Review

Reviewed Work(s): Gottfried Semper: In Search of Architecture by Wolfgang Hermann

Review by: Harry Francis Mallgrave
Source: Journal of Architectural Education (1984-) , Summer, 1985, Vol. 38, No. 4
(Summer, 1985), pp. 33-34
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. on behalf of the Association of Collegiate Schools
of Architecture, Inc.

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1424862

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. and Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Inc. are
collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Architectural
Education (1984-)

This content downloaded from

202.119.46.131 on Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:14:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
employs some illuminating middle range social theory in dis-
cussing voice and the related concept of commitment. The
appropriately complex representations that result should
offer architects clear hints for finding satisfaction and avoid-
ing alienation. Though Architects and Firms never raises the
question except by implication, the reader will inevitably ask
in the light of this research what educators who subordinate
all to design are doing for, and to, their students.
The most useful of the insights on managing alienation
comes in the findings about the virtues of vertical or project
oriented office organization in contrast to the more usual
departmental or skill specialization organization of larger
offices. Architects who work in vertical project teams feel
that they share in a collective voice which has power in the
architectural process. This associates with higher levels of
commitment and job satisfaction. It may even have benefits
for the muses of great architectural design. Later chapters
seem to intimate that design awards, even profits and firm
survival, may also associate with vertically organized firms
with relatively larger professional design staffs as opposed to
ones with larger, technician and non-architect professional
staffs. Though it seems almost too good to be true in the
conflict and class warfare traditions of labor-management
relations, this book seems to suggest both sides may have a
community of interest in promoting less alienating organiza-
tional forms for practice.
Turning to the problems in the book, and any work as broad
and ambitious as this has to have them, among its less
important difficulties, Architects and Firms exhibits one more
characteristic of neo-classical economics than of modern
sociology. Blau tends to take architecture, or perhaps it
would be more accurate to say, the architecture commodity,
as a somehow homogeneous, infinitely divisible commod-
ity-the economists' favorite example being wheat, one
bushel is like the next and any two half bushels make a
whole. The architecture commodity represents something
fundamentally different: a very heterogeneous collection of
lumpy, often indivisible attributes-each one is different
from the other and halves of two buildings do not ordinarily
assemble into architecture. While the author demonstrates
courage and insight in disaggregating architects into sets of
subcategories, she fails to do the same for their products.
(Here this reviewer finds himself arguing on very unfamiliar
territory. Usually he pleads for more social science attention
to the producers of architecture and against the common-
place fixation on the product.) Had that the study paid more
attention the results of architecture production: to art prod-
ucts versus user satisfaction products versus profit maximiz-
ing products. Granted, satisfying this objection would take
another research campaign and another book. Would that
Blau could be prevailed upon to do it.
The chapters on convictions and merit and the marketplace
use fancy methodological approaches to discuss architect's
values, and the relations among values, business success,
firm organization, and design award winning. These findings
rest on factor analyses of the previously mentioned archi-
tects' responses to the lists of big names and handy aphor-
isms. Using these techniques to sort a list of favorite archi-
tects in order to determine convictions about architecture
produces somewhat interesting results in the abstract, but I
think really represents a case of what C. Wright Mills called
"abstracted empiricism." Among the problems: the unwar-
ranted assumption that a list beginning with Smithson and
Aalto and ending with Speer and Lapidus, could, despite the
cannons of statistics, represent an analytically meaningful
design dimension; and the equally unwarranted notion that
reading texts by popular critics for key words will uncover
the meaning of the factor clusters. Perhaps even worse for a
sociologist of Blau's generation who is obviously familiar
with critical theory and hermeneutics, is her lack of suspi-
cion in applying such procedures to her funny (perhaps
