HEGEL'S INFLUENCE ON MIES VAN DER ROBE'S

DEVELOPMENT OF ARCHITECTURAL SPACE

Jae Sung Yim

A graduate research project

111

Architecture

Presented to the Faculties of the University of New South Wales in Partial

Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture in
History and Theory.

1996
... if someone does not find himself, let me remind him of Mies van der
Rohe.

Sergius Ruegenberg, quoted by Fritz Neumeyer, 1993

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS...................................................... p. 3

I. INTRODUCTION.......................................................... p. 4

II. BUILDING ART AND PHILOSOPHY OF SPIRIT.................. p. 6

III. DIALECTIC AND SPIRIT................................................ p. 9

IV. THE GENEALOGY OF SPACE ......................................... p. 11

V. CONCLUSION............................................................. p. 29

REFERENCES..................................................................... p. 31

2
 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

1. The Riehl House, Berlin-Neubabelsberg, 1907. From Schulze, F. Mies

van der Rohe: A Critical Biography........................................................ p. 15
2. Plan of the Riehl House. From Schculze, F.,......................................... p. 15
3. The Wolf House, Guben, 1927. From Tegethoff, W. Mies van der
Rohe: The Villas and Country Houses..................................................... p. 16

4. The Esters House, Krefeld, 1930. From Tegethoff, W............. .. .......... p. 17

5. Plan of the Esters House. From Tegethoff, W...................................... p. 17
6. The Lange House, Krefeld, 1930. From Tegethoff, W.......................... p. 18
7. View From Entrance Hall. From Tegethoff, W..................................... p. 18
8. Interior, The Barcelona Pavilion, Barcelona, 1929. From Neumeyer, F.
The Artless Word: Mies van der Rohe on the Building Art...................... p. 20
9. The Barcelona Pavilion. From Schulze, F............................................. p. 21
10. Plan of the Barcelona Pavilion. From Tegethoff, W............................ p. 21
11. The Tugendhat House, Brno, 1930. From Tegethoff, W..................... p. 22
12. Living Area, the Tugendhat House. From Tegethoff, W...................... p. 22
13. The Glass Skyscraper, Berlin, 1921. From Schulze, F....................... p. 24
14. The New National Gallery, Berlin, 1968. From Schulze, F................. p. 25
15. Exterior, the New National Gallery. From Schulze, F......................... p. 26
16. Interior, the New National Gallery. From Schulze, F......................... p. 27
17. The Farnsworth House, Illinois, 1950. From Spaeth, D. Mies van der
Rohe........................................................................................................ p. 27
18. The Crown Hall, Illinois, 1956. From Schulze, F................................ p. 28

3
 HEGEL'S INFLUENCE ON MIES VAN DER ROHE'S
DEVELOPMENT OF ARCHITCTURAL SPACE

I. INTRODUCTION

The spatial concept of Mies van der Rohe was defined as 'Universal space'
(Haraguchi 1988: 65) with the character of homogeneity and functional
flexibility (McLeod 1986: 25). Haraguchi in his writing on "Towards the
Universal space: An Analysis of Mies van der Rohe," in A Comparative
Analysis of 20th-Century Houses, surmised that Universal space was
developed from Mies's early Classic, Revolutionary, through Transitional to
Mature period based on the analogy of form (Haraguchi 1989: 67).

Haraguchi divided Mies's buildings into four 'Types' which are based on
the arrangement of 'Box-shaped.' For instance, in Type 1 of Mies's overall
form of the buildings, Haraguchi defined it as an arrangement of boxes in
simple overall outlines such as rectangular or U-shaped. Types were labelled
further according to the way the boxes were organised (Haraguchi: 67).
However, understanding of Mies's spatial concept with its formal
arrangement was insufficient if Mies' s manifestos in 1926 were viewed
profoundly. In his manifestos in 1926, Mies had rejected all 'formal
expression' of building, but he asserted that building art is always 'the
spatial execution of spiritual decisions' (Neumeyer 1991: 253).

