflatable membranes have been in ence, the levitators will travel in serpentine
use for some time, though a cluster patterns about the complex.
of air chambers of this complexity The cluster of bubbles, seen from outside,
has never been realized. The primary will certainly make for a striking image
difficulty is the equalization of air on the urban horizon. The experience of
pressures sustained in the various movement along a serpentine path through
spherical volumes. Here, this process the coalescing spaces of these spherical
is controlled by monitors connected membranes, which change opacity to
to a central computer that activates accommodate interior and exterior con
air pumps that stabilize the various ditions, would be unprecedented. Sym
bubbles. bolically, the spherical forms represent
At the electromolecular level, the containment and wholeness; the absence
spheres’ skins respond to light and of angular form metaphorically eradicates
heat. Glass and plastic panels that disturbing or discordant experience. Travel
change from opaque to translucent along the serpentine rail calls to mind cos-
when charged with electric current mic motion, creativity, growth, wisdom—all
are already available. Here, a more meanings appropriate to the purposes of a
sophisticated system will allow the conference center. [1988]
bubbles to respond not just to a 029
030
35
043
044
046
48
THE WEB
This theater complex takes hell and flights upward through selector, a remote panel, or a
advantage of the developing purgatory and then into the computer program. With this
technology of electromag- realms of the divine. The technology a stationary audi-
netic levitation (“mag-lev”). Theater of the Eternal Return ence can witness a levitated
The complex is comprised is for theatrical events that performance, or vice-versa.
of three lightweight, inflated are philosophically circular in As an educational demon-
structures supported in a steel nature: cycles of life, reincar stration, for example, a levi-
frame basket that rests upon nation, the seasons, the tated audience might travel
the roof of another building. passing of the day. through a large model of the
People-moving tubes convey There are two mag-lev sys- human brain.
the theater audience up from tems employed in the com- Each theater structure can
the street along the existing plex. The first is a more limited be interpreted as a chrysalis;
building facade and on to a “sliding contact” or shoe- each holds, for a time, audi-
central lobby that accesses to-rail lift that is propelled by ences under a spell that might
the three theaters and a res lineal induction motors. With be understood as condition-
taurant at the top. this method, continuously ing for the theatrical event.
Each of these experimental changing scenic, lighting, Meanwhile, the steel-frame
theaters has a specialized and projection positions can basket binds together a com-
purpose. The Theater of Simul- be achieved. The second, pany of people in common
taneity is set on horizontal rails more complex, system is not cause or adventure. [1990]
and uses linear induction yet possible but is theoretical-
motors to move performance ly realistic. Here, a free-float- This project was supported
platforms that will feature ing platform is moved and by a grant from the Graham
theatrical events set in times stabilized through the appli- Foundation for Advanced
past, present, and future. Here cation of electromagnetic Studies in the Fine Arts.
plots can unfold with refer- forces—attraction and repul-
ence to any time relationship. sion. Movement is determined
The Theater of the Divine by the coordinated control of
Comedy moves platforms forces emanating from walls,
vertically to accommodate floors, ceiling, and platform.
dramatic events that call, for The platform is maneuvered
example, for descents into either by a handheld video 069
072
073
077
078
080
087
The Space Labyrinth
091
094
096
The Air Quilt
097
099
The Floating
Conference Center
In my effort to advance the ing the shells. Take, for example, the plastic container used to
field of architecture, I often find hold water or milk (and used here in this model): though only
it useful to adopt advanced 1/32 of an inch in thickness, they can carry some 50 pounds of
technologies and construction water. The thin fiberglass shell exhibits similar properties.
procedures from related Thin shell technology will provide a unique formal and aesthetic
industries. Such is the case character to a building. In the conference center, structural ribs
with my application of the rise from the floor, reaching upward and merging to support the
thin fiberglass shell, a technol- arched roof. Natural light glows through these translucent shells,
ogy used in the construction creating a luminous, iridescent, and ever-changing interior of
of boat hulls, for these two gossamer character. It is an architecture of dematerialization:
projects. Fiberglass shells, eerie, magical, other-worldly, somehow Gothic in spirit.
which can be formed in any The shells would be formed at a factory and then transported
desired curvature, have been and literally glued together on site, at water’s edge. If boats are
created in lengths ranging up made to float, then why not a conference center, located away
to 175 feet. Set vertically, these from busy surroundings, that can do so as well? [1996–97]
could make eighteen-story
buildings.
The remarkable aspect of
thin shell structures is that great
strength can be achieved by
bending, curving, and crimp- 101
102
104
106
107
108
112
114
The Floating House
Like the Floating Conference Center, the much of its built-in furniture—is sculpted
Floating House applies thin-shell structural from the same luminescent plastic material,
technology, but this time for a domestic giving it the bearing of a giant water flower.
rather than a commercial building. The Residents moving through its inner cham-
three-story home has a central, spiral stair- bers will experience a visual unfolding, as if
case and a roof deck above where resi- promenading about the flower’s translucent
dents might enjoy the canopy of the night petals. [1996–97]
sky. Public rooms are situated on the first
level, as is a private dock. The entire
home—its structural supports along with
120
121
123
128
132
Molecular-
Engineered House
(For the Year 2200)
The following is a diary created by the owner with the development of primary exterior
of a molecular-engineered house written dur- and interior vertical ribs. The infill of minor
ing its construction. It is set in the year 2200. connecting ribs—“the lattice”— also begins
to develop. The lattices are of varied den
Day 1: Excavation begins on site where sities, and are programmed to meet stress
assembly vats will be placed. requirements—being less dense and more
open in pattern where door openings are
Day 2: Vats delivered to the building site, specified, for example. Fine web work and
along with selected chemicals and bulk membranes appear as protective enclo-
materials in liquid form. The various materials sures and interior partitioning. A neural net-
are then pumped into the vats. work communicating via transmissions—
and not preprogrammed—couples to the
Day 3: The code, developed from an archi- vascular system and begins operation.
tect’s designs and then engineered and
molecularly modeled, is ceremonially Day 6: The upper platforms, supported by
placed in the vat. We are amused that this lateral brackets stemming from some of the
code represents what long ago were the major structural ribs, are accessible by a
drawings, specifications, and strategies of sprouting central spiral staircase. Exterior
construction management. protective membranes conceal the interior.