naive would be a better word) list of aphorisms.
Actually the problem here lies at a very basic level. Blau falls
victim to the current attraction for using linguistic metaphors
in dealing with architecture. In a sense her discipline impris-
ons her. Since sociology is a language-reasoning science as
202.119.46.131 on Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:14:14 UTC
opposed to a quantitative-reasoning science like physics, or
a visual configuration-reasoning discipline like architecture, it
becomes almost automatic for her to use linguistic models
for processes that are not verbal or linguistic. A case in
point that is central to Blau's argument appears in the words
she quotes from art sociologist Janet Wolff and set in italics
for this book. "The relative autonomy of art and culture con-
sists in the specific codes and conventions of artistic repre-
sentation, which mediate and (re)produce ideology in aes-
thetic form." The problem here, of course, is that the lin-
guistic model suggests an order of causal relations and
associations between ideology and form or visual art prod-
ucts and processes. Ideologies necessarily exist in the world
of language; they are verbal representations. Designers "rea-
son" directly in the world of form largely without mediating
or underlying ideologies. Actually, a very extensive argument
ought to come in at this point. The ramifications are neces-
sarily more complex than this short review can cover.
Reviews necessarily caricature the books that report on a
scholar's patient search. That is the game. My point here,
and I stand on it: the problems with linguistic models
applied to the visual arts makes hash of the sort of research
strategy Blau uses to dissect architect's convictions about
design. This is the books' only serious flaw.
Actually this author, despite her verbalism, or because of it,
knows a great deal about art and architecture, including a
great deal about the few weaknesses her analysis has. For
instance, the whole thrust of her Chapter 5 on merit as
design award winning depends upon a definition that must
seem outrageous to most social scientist-architect types
involved in the environment and behavior world. While the
discussion fails to deal directly and at length with the contra-
diction between the user-regarding, humanist values that
ranked so high among architects' convictions, and the
encapsulated aesthetic values of the professional reference
group, the author clearly recognizes the paradox. Another
related weakness appears in the inadequate treatment of the
contradictions between the architects' unrepentant environ-
mental determinism and the definition of merit, a point the
author begins to make in observing that architects give
"strong endorsement of this anachronistic formulation
(which) indicates a disregard for the large social science lit-
erature .. ." Readers would have benefited from a few
more words on this topic given the study's rich data and
author's bravado in moving into the political economy realm.
For this reviewer the strongest aspect of the work is its cath-
olicity, its breadth of interests, and background, and knowl-
edge. At the same time that is also a problem, the book
ranges so widely in but 150 pages the reader is hard
pressed to keep up. (Could MIT have given her a few more
pages? Were their marketing people that worried about
sales?) To put it another way, Blau's strength lies in her
ability to see architects' ideas, and the ways in which they
organize themselves in practice, not just in terms of the
immediate socio-economic context of New York City in 1974
and 1975, but also in terms of corporate capitalism, the
sociology of organizations, and, for a social scientist, in
terms of an extraordinary familiarity with the ideas, people,
and literatures of the American architects' world during the
1970s. She and Magali Larson must be the only sociologists
who read Tafuri and Frampton, and who could characterize
Joe Esherick's position in the profession. That is an amazing
accomplishment!
Given this breadth the book offers a treasury of insights into
the architects' practice selves. Chief among these as noted
earlier is the exploration of the alienating contradiction
between value convictions around architecture as creative art
and the reality of powerlessness at the drawing board. But
Blau offers positive interpretations which should give some
people a way out. To avoid alienation stay small and light,
and hang out with designers. But how to buy the groceries?
If you have to work in a corporate firm, work in one orga-
nized vertically into project teams. Architects are bound to
be better informed, to know themselves better, from Archi-
tects and Firms. Judith Blau's pathbreaking study reported
in this richly informative, sensitive, and knowingly written
short volume should lead to a quantum jump in architects'