Instead of a formal understanding of Mies' s spatial concept, Universal space

based on his manifestos can be understood in relation to spirit. Neumeyer
explained that for Mies in 1926, "the 'spiritual will,' the 'spiritual decision'
4
now takes its position" (Neumeyer: 159). Since then, the notion of spirit
permeates Mies's work and his statements. It appears that this was
influenced by the philosophy of spirit of Hegel, the German philosopher for
whom spirit was self-knowledge of reality. Hegel articulated a three stage
developmental progression from Subjective spirit through Objective spirit to
Absolute spirit in which the subject eventually developed the capacity to
know spirit. While every stage has its own existential requirements, at the
highest level is the awareness of reality.

Hegel's comments on spirit illuminates Mies' s own statements and help

reveal why Mies was famous for Universal space. The idea on Universal
space is no longer well understood, but a close examination of Hegel's
philosophy of spirit shows that it is a model for the architectural space of
Mies.

Hegel's philosophy was one of the many philosophical influences on Mies' s

architecture (Hartoonian 1994: 68). Hegel is regarded as an idealist who
became one of the most influential thinkers of the nineteenth century, but
Hegel also had interests in architecture and aesthetic. As van de Ven
remarked, 'For the first time in aesthetic theory, the space within, enclosed
by an architectural boundary, was recognised and identified as the necessary
content. Space within, made visible by concrete form, became the
embodiment of Spirit' (van de Ven 1978: 37).

In this research the Hegel's influence of philosphy of spirit on Mies' s

architecture, particularly, Universal space will show how Mies developed
his idea based on Hegel's philosophy. To explore the question, it will be
divided into three parts. The first part will search for the common ground of
5
both Hegel and Mies; where they started to develop their philosophy and
architecture, respectively. Hegel's influence on Mies will be based on this
common ground. The second, Hegel's philosophy of spirit will be closely
viewed to find how he evaluated his philosophy according to his dialectic, a
system embedded in his philosophy. In the third, based on the analogies of
the first part, it will be argued that the similarity and structure of the
evaluation of philosophy and architecture have a close relationship. This part
will explore how Mies's Universal space was developed in the reflection of
Hegel's Philosophy of Spirit and Dialectic. The Universal space of Mies will
be explained in relation to the common ground between Hegel and Mies;
reality. The concrete meaning of reality will be revealed in architectural
interpretation and Mies' s Universal space finally will be understood as
reality both in philosophy and in architecture.

II. BUILDING ART AND PHILOSOPHY OF SPIRIT

Whenever a discussion of Mies' s work arises, it is impossible to avoid

reference to spirit, particularly Zeitgeist, the spirit of age. Hartoonian, for
example, said that, 'In a Hegelian sense, Mies conceived of the Zeitgeist as
a driving force in history infused in and identified with technology'
(Hartoonian 1994: 69).

In relation to Zeitgeist, before Hartoonian, the discussion on Hegel and Mies

has continuously appeared. Some of the earliest research had been done by
Peter Serenyi in his paper abstract, "Spinoza, Hegel, and Mies: The meaning
of the New National Gallery in Berlin," appeared in Journal of the
Architectural Historians 30 (Oct. 1971 ). Serenyi, from Mies' s speech
6
quoting Spinoza's famous dictum, "Great things are never easy. They are as
difficult as they are rare," traced the influence of Spinoza on Mies through
Hegel. He stated, 'Mies's relation to Spinoza must be seen through Hegel ...
the latter's [Hegel] attempt to fuse . Biblical idealism with Cartesian
rationalism is replaced by Mies' s unification of scientific materialism with
German idealism' (Serenyi 1971: 240).
After Serenyi claimed a direct relationship of Mies to Hegel, another
significant remark appeared in Juna Pablo Bonta's Architecture and its
interpretation: A study of Expressive Systems in Architecture (1979). Bonta
quoted letters from Colin Rowe in relation to Mies in May 26 and June 20,
197 5. 'It seems to me that Mies begins as something of an Hegelian (the will
of the epoch translated into space), ... ' (Bonta 1979: 215).

Continued from Serenyi and Rowe, Fritz Neumeyer in German extensively

investigated the background of Mies' s philosophical influences from Hegel,
Nietzsche, Riehl and Gardini in relation to architects of his time, like
Behrens and Berlage. Neumeyer stated Mies's relationship with Hegel in his
paper, "A World in Itself: Architecture and Technology," presented in a
symposium held to mark the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Toronto-
Dominion Centre in 1992. He claimed, "Mies held that technology was 'a
world in itself.' Supported by a Hegelian concept of the spirit of the age, this
world was taken to be a 'real historical movement - one of the greatest
movements which shape and represent their epoch' (Neumeyer 1994: 71).