The molecules of the membranes link to
Day 4: Molecular growth, in the form of a create an unbroken fabric. The membranes
vascular system, begins. This starts with provide openings for access that are prompt
roots stemming from the chemical com- ed by two molecular activities. First, the
posite. Reaching up and out of the vat to membranes are infused with electric current
ground level, the roots form rudimentary by a manual selector that induces the mole-
“grade beams” extending horizontally to cules to disengage and form the openings.
the edge of the house, where they curve Second, other molecules, acting as muscles
upward to support the superstructure. Cross at the opening edge, flex to draw the exteri-
ribs connect the grade beams and form or membrane apart. We enter our house.
the ground-floor platform.
Day 7: For the first time, we experience the
Day 5: The growth of the superstructure starts space, ample for a small house. Ethereal
light glows through the translucent membranes.
With a signal, these membranes change from
translucent to opaque to transparent, providing
a view anywhere at any time desired. Our house
is self-sufficient, functioning without dependence
upon any outside public services. Solar power
activates heating, cooling, recycling of wastes,
and purifying of water. The vats and vascular
system, vital to the growth of our house, remain
and will convey additional materials when repair
or replacement is required.
Interior finishes grow around us. “Body support,”
known previously as sofas, chairs, tables, and beds,
are springing up from the floor, out from the wall
ribs, and hanging from the arched vault—furniture as
an extension of the structure itself. The floor, a “mor-
phable topographic carpet,” consists of a resilient,
molecular, spongy substance that is responsive to
our every comfort, whim, or tactile experience.
Growth of the structure would then be in stages; say, in four- or six-story increments in accordance
with rental and marketing analysis; when necessary, growth could be arrested, to be activated
at another time. Replenishing the bulk material in liquid form in the original vats would fuel subse-
quent stages.
Looking back from our future time, we would remember uniformly designed dwelling units in
which there was little latitude for personal expression, and consider them inhuman. Intricate
coding systems will facilitate a greater diversity, particularly in interior design. Suppose the basic
building structure proceeds in growth according to the directives of a central, all-inclusive code
to achieve the entire structure, dwelling units and all common basic services. But suppose then
that each dwelling unit is provided a separate local vat, and within it a separate code that could
prompt growth of personalized interior design—growth within growth, as it were. Such specific
codes could be readily acquired from the local rental agent, or custom designs could be
produced by designers of the tenant’s choice—offering any interior, from styles past to contem
porary to something imagined. Remodelling partition layout, lighting, surface materials, and
furniture within the dwelling unit would be of little complication. However, the basic form and
character of both the house and apartment exterior and interior will, or honestly should, express
the growth process. [2001]
With all of the dazzling opportunities offered by a revolutionary building process, which we
are told will be inevitable, what course are we to take? Molecules, we must be reminded,
can be programmed to produce utilitarian box shelters, or houses of any frivolous style.
Designs of historic revival, popular as nostalgic escape from technology shock, may
continue for, as Marshall McLuhan has said of most cultures, “we proceed into the future
looking back through the rear-view mirror.” It has also been observed that, in the United
States at least, with few notable exceptions, engineers don’t look ahead because they’re
not paid to do so. We will overcome technology shock as we always have. Understanding
the implications of the new technology is ultimately a matter of how we direct our minds
and emotions.
occurs. I am mindful also of the many talented architects in the coming decades with
more advanced knowledge of this technology at their disposal than is available now,
who may express themselves differently. However, it is my earnest hope that I will be
considered as one of the few architects at this time to have grappled with this challenge.
May my projects be, in any event, an exhortation to those who follow me.
159
Acknowledgments contributors
The technical material from I am also grateful for friendly John M. Johansen, born in New York City in
which I have principally drawn yet critical comments from: 1916, studied architecture at Harvard University
is to be credited to the exten- Haresh Lalvani: architect and under Walter Gropius and then became one
sive research performed by morphologist of the preeminent American architects of the
K. Eric Drexler, Ralph Merele, J. Michael Webb: visionary modern era. Now retired from practice, he has
Storrs Hall, and others, as pub- architect devoted himself to the development of a vision-
lished in bulletins issued William Katavolos: physicist ary architecture based on scientific discovery.
by the Foresight Institute. Brian Schwartz: physicist
I wish to acknowledge my Guy Nordenson: structural Kevin C. Lippert is the publisher of Princeton
former students of experimen- engineer Architectural Press and teaches computing
tal structures at the School of Brewster Beach: Jungian and architecture at the Princeton University
Architecture, Pratt Institute: therapist School of Architecture and the Cooper Union.
Patrick Beagan and Alkis
Kimanthias for assistance in COMA is an award-winning design studio
gathering research material. based in New York and Amsterdam.
Ismael Aqtash with Richard
Sarrach for computer graphics. Michael Moran is a New York-based architec
Principally for computer tural photographer.
graphics: Mohamad Alkhayer,
Christian Lischewski, Marcel
de Winter, and Daniel Stoika,