This content downloaded from
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
self-knowledge. But this may not happen. The likelihood it
will, or even that Blau's book will find a wide professional
audience, becomes muted as the question shifts to the rela-
tionship between self-knowledge and successful practice--a
question incidently that Blau does not address. As long as
the myth remains that everyman, and everywoman, can
make form, self-knowledge may simply get in the way.
Roger Montgomery, University of California, Berkeley
Gottfried Semper: In Search of Architecture,
by Wolfgang Hermann
Cambridge, Mass. & London: MIT Press
1984, 308pp., illus., $35.00
Until very recent times, Gottfried Semper has been handled
by architectural historians without much adroitness or suc-
cess. On the one hand, Semper's relation to that excessively
fecund tradition of German historians and theorists that blos-
somed near the end of the 19th century-an array which
included Konrad Fiedler, Adolf Hildebrand, Alois Riegl,
August Schmarsow, among others-has not been ade-
quately explored. On the other hand, the fascination, some-
times reverence, which Semper's ideas inspired in several
"modem" architects-notably, Otto Wagner, Adolf Loos,
Hendrik Berlage and John Root-has been imperfectly
understood. While these shortcomings may be due in part
to some basic biases of 20th-century histories, in general
the denigration or neglect of 19th-century eclectic influences,
it is also true that Semper's literary accessibility, rather inac-
cessibility, does little to mitigate the problem. Semper
cannot be read casually. Nor does any single work represent
or summarize his ideas.
Eclecticism, at least, no longer poses an obstacle to schol-
arly investigation, and there are indications that Semper is
gaining visability as a historical figure. In 1974 the Eidge-
nossischen Technischen Hochschule (ETH), in celebration of
the founding of the Semper Archives, held an international
symposium on Semper's architecture and theory. From the
conference emerged a score of papers on Semper and, per-
haps more importantly, a new interest in re-evaluating his
historical significance.
Without doubt, the leading scholar examining Semper's life
and theory has been Wolfgang Herrmann. At the 1974 sym-
posium, Herrmann's research surveyed Semper's relation-
ship with the publisher Eduard Vieweg. Four years later
Herrmann published Gottfried Semper im Exil, an impressive
biographical account of Semper's years in Paris and Lon-
don, and his struggle with starting his main work, Der Stil in
den technischen und tektonischen Kinsten oder praktische
Asthetik (Style in the Technical and Tectonic Arts or Practical
Aesthetics). In 1981 Herrmann released his Katalog und
Kommentare on the voluminous material housed in Zurich: a
book of careful scholarship and annotation, and containing
seven unpublished manuscripts by Sefmper and five critical
essays by Herrmann. Gottfried Semper: In Search of Archi-
tecture is Herrmann's English translation of his first book,
Gottfried Semper im Exil, together with the essays and
manuscripts from the Katalog und Kommentare.
Gottfried Semper is a subject that whets either the histori-
an's interest or indignation. A polemicist for Greek poly-
chromy, a youthful Professor, an educational reformer, a
monumental builder, an unrepentant revolutionary, an
impoverished refugee, a brilliant theorist, an on occasion, a
vain liar-these are but a few of the personality attributes
that constitute this Wagnerian friend of Richard Wagner.
Herrmann's success in chronicling Semper's middle years in
part one of this work lay in his detached and skillful mar-
shalling of facts, in a way that simply allows the person of
Semper to emerge. In particular Herrmann is methodical in
tracing Semper's financial and psychological troubles during
his years in political exile, and in outlining the many false
starts and lengthy conceptual formulation of Der Stil. In the
former chapter Semper resembles a figure from a Dumas
novel, destined to a seemingly endless string of defeats and
humiliations; in the latter, Semper himself steps forth as the
Summer 1985, JAE 38/4
bete noir, in his willingness to sacrifice a long-standing Park and his later encounters with other
friendship with the publisher Vieweg to his personal guilt
Goodhue buildings that there was something
and pecuniary greed.
important in the work of Goodhue that had
In the second and third part of Gottfried Semper: In Search ...... ...: not been acknowledged. He knew that this
of Architecture-(the essays by Herrmann and the Semper
work mattered to him even when most of his
manuscripts)-Wolfgang Herrmann tums from Semper's life peers and his teachers had shown little
to his theory. interest in it and the profession was con-
cerned with other issues. So he went about
The six essays by the author cover an array of issues, each
.. ... . ..'. :.