In contrast to the research by Serenyi, Bonta, and Neumeyer on the

relationship between Hegel and Mies, not only did they fail to profoundly
compare and understand Hegel's philosophy and Mies' s Universal space,
but, they left the question of why the relationship had been revealed for a
7
long time without further discussion. Mies' s apparent change of space has
not been discussed in the question of why. Even the recent research by
Haraguchi and Hartoonian has not clearly proved why Mies had changed
spatial concept through his career. Haraguchi, as discussed before, divided
Mies' s architecture with form and did not discuss the reason. Hartoonian
also did not understand the reason, but he only concentrated on 'the process
of demythification of construction and the realisation of what I [Hartoonian]
would like to call Mies' s speechless art of construction' (Hartoonian 1994:
68) in his essay, "Mies van der Rohe: The Genealogy of Column and Wall."

Despite insufficient sources relative to Hegel and Mies, this research will be
viewed from Mies' s own words on spirit in his writing and its relation to
Hegel's philosophy of spirit.

Mies' s own use of the word spirit started to appear from his lecture notes in
1926. 'One will have to understand that building art is always the spatial
execution of spiritual decisions, that it is tied to its times and can only
manifest itself in addressing vital tasks with the means of its own time. It has
never been otherwise' (Neumeyer 1991: 253). Since then, building art, as
the spatial execution of spiritual decisions, continuously appeared in Mies' s
public lectures. For example, his thoughts on building art appeared again in
1928 in his "The Precondition of Architectural Work" and eventually he
wrote with the title of "We Stand at the Turning Point of Time: Building Art
as the Expression of Spiritual Decisions" in 1928.

From his comments on building art and spirit, it seemed unclear whether
Mies was thinking of space in relation to Hegel's spirit. However, in his
articles on Innendekoration in 1928, Mies mentioned the relationship with
8
his position on building art, space, and spirit. He explained, 'Building art is
in reality only understandable as a life process, it is an expression of man's
ability to assert himself and master his surroundings' (Neumeyer: 304).

In Hegel's Absolute spirit, philosophy, the resolution of art and religion and
the final stage of its evolution, 'knows that it is itself all reality' (Stace 1955:
323). Also, in relation to Hegel's reality, Baird mentioned that 'reality is
understood as the Absolute unfolding dialectically in a process of self-
development which comes to know itself through the human mind's
increased understanding of reality, or the absolute' (Baird: 1995). To Mies,
building art of spatial execution is based on reality which is similar to the
position that Hegel stood for his Absolute spirit.

Reality in building art can be understood as the absolute expressed by space

which can unfold dialectically in a process of self-development, 'man's
ability to assert himself and master his surroundings,' with 'a knowledge of
the time, its task and means, are necessary prerequisites for the work of the
building artist, ... ' (Neumeyer 1991: 304). Universal space for Mies is
reality and can be understood as the absolute unfolding dialectically in a
process of self-development.

III. DIALECTIC AND SPIRIT

Hegel claimed that the absolute must ultimately be regarded as pure

Thought, or Spirit, or Mind, in the process of self-development (Stace 1955:
26). The logic that governs this development process is dialectic. The
dialectical method involves the notion that movement, or process, or
9
progress, 1s the result of the conflict of opposites. Traditionally, this
dimension of Hegel's thought has been analysed in terms of the categories of
thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.

Hegel regarded thesis as 'immediate' or as characterised by 'immediacy'

(Stace: I 05). 'Being' is the representation of 'immediacy.' It is simple and
undifferentiated and it can be grasped immediately. It claims to be in itself
the sole truth without reference to other than itself. It asserts itself as the
complete truth because it has not yet embraced nothing. 'Immediacy' is the
same as simple identity.

Such 'immediacy' of being gives rise to opposition, or an antithesis to

become the truth with otherness. The complete truth of being itself will face
with its reference, 'Nothing.' It is characterised as 'mediation' (Stace: I 05).
Nothing has developed within itself the distinction between being and
nothing and this differentiation is mediation.

As a result of the conflict, a third point of view arises, synthesis, which

overcomes the conflict by reconciling at a higher level the truth contained in
both thesis and antithesis. 'Becoming' is the merging of mediation in a new
immediacy. It abolishes and preserves the differences of thesis and
antithesis. Being and nothing and the opposition between them are merged in
the unity of becoming.

Hegel proposed a three stage developmental progression of spirit that

appears to be the basis for Mies' s Universal space. The first consists of
Subjective spirit which takes first condition as a container of spirit. Hegel
called 'subject insofar as it is in its concept' (Hegel 1990: 203). Subjective
10
spirit as free mind is the resolution of physical content - The soul - and its
sensuous perception - Consciousness. It can only be defined by itself. There
is no outward force to measure the existence of being. It is being itself with
its natural limitation.

The second consists of Objective spirit which means the spirit issued force
from its inwards and subjectivity, and embodied in an external outward
world where spirit exists itself without natural limitation, but still, it exists as
Objective spirit (Stillman 1987: vii). Objective spirit is regarded by Hegel as
the sphere of the law, morality and the ethics (Hegel 1990: 241). Objective
spirit, unlike Subjective spirit, does not exist with its physical content, but it
still exists.

Finally, the third involves Absolute spirit. It is the unity of Subjective spirit
and Objective spirit and it is only here that 'spirit becomes at last absolutely
free, infinite, and fully concrete' (Stace 1955: 323). In its final stage,
'philosophy, spirit knows that it is itself all reality.' The world becomes only
itself. The world as the object, is identical with itself, with the subject.
Therefore, in Absolute spirit, Subject and Object spirit are identical. Hegel
thought that Absolute spirit itself develops in this dialectic fashion toward an
ultimate end or goal.

IV. THE GENEALOGY OF SPACE

For Mies, Hegel's philosophy of spirit erects a necessary intellectual link

allowing him to describe how architects can move developmentally, but
conditionally, from his early concept of space to Universal space. In relation
11
to spirit, Rowe discussed in his The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa and
Other Essays, that spirit seemed to pervade architectural thinking in early
20th century Germany (Rowe 1995: 126) supported by his early thought that
Mies was interested in, and studied spirit (Bonta 1979: 215).

Although, Mies almost never explained his own work, his statement on his
building usually was taken to be simple, or an example of his silence, but it
would be consistent with philosophy and could be the reason why there is
such difficulty interpreting Mies' s work (Brown 1990: 44). As Spaeth
mentioned, to Mies, 'it is not just architecture, not just building art, but the
refinement of the principles of building, and the act itself of building'
(Spaeth 1986: 14).

To understand Mies's architecture, Haraguchi explained Mies's spatial

development as being governed by two components: structure and space. In
the conclusion of Haraguchi, he described that 'in the development from the
Classic period to the Mature period there was a gradual tendency for walls
to become separated and for the separated walls to be reduced to a
minimum.' And he continued on space that 'Enclosed space was generally
opened; the simple and static space of the classic period became
complicated and dynamic in the Revolutionary period and then simple and
static again through the final two periods [Revolutionary and Mature
period]' (Haraguchi 1989: 68).

Based on Haraguchi' s observation on Mies' s spatial evolution and its

relationship with structure, the philosophy of spirit enables Mies to address
three levels of concern in terms of building art as self-development and in
the understanding of reality to both Hegel and Mies himself.
12
In the development of Mies' s space, Universal space must be grasped in the
space of architecture by an understanding of space through the relationship
between absolute quality of space and space bounded within natural
conditions, the walls. The space extended and longed for, being absolute, is
in the period of withdrawal of natural conditions with separating walls which
is gradually opened and creates ambiguous space - enclosed and not-
enclosed. Following this, is open space that addresses the universal and
absolute quality of space with structure. Separating walls are reduced to a
minimum, columns and space become simple and static. But, being absolute
and representing reality, because it is simple and static, universal space
resolves its subjective character of being, enclosed and objective character
of being, not-enclosed.

The first and closest to the emergence of conscious activity is his concern
about space within the walls. Classical space is defined by its natural
conditions. According to Haraguchi, the Classical period of Mies' s
architecture was distinguished by 'Regular form defined by solid walls.'
Then he further explained, 'Designs in the classical period are symmetrical
boxes which have rectangular or U-shaped outlines. The approach routes to
these buildings are set on the central axis, which is fairly traditional'
(Haraguchi 1989: 67). Haraguchi's analysis on architecture of Mies's
Classical period can be discussed in terms of the character of space and the
relationship between space inside and outside.

From Haraguchi, Classical space is bounded by the walls, the separation

between inside and outside is clearly expressed and its character of space is
captured within. Its character is similar to Subjective spirit of Hegel,
because, Subjective spirit is natural, inward, and immediate. As Subjective
13
spirit of soul, consciousness and spirit is bounded within physical body,
space is bounded in physical elements of architecture.

Mies' s early projects and some projects until 1936 can be called Classical
space with their character of space enclosed by walls and the spatial
relationship between inside and outside. Regarding the relationship between
space of inside and outside, and walls, the windows are of major concern in
the expression of this relationship. Ford in his The Details of Modem
Architecture mentioned that 'the traditional window is designed to
emphasise the mass of the building and the support of the weight above the
opening' (Ford 1990: 269). From his comment, the quality of space inside
and its relationship with outside, it can be deduced that space of free, infinite
and absolute is heavily enclosed with minimum openings to emphasise the
mass and to support the weight. Hence, its free will is constrained with a
physical boundary governed by gravity.

Mies' s spatial expression of this period can be divided into two different
stages. The first stage can be distinguished with the mass and limited
openings. The Riehl House (1907), first independent work for a philosopher
Alo is Riehl, and the Werner House ( 1913) were examples of the early
Classical period. The Riehl House (Figure 1, 2) was 'a simple brick
structure' (Schulze 1985; 24) recalling the traditional eighteen-century villa
house of the Postdam-Neubabelsberg. The internal space was arranged by
the walls and its relationship with the outside was limited because the size of
openings was limited by the weight.

14
Figure 1. The Riehl House, Berlin-Neubabelsberg, 1907.

Figure 2 . Plan of the Riehl House.

15
Figure 3. The Wolf House, Guben, 1927.

In the second stage, the massiveness was much reduced with wide openings.
The introduction of steel beams to his design in the houses between 1925
and 1930 like the Wolf House (1927) (Figure 3), the Esters House (1930)
(Figure 4, 5) and the Lange House (1930) (Figure 6, 7), allowed Mies to
express the flowing of space (Frampton 1995: 167) and improve
transparency through wider windows (Ford 1990: 267). Even though Mies
kept his constrnction method of traditional load-bearing walls, he certainly
used more glass for those houses (Frampton 1995: 167).

16
Figure 4 . The Esters House, Krefeld, 1930.

Figure 5. Plan of the Esters House.

17
 :~

' 1 •· :.~
-'.".·
ll:

' .
·i.
d' ·

Figure 6. The Lange House, Krefe ld, 1930.

Figure 7. View From Entrance Ha ll.

18
The second is Transitional space distinguished by the tendency of containing
complicated and dynamic, but ambiguous space with the separated walls. As
Objective spirit of Law, Moral and Ethics does not exist in physical form,
but does exist without that, Transitional space is, too, not confined by its
physical form, the walls, but still exists. The character of space without its
definite body becomes 'ambiguous space' (Neumeyer 1994: 78) because
space is neither enclosed nor open.

Compared to Classical space clearly defined by the walls and limited in its
contact with absolute character of space, open and infinite, through the
windows governed by the weight, Transitional space becomes ambiguous
because it does not rely on the walls to be confined, but it does on the
columns. The openings are freed from the weight. Space is not bounded by
the walls and it is not limited to contact with the outside through the
windows governed by the weight. As in Barcelona Pavilion (Figure 8, 9 10),
there is no distinction between space freely flowing between inside and
outside. 'Walls are no longer subject to the rationality of gravity'
(Hartoonian: 74). Instead, little steel posts, cruciform and cased in chrome
are supporting the horizontal plane to create space separated by the walls
and the ambiguity of space is heightened by steel posts which 'dissipate
their meagre substance into attenuated smears of light' (Evans 1990: 58)
(Figure 8).

The ambiguity of space may be also caused by a lack of distinguishing

structural members to support the weight. Frank Lloyd Wright in his
comments on one of Mies' s buildings in the Transitional period, the
Barcelona Pavilion, would like to persuade Mies 'to get rid of those damned
little posts that look so dangerous and interfering in his lovely designs'
19
(Evans: 58). In fact, Wright could not understand the presence of ' damned
li ttle posts ' and might think that the walls in the Pavilion should support the
weight. Neumeyer, later, provided a more sensible explanation than Wright,
writing that ' the shining skin imparted a dematerialised look that did not
disrnpt the unification of space. The sky, the ultimate symbol of the yearning
for infinity, was reflected on their polished smface' (Neumeyer 1991 : 2 14).

Based on the methods of employing structural system, column or plannar

load bearing wall, and spatial quality, this period includes the Barcelona
Pavilion (1929) and the Tugendhat House (1930) (Figure 11 , 12). The
ambiguity of space in the Barcelona Pavilion was kept in the Tugendhat
House, even the latter was designed for living. The disappearance of the
glass wall with mechanical operation creates ' a challenging ambiguity
between inside and outside' (Neumeyer 1994:81) (Figure 12).

.)t:\:

,. Alln
Figure 8. Interior, The Barcelona Pavilion, Barcelona, 1929.

20
,w,,/;(
:??•'
:·-·:

Figure 9. The Barcelona Pavilion.

··••·:·••,•· '."·"·••··••••··············•·······•·•···•·•·•·•·•••·• v•· <•"•••••._,., •• , •

• ·' . !· ·. • : • ...
· - - - - - - - -- -

Figure 10. Plan of the Barcelona Pavilion .

21
Figure 11 . The Tugendhat House, Brno, 1930.

Figure 12. Living Area, the Tugendhat House.

22
The third, is Hegelian freedom of space as Absolute spirit, called Universal
space. Universal space as a synthesis, has a character of Absolute spirit of
Hegel which becomes, at last absolutely free, infinite, and fully concrete.
Stace explained, 'In order to be absolute, spirit must embrace both sides in a
concrete unity. Absolute spirit must be both subject and object at the same
time' (Stace 1955: 439). Stace further explained in relation to Subject and
Object spirit, 'As being subjective, absolute spirit will necessarily be a mode
of human consciousness, and of individual consciousness. It cannot be a
purely impersonal existence, such as the state. It must be the actual
consciousness, existing in the minds of individual man, of some object.'
(Stace: 439-440).

In terms of being absolute, and as spirit became the unity of subject and
object, Universal space of Mies is the unity of Classical and Transitional
space. Space is confined by the walls and its infinite quality is governed by
gravity. Because the oneness of space is still bounded by physical form, it is
finite and it is looking for the otherness to be absolute. The otherness of
space was developed with the space of not-enclosed. Space of Transitional
period is ambiguously flowing between inside and outside.

For Universal space, it should include the character of space enclosed and
that of not-enclosed. Universal space as free, infinite and fully concrete it
should be enclosed and, simultaneously not-enclosed. Universal space of
Mies is finally represented as the unity of the opposite world of enclosed
and not-enclosed.

23
 ~.~~;~~~
> - ·:
,;• tt{ .
. .
t i•
J',:
: i:: r ·.

M
:;:::t;;

Figure 13. The G lass Skyscraper, Berlin, 1921.

The spatial quality of Classical space was represented in Universal space

with the walls, but the walls of the glass. The space is still enclosed by the
glass wall which obsessed Mies in his early buildings of the Glass
Skyscraper ( Figure 13) in Friedrichstrasse with ' a rich interplay of light
reflection' (Neumeyer 1991: 240). The glass not only reflects the light, but
mirrors ' the immediate image of city life' (Hays 1984: 19). With the images
mirrored on the glass, it forms the solid body and the space inside is not any
more transparent. It is enclosed (Figure 14).

In contrast to the character of reflection and rrurror, the glass wall of

Universal space period absorbed th e images of outside. Space of the inside
is not-enclosed because of the transparent quality of the glass. The glass
wall makes space extend outwards to merge with the outside. The freedom

2-4
of space inside was 'emiched by undisturbed communication with the
absolute, the horizon and the sky' (Neumeyer 1994: 8 1). The quality of
Universal space in The New National Gallery in Berlin, a synthesis of
enclosed and not-enclosed, was explained by Neumeyer as 'art can be
viewed against the backdrop of the city, with the viewer being visually
connected to it yet physically separated at the same time' (Ne umeyer 1991:
82) (Figure 15, 16).

Figure 14. The New National Gallery, Berlin, 1968.

25
F
:{'

Figure 15. Exterior, the New National Gallery.

Mies' s later works and spatial execution in terms of visual connection and
physical separation as in the Farnsworth House (Figure 17), the Crown Hall
(Figure 18) and the New National Gallery in Berlin, can be referred to as
Universal space. The character of buildings in this period is free open space
with the precondition Mies mentioned, ' three basic elements - a floor slab,
columns and a roof plate' (Neumeyer: 228). The columns supporting the
weight stands outside of the perimeter not to intem1pt the freedom of inside.
With the preconditions, space 'secures life but allows room for the unfolding
of the spirit, providing for twentieth-century man the ordered, if contrasting
reality of both freedom and retreat, expansiveness and restraint' (Neumeyer:
200).

26
Figure 16. Interior, the New National Gallery.

Figure l7. The Farnsworth House, Illinois, 1950.

27
Figure 18. The Crown Hall, Illinois, 1956.

What Mies must have had in mind was Universal space that ensures this
process and, in doing so, space eventually becomes absolute and infinite.
Space fanned and bounded by the wall s must go through the same
procession of Absolute spirit. In his speech, Mies outlines the forming
progression of space and seems to clearly derive from Hegel. ' Building is
giving fo rrn to reality. Fulfil the law to gain freedom ' (Neumeyer: 328).
Hegelian reality becomes freedom in space.

Hegel's philosophy articulates the steps or the process by which the

architect develops a capacity to address the question of spirit. Hegelian
reality is understood as the absolute unfolding dialectically. The spatial
executions may unfold dialectically, as well. Hence, Universal space is a
synthesis of Classical space, a thesis and Transitional space, an antithesis.

The process to understand reality has been explained with Hegel's

philosophy of spirit and its system and, based on that, Mies's process of

28
conforming Universal space and its philosophical influence, revealed.
However, the understanding of reality through self-development still remains
in the abstract. How can we read reality in Universal space? Universal space
as reality will be discussed to bring out the meaning of spirit and Universal
space.

Neumeyer in his reference to explain Mies's free plan, explained 'The

preference for an empty, silent room may have had its ideological-religious
impetus in the writings of Gardini and Rudolf Schwarz.' Then he quoted
from Gardini, 'fear of empty space and silence ... as a fear of being alone
with God and the forlorn standing in front of him.' Mies admired Rudolf
Schwarz 'who claims that the idea of a large, pure, almost empty space'
inspired Mies with 'not the longing to become lost, but the hope of finding
oneself (Neumeyer: 1991: 231) through 'the loss of memory and intimacy'
(Hartoonian 1994: 77).

V. CONCLUSION

Hegelian reality with the process of self-development through philosophy of

spirit and its dialectic process influenced Mies' s Universal space. Universal
space is not only adopting the process, but also, explains what reality is in
architecture and philosophy.

Mies' s searching for spirit to understand reality started from the philosophy
of spirit. Due to both Hegel and Mies looking for the absolute in life, it
seems natural that Mies took the process of Hegel as it is argued through
this research. However, Mies as an architect should interpret reality into a
29
concrete form. His understanding of building art as 'the spatial execution of
spiritual decisions' makes him search for the system underlaid between
space and spirit. The reality of Hegel as Absolute spirit led Mies to reality in
Universal space.

As Hegel was searching reality dialectically through the process of self-

development to understand its absolute quality, Mies started his journey
from space and its relation to structure. Concrete form of reality was
revealed in the evolution of space from enclosed space with the walls
through not-enclosed space with the separated walls and then, free space
with minimum. Hegelian reality not only exists in its concrete form, but, with
the meaning of space as reality. Mies' s journey to find the meaning of reality
in architecture created the empty, free space. Vast emptiness of space with
the horizon and the sky extended from inside to outside of absolute and
infinite that is never experienced makes one find oneself by the loss of
memory and intimacy. It is the moment of 'finding oneself through the
separation of a person from their intimate world that gains the freedom
which is prerequisite to positioning oneself in the universality of existence,
the fullness of self-development.

Reality of Universal space as Absolute spirit becomes at last absolutely free,

infinite, and fully concrete. It is understood as the absolute unfolding
dialectically in a process of self-development in Hegel and Mies.

30
REFERENCES

Baird, M. Robert. 1995. Georg Hegel. Microsoft Encarta: Multimedia

Encyclopedia. Redmond, Wash.: Microsoft.

Banta, Juan Pablo. 1979. Architecture and Its Interpretation: A Study of

Expressive Systems in Architecture. New York: Rizzoli.

Brown, W. Gordon. 1990. Form as the Object of Experience: Georg

Simmel's Influence on Mies van der Rohe. Journal of Architectural
Education, Vol. 43, Winter: 42-46.

Crowther, Paul. 1990. Art, Architecture and Self-Conscious: An Explanation

of Hegel's Aesthetics. In Andrew Benjamin. ed. Philosophy and
Architecture. London: Academic Editions.

Evans, Robin. 1990. Mies van der Rohe's Paradoxical Symmetries. AA

Files, 19, Spring: 56-68.

Ford, Edward, R. 1990. The Details of Modern Architecture. Cambridge,

Mass: The MIT Press.

Frampton, Kenneth. 1995. Studies in Tectonic Culture: The Poetics of

construction in Nineteenth and Twentieth Century Architecture. John Cava.
ed. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.

Haraguchi, Hideaki. 1989. A Comparative Analysis of 20th-Century

Houses. New York: Rizzoli.
31
Hartoonian, Gevork. 1994. Ontology of Construction: On Nihilism of
Technology in Theories of Modern Architecture. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Hays, K. Michael. 1984. Critical Architecture: Between Culture and Form.

Perspecta, No. 21: 14-29.

Hegel, Georg. W. F. 1_990. Encyclopedia of the Philosophical Sciences in

Outline and Critical Writings. Ernst Behler. ed. New York: Continuum.

Mertins, Detlef. 1994. Mies's Skyscraper "Project": Towards The

Redemption of Technical Structure. In Detlef Mertins. ed. The Presence of
Mies. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

McLeod, Mary. 1986. Mies After Postmodernism. Art in America, Vol. 74,
December: 25.

Neumeyer, Fritz. 1994. A world in Itself: Architecture and Technology. In

Detlef Mertins. ed. The Presence of Mies. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press.

Neumeyer, Fritz. 1991. The Artless Word: Mies van der Rohe on the
Building Art. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press

Rowe, Colin. 1995. The Mathematics of the Ideal Villa and Other essays.
Cambridge Mass.: The MIT Press.

32
Schulze, Franz. 1985. Mies van der Rohe: A Critical Biography.
Cambridge: The MIT Press .

- - -. 1989. Mies van der Rohe: Critical Essays. New York: The MIT
Press.

Serenyi, Peter. 1971. Spinoza, Hegel and Mies: The Meaning of the New
National Gallery in Berlin. In Abstracts of Papers. Journal of The Society of
Architectural Historian, 30, October: 240-241 .

- - -. 1980. Mies's New National Gallery: An Essay on Architechlral

Content. Harvard Review, Vol. 1, Spring, 181-189.

Spaeth, David. 1989. Misreading and the Search for the Zeitgeist.
Architecture and Urbanism, No. 224, May: 5-9 .

- - -. 1985. Mies van der Rohe. New York: Rizzoli Architechlral Press.

Stace, W. T. 1955. The Philosophy of Hegel: A Systematic Exposition.

London: Dover Publications, Inc.

Stillman, Peter, G. ed .. 1987. Hegel's Philosophy of Spirit. Albany: State

University of New York Press

Tegethoff, Wolf. 1985. Mies van der Rohe: The Villas and Country Houses.
New York: The Museum of Modem Art.

33
van de Ven, Comelis. 1978. Space in Architecture: The Evolution of a New
Idea in the Theory and History of the Modern Movements. Amsterdam: Van
Gorcum.

34