setting the world right on this score; creat-

addressed from Herrmann's total command of the archival
ing an exemplary book in the prestigious
documents. The first, "Was Semper a Materialist?", no
longer promotes critical debate or possesses historical inter-
American Monographs Series sponsored by
est, however it is made necessary by the numerous and ......... . .......
the Architectural History Foundation. His
continuing allusions to Semper as such-so prevalent in the work has helped the profession to articulate
artistic literature of this century as to appear intractable. *
new standards-to
~ ~
recognize
~~~~~~
once again
that traditions can be a well-spring for inno-
Three other essays deal, respectively, with Semper's posi-
vation; that ornament and sculpture (when
tions on the Gothic Revival, mid 19th-century architecture in
general, and the use of iron as a building material. These
they are genuinely a part of the building's
refer, once again, to earlier discussions, and if he emerges conception) enrich our perceptions and our
from Herrmann's analysis less sagacious than before it is understanding; that architecture is experi-
because there is no longer the overriding need to depict him enced in the passage through spaces and
as a proto-modemist. He steps forth simply as an opinion- the complexities of textured and configured,
ated individual. sun-bathed forms; and that landscape
should be understood to be the underlying
RICHAR
The essays "Semper and the Archeologist Botticher" and
matrix for our experience of buildings. With
"Semper's Position of the Primitive Hut" throw much needed

In
light on crucial areas of his theory which were previously
meticulous scholarship and clear exposition
murky. His connection to Botticher has been discussed in the book brings to life the works and con-
several German dissertations. Yet although earlier writers cerns of one of America's great architects,
were forced to approach the subject through Semper's vilify-
Memor
and in so doing reawakens interests that
ing and disingenuous references to the Berlin architect, Herr- Sanconventional professional Die
wisdom had sup-
mann has uncovered new evidence-beginning with Sem- Disciplin
pressed. Dick, meanwhile, stands aside: he
per's request slip for Botticher's work at the British mind as
does not intrude upon the material he brings
Museum, and the extensive notes Semper made during his special
forward, he lets it make its own case. The q
reading. What becomes clear is how deeply Semper felt immedi
book is a means for sharing what he
challenged by Botticher's exegesis of the Doric temple, and labored
learned, for extending the reach of his
how strongly he resented what he believed to be an intru-
energy
enthusiasms, not for aggrandizing himself.
sion into his area. At the same time Botticher's ideas forced
lections
Semper to review and sharpen his previously held beliefs,
Throughout his career he gave his energies
and carry his analysis into new and more fertile terrain.
Grace
to enlarging and improving upon the con- s
Herrmann's essay, "Semper's Position on the Primitive
grace
ception of architecture. He strove to be th
Hut," underscores the important theoretical revision result-
confide
where he could do that best, where he could
ing from Semper's reading of Bo1tticher in 1852, by examin-
ing Semper's complementary regard for the hut as both an
Dick's
be among those who were thinking most t
ethnological fact (still existent in the so-called "primitive" ties see
acutely about what architecture could
areas of the world) and as a "hieratic analogue" (in early mand.
become: at the University of California, H
antiquity transposing its omamental forms into stone). By start-ne
Berkeley in what were surely its finest years;
1854, Botticher had caused Semper to limit his analysis quality
the University of Pennsylvania where Louis
almost totally to omamental concems. mind.
Kahn was conducting the most vital graduate H
remark
program in the country; Cambridge, Eng-
The five Semper manuscripts translated in part three of
hisland, from whichluci
much of the prevailing
Herrmann's work remained unpublished in German until
1981. The first and last of these, Semper's prefaces to
well in
thought about architecture has descended;
"Comparative Building Theory" and "Theory of Formal memori
the offices of Richard Meier and Charles
Beauty," reveal his views on contemporary architectural gracefu
Moore, two singularly important architects
trends; the other three works deepen our knowledge of his them
of our time who admired his talents; the th
theoretical development. Their significance, in large part, lay University of Texas and later Columbia Uni-
in their connection with Semper's published writings. His The spe
versity, where his own thoughts could con-
introduction and tenth chapter of "Comparative Building accomp
geal through teaching in an open, inquiring,
Theory," for instance, is a youthful work (1849/50), awk- venture
and vigorous mileu; the Cooper Hewett
ward in its pronunciation of ideas, yet of great importance his abil
since it contains Semper's first formulation of his four-
Museum, where his work helped to renew
hesitate
motive theory, and because it shows how indebted his Bek- interest in architecture and design as sub-
designs
leidung or "cladding" thesis was to the Assyrian findings of jects for exhibition. He found in New York a
Cooper-
Paul Emile Botta and Henry Layard. Semper's introduction place where his enthusiasms and energies
he knew
to "Theory of Formal Beauty" (1856/59), by contrast, is a could be matched by those around him, and
the subt
mature
mature and
andsophisticated
sophisticatedwork,
work,obligated
obligated
to the
to the
writings
writings
of of he earned their great esteem and affection.
Botticher
Botticherand
andAdolf
AdolfZeising,
Zeising,
betokening
betokening
thethe
Prolegomenon
Prolegomenon
of of clarity
Der Stil. seeBut Dick nevertimlost his love for this place,
parts
where, I believe, his great interests were of
An unfamiliarity with Semper's writings, however, in no way pleasur
formed and where, surely, the confidence
precludes an appreciation of Semper's ideas or Herrmann's
Bertram
and grace that marked his accomplishments
analysis. The latter's scholarship is impeccable. In view of
remind
were first nurtured by his family.
the many false appraisals of Semper and his ideas, Herr-
architec
mann's book, Gottfried Semper: In Search of Architecture,
Richard Oliver's work will abide with us; we
Most ar
becomes an essential starting point to this sardonic guru of
letters, the architect and the man. shall cherish his memory.
ment no
about a
Harry Francis Mallgrave, Minneapolis, Minnesota. Donlyn Lyndon
knew f

Summer 1985, J

This content downloaded from

202.119.46.131 on Thu, 29 Sep 2022 13:14:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms