 |
A HOME IS NOT A
HOUSE
| Reyner Banham |
illustrated by François Dallegret |
When your house contains such a complex
of piping, flues, ducts, wires, lights, inlets, outlets, ovens, sinks,
refuse disposers, hi-fi re-verberators, antennae, conduits, freezers,
heaters -when it contains so many services that the hardware could stand
up by itself without any assistance from the house, why have a house to
hold it up. When the cost of all this tackle is half of the total outlay
(or more, as it often is) what is the house doing except concealing your
mechanical pudenda from the stares of folks on the sidewalk? Once or twice
recently there have been buildings where the public was genuinely confused
about what was mechanical services, what was structure-many visitors to
Philadelphia take quite a time to work out that the floors of Louis Kahn's
laboratory towers are not supported by the flanking brick duct boxes,
and when they have worked it out, they are inclined to wonder if it was
worth all the trouble of giving them an independent supporting structure.
No doubt about it, a great deal of the attention captured by those labs
derives from Kahn's attempt to put the drama of mechanical services on
show - and if, in the end, it fails to do that convincingly, the psychological
importance of the gesture remains, at least in the eyes of his fellow
architects. Services are a topic on which architectural practice has alternated
capriciously between the brazen and the coy - there was the grand old
Let-it-dangle period, when every ceiling was a mess of gaily painted entrails,
as in the council chambers of the UN building, and there have been fits
of pudicity when even the most innocent anatomical details have been hurriedly
veiled with a suspended ceiling.
Basically, there are two reasons for all this blowing hot and cold (if
you will excuse the air-conditioning industry's oldest working pun). The
first is that mechanical services are too new to have been absorbed into
the proverbial wisdom of the profession : none of the great slogans -
Form Follows Function, accusez la structure, Firmness Commodity and Delight,
Truth to Materials, Werzig ist Mehr - is much use in coping with the mechanical
invasion. The nearest thing, in a significantly negative way, is Le Corbusier's
"Pour Ledoux, c'était facile - pas de tubes," which seems
to be gaining proverbial type currency as the expression of a profound
nostalgia for the golden age before piping set in.
The second reason is that the mechanical invasion is a fact, and architects-especially
American architects - sense that it is a cultural threat to their position
in the world. American architects are certainly right to feel this, because
their professional speciality, the art of creating monumental spaces,
has never been securely established on this continent. It remains a transplant
from an older culture and architects in America are constantly harking
back to that culture. The generation of Stanford White and Louis Sullivan
were prone to behave like émigrés from France, Frank Lloyd
Wright was apt to take cover behind sentimental Teutonicisms like Lieber
Meister, the big boys of the Thirties and Forties came from Aachen and
Berlin anyhow, the pacemakers of the Fifties and Sixties are men of international
culture like Charles Eames and Philip Johnson, and so too, in many ways,
are the coming men of today, like Myron Goldsmith.
Left to their own devices, Americans do not monumentalize or make architecture.
From the Cape Cod cottage, through the balloon frame to the perfection
of permanently pleated aluminum siding with embossed wood-graining, they
have tended to build a brick chimney and lean a collection of shacks against
it. When Groff Conklin wrote (in "The Weather-Conditioned House")
that "A house is nothing but a hollow shell ... a shell is all a.house
or any structure in which human beings live and work, really is. And most
shells in nature are extraordinarily inefficient barriers to cold and
heat ..." he was expressing an extremely American view, backed by
a long-established grassroots tradition.
And since that tradition agrees with him that the American hollow shell
is such an inefficient heat barrier, Americans have always been prepared
to pump more heat, light and power into their shelters than have other
peoples. America's monumental space is, I suppose, the great outdoors
- the porch, the terrace, Whitman's rail - traced plains, Kerouac's infinite
road, and now, the Great Up There. Even within the house, Americans rapidly
learned to dispense with the partitions that Europeans need to beep space
architectural and within bounds, and long before Wright began blundering
through the walls that subdivided polite architecture into living room,
games room, card room, gun room etc., humbler Americans had been slipping
into
______________________________________________________________
Reyner Banham, British architectural historian and critic, currently
holds a fellowship, from the Graham Foundation to investigate the role
of mechanical services in the rise of modern architecture. "A Home
Is Not a House" is a direct product of this research, and the illustrations
by Moroccan-born architect designer and car-buff François
Dallegret add a footnote whose importance, Banham says, "goes
beyond their quality as graphics - they demonstrate the hollowness of
the fear of many architects that acceptance of the dominance of environmental
machinery will be 'the end of creativity.'"
______________________________________________________________
a way of life adapted to informally planned interiors that were, effectively,
large single spaces.
Now, large single volumes wrapped in flimsy shells have to be lighted
and heated in a manner quite different and more generous than the cubicular
interiors of the European tradition around which the concept of domestic
architecture first crystallized. Right from the start, from the Franklin
stove and the kerosene lamp, the american interior has had to be better
serviced if it was to support a civilized culture, and this is one of
the reasons that the U.S. has been the forcing ground of mechanical services
in buildings so if services are to be felt anywhere as a threat to architecture,
it should be in America.
"The plumber is the quartermaster of American culture," wrote
Adolf Loos, father of all European platitudes about the superiority of
U.S. plumbing. He knew what he was talking about; his brief visit to the
States in the Nineties convinced him that the outstanding virtues of the
American way of life were its informality (no need to wear a top hat to
call on local officials) and its cleanliness - which was bound to be noticed
by a Viennese with as highly developed a set of Freudian compulsions as
he had. That obsession with clean (which can become one of the higher
absurdities of America's lysol-breathing Kleenex-culture) was another
psychological motive that drove the nation toward mechanical services.
The early justifications of air-conditioning were not just that people
had to breathe: Konrad Meier ("Reflections on Heating and Ventilating,"
1904) wrote fastidiously of "... excessive amounts of water vapor,
sickly odors from respiratory organs, unclean teeth, perspiration, untidy
clothing, the presence of microbes due to various conditions, stuffy air
from dusty carpets and draperies ... cause greater discomfort and greater
ill health." (Have a wash, and come back for the next paragraph.)
Most pioneer air-conditioning men seem to have been nose-obsessed in this
way: best friends could just about force themselves to tell America of
her national B.O. - and then, compulsive salesmen to a man, promptly prescribed
their own patent improved panacea for ventilating the hell out of her.
Somewhere among these clustering concepts-cleanliness, the lightweight
shell, the mechanical serviees, the informality and indifference to monumental
architectural values, the passion for the outdoors-there always seemed
to me to lurk some elusive master concept that would never quite come
into focus. It finally came clear and legible to me in June 1964, in the
most highly appropriate and symptomatic circumstances.
I was standing up to my chest-hair in water, making home movies (I get
that NASA kick from taking expensive hardware into hostile environments)
at the campus beach at Southern Illinois. This beach combines the outdoor
and the clean in a highly American manner - scenically it is the ole swimmin'
hole of Huckleberry Finn tradition, but it is properly policed (by sophomore
lifeguards sitting on Eames chairs on poles in the water) and it's chlorinated
too. From where I stood, I could see not only immensely elaborate family
barbecues and picnics in progress on the sterilized sand, but also, through
and above the trees, the basketry interlaces of one of Buckminster Fuller's
experimental domes. And it hit me then, that if dirty old Nature could
be kept under the proper degree of control (sex left in, streptococci
taken out) by other means, the United States would be happy to dispense
with architecture and buildings altogether.
Bucky Fuller, of course, is very big on this proposition: his famous non-rhetorical
question, "Madam, do you know what your house weighs?" articulates
a subversive suspicion of the monumental. This suspicion is inarticulately
shared by the untold thousands of americans who have already shed the
deadweight of domestic architecture and live in mobile homes which, though
they may never actually be moved, still deliver rather better performance
as shelter than do ground-anchored structures costing at least three times
as much and weighing ten times more. If someone could devise a package
that would effectively disconnect the mobile home from the dangling wires
of the town electricity supply, the bottled gas containers insecurely
perched on a packing case and the semi-unspeakable sanitary arrangements
that stem from not being connected to the main sewer - then we should
really see some changes. It may not be so far away either; defense cutbacks
may send aerospace spin-off spinning in some new directions quite soon,
and that kind of miniaturizationtalent applied to a genuinely self-contained
and regenerative standard-of-living package that could be towed behind
a trailer home or clipped to it, could produce a sort of U-haul unit that
might be picked up or dropped off at depots across the face of the nation.
Avis might still become the first in U-Tility, even if they have to go
on being a trying second in car hire.
Out of this might come a domestic revolution beside which modern architecture
would look like Kiddibrix, because you might be able to dispense with
the trailer home as well. A standard-of-living package (the phrase and
the concept are both Bucky Fuller's) that really worked might, like so
many sophisticated inventions, return Man nearer to a natural state in
spite of his complex culture (much as the supersession of the Morse telegraph
by the Bell Telephone restored his power of speech nationwide). Man started
with two basic ways of controlling environment: one by avoiding the issue
and hiding under a rock, tree, tent or roof (this led ultimately to architecture
as we know it) and the other by actually interfering with the local meteorology,
usually by means of a campfire, which, in a more polished form, might
lead to the kind of situation now under discussion. Unlike the living
space trapped with our forebears under a rock or roof, the space around
a campfire has many unique qualities which architecture cannot hope to
equal, above all, its freedom and variability.
The direction and strength of the wind will decide the main shape and
dimensions of that space, stretching the area of tolerable warmth into
a long oval, but the output of light will not be affected by the wind,
and the area of tolerable illumination will be a circle overlapping the
oval of warmth. There will thus be a variety of environmental choices
balancing light agrainst warrnth according to need and interest. If you
want to do close work, like shrinking a human head, you sit in one place,
but if you want to sleep you curl up somewhere different; the floating
knuckle-bones game would come to rest somewhere quite different to the
environment that suited the meeting of the initiationrites steering committee...
and all this would be jim dandy if campfires were not so perishing inefficient,
unreliable, smoky and the rest of it.
But a properly set-up standard-of-living package, breathing out, warm
air along the ground (instead of sucking in cold along the ground like
a campfire), radiating soft light and Dionne Warwick in heart-warming
stereo, with well-aged protein turning in an infrared glow in the rotisserie,
and the ice-maker discreetly coughing cubes into glasses on the swingr-out
bar-this could do something for a woodland glade or creek-side rock that
Playboy could never do for its penthouse. But how are you going to manhandle
this hunk of technology down to the creek? It doesn't have to be that
massive; aerospace needs, for instance, have done wild things to solid-state
technology, producing even tiny refrigerating transistors. They don't
as yet mop up any great quantity of heat, but what are you going to do
in this glade anyhow; put a whole steer in deep-freeze ? Nor do you have
to manhandle it-it could ride on a cushion of air (its own air-conditioning
output, for instance) like a hovercraft or domestic vacuum cleaner.
All this will eat up quite a lot of power, transistors notwithstanding.
But one should remember that few Americans are ever far from a source
of between 100 and 400 horsepower - the automobile. Beefedup car batteries
and a self-reeling cable drum could probably get this package breathing
warm bourbon fumes o'er Eden long before microwave power transmission
or miniaturized atormic power plants come in. The car is already one of
the strongest arms in America's environmental weaponry, and an essential
component in one non-architectural anti-building that is already familiar
to most of the nation-the drive-in movie house. Only, the word house is
a manifest misnomer - just a flat piece of ground where the operating
company provides visual images and piped sound, and the rest of the situation
comes on wheels. You bring your own seat, heat and shelter as part of
the car. You also bring Coke, cookies, Kleenex, Chesterfields, spare clothes,
shoes, the Pill and god-wot else they don't provide at Radio City.
The car, in short, is already doing quite a lot of the standard-ofliving
package's job-the smoochy couple dancing to the music of the radio in
their parked convertible have created a ballroom in the wilderness (dance
floor by courtesy of the Highway Dept. of course) and all this is paradisal
till it starts to rain. Even then, you’re not licked - it takes
very little air pressure to inflate a transparent Mylar airdome, the conditioned-air
output of your mobile package might be able to do it, with or without
a little boosting, and the dome itself, folded into a parachute pack,
might be part of the package. From within your thirty-foot hemisphere
of warm dry lebensraum you could have spectacular ringside views of the
wind felling trees, snow swirling through the glade, the forest fire coming
over the hill or Constance Chatterley running swiftly to you know whom
through the downpour.
But ... surely this is not a home, you can't bring up a family in a polythene
bag? This can never replace the time-honored ranch-style tri-level standing
proudly in a landscape of five defeated shrubs, flanked on one side by
a ranch-style tri-level with six shrubs and on the other by a ranch-style
tri-level with four small boys and a private dust bowl. If the countless
Americans who are successfully raising nice children in trailers will
excuse me for a moment, I have a few suggestions to make to the even more
countless Americans who are so insecure that they have to hide inside
fake monuments of Permastone and instant roofing. There are, admittedly,
very sound day-to-day advantages to having warm broadloom on a firm floor
underfoot, rather than pine needles and poison ivy. America's pioneer
house builders recognized this by commonly building their brick chimneys
on a brick floor slab. A transparent airdome could be anchored to such
a slab just as easily as could a balloon frame, and the standard-of-living-package
could hover busily in a sort of glorified barbecue pit in the middle of
the slab. But an airdome is not the sort of thing that the kids, or a
distracted Pumpkin-eater could run in and out of when the fit took them-believe
me, fighting your way out of an airdome can be worse than trying to get
out of a collapsed rain-soaked tent if you make the wrong first move.
But the relationship of the serviees-kit to the floor slab could be re-arranged
to get over this difficulty; all the standard-o£-living tackle (or
most of it) could be re-deployed on the upper side of a sheltering membrane
floating above the floor, radiating heat, light and what-not downwards
and leaving the whole perimeter wide-open for random egress-and equally
casual ingress, too, I guess. That crazy modern-movement dream of the
interpenetration of indoors and outdoors could become real at last by
abolishing the doors. Technically, of course, it would be just about possible
to make the power membrane literally float, hovercraft style. Anyone who
has had to stand in the ground-effect of a helicopter will know that this
solution has little to recommend it apart from the instant disposal of
waste paper. The noise, power consumption and physical discomfort would
be really something wild. But if the power-membrane could be carried on
a column or two, here and there, or even on a brick-built bathroom unit,
then we are almost in sight of what might be technically possible before
the Great Society is much older.
The basic proposition is simply that the power-membrane should blow down
a curtain of warmed/cooled/conditioned air around the perimeter of the
windward side of the un-house, and leave the surrounding weather to waft
it through the living space, whose relation ship in plan to the membrane
above need not be a one-to-one relationship. The membrane would probably
have to go beyond the limits of the floor slab, anyhow, in order to prevent
rain blow-in, though the air-curtain will be active on precisely the side
on which the rain is blowing and, being conditioned, will tend to mop
up the moisture it falls. The distribution of the air-curtain will be
governed by various electronic light and weather sensors, and by that
radical new invention, the weathervane. For really foul weather automatic
storm shutters would be required, but in all but the most wildly in climates,
it should be possible to design the conditioning kit to with most of the
weather most of the time, without the power consumption becoming ridiculously
greater than for an ordinary inefficient monumental type house.
Obviously, it would still be appreciably greater, but this argument hinges
on the observation that it is the American Way to spend money on services
and upkeep rather than on structure as do the peasant cultures of the
Old World. In any we don't know where we shall be with things like solar
power in next decade, and to anyone who wants to entertain an almost-possible
vision of air-conditioning for absolutely free, let me recommand Shortstack
(another smart trick with a polythene tube) in the december 1964 issue
o£ Analog. In fact, quite a number of the obvious common sense objections
to the un-house may pove to be self evaporating: for instance, noise may
be no problem because there would be no surrounding wall to reflect it
back into the living space and, in any case, the constant whisper of the
air-curtain would provide a fair threshold of loudness that sounds would
have to beat before they began to be comprehensible and therefore disturbingr.
Bugs? Wild life? In summer they should be no worse than with the doors
and windows of an ordinary house open; in winter all right-thinking creatures
either migrate or hibernate; but, in any case, why encourage the normal
processes of Darwinian competition to tidy up the situation for you? All
that is needed is to trigger the process by means of a general purpose
lure; this would radiate mating calls and sexy scents and thus attract
all sorts of mutually incompatible predators and prey into a compact pool
of unspeakable carnage. A closed-circuit television camera could relay
the state of play to a screen inside the dwelling and provide a twenty-four-hour
program that would make the ratings for Bonanza look like chicken feed.
And privacy ? This seems to be such a nominal concept in American life
as factually lived that it is difficult to believe that anyone is seriously
worried. The answer, under the suburban conditions that this whole argument
implies, is the same as for the glass houses architects were designing
so busily a decade ago - more sophisticated landscaping. This, after all,
is the homeland of the bulldozer and the transplantation of grown trees
- why let the Parks Commissioner have all the fun ?
As was said above, this argument implies suburbia which, for better or
worse, is where America wants to live. It has nothing to say about the
city, which, like architecture, is an insecure foreign growth on the continent.
What is under discussion here is an extension of the Jeffersonian dream
beyond the agrarian sentimentality of Frank Lloyd Wright's Usonian/Broadacre
version -the dream of the good life in the clean countryside, power-point
homesteading in a paradise garden of appliances. This dream of the un-house
may sound very antiarchitectural but it is so only in degree, and architecture
deprived of its European roots but trying to strike new ones in an alien
soil has come close to the anti-house once or twice already. Wright was
not joking when he talked of the "destruction of the box," even
though the spatial promise of the phrase is rarely realized to the full
in the all-too-solid fact. Grass-roots architects of the plains like Bruce
Goff and Herb Greene have produced houses whose supposed monumental form
is clearly of little consequence to the functional business of living
in and around them.
But it is in one building that seems at first sight nothing but monumental
form that the threat or promise of the un-house has been most clearly
demonstrated-the Johnson House at New Canaan. So much has been misleadingly
said (by Philip Johnson himself, as well as others) to prove this a work
of architecture in the European tradition, that its many intensely American
aspects are usually missed. Yet when you have dug through all the erudition
about Ledoux and Malevitsch and Palladio and stuff that has been published,
one very suggestive source or prototype remains less easily explained
away-the admitted persistence in Johnson's mind of the visual image of
a burned-out New England township, the insubstantial shells of the houses
consumed by the fire, leaving the brick floor slabs and standing, chimneys.
The New Canaan glass-house consists essentially of just these two elements,
a heated brick floor slab, and a standing unit which is a chimney/fireplace
on one side and a bathroom on the other.
Around this has been draped precisely the kind of insubstantial shell
that Conklin was discussing, only even less substantial than that. The
roof, certainly, is solid, but psychologically it is dominated by the
absence of visual enclosure all around. As many pilgrims to this site
have noticed, the house does not stop at the glass, and the terrace, and
even the trees beyond, are visually part of the living space in winter,
physically and operationally so in summer when the four doors are open.
The "house" is little more than a service core set in infinite
space, or alternatively, a detached porch looking out in all directions
at the Great Out There. In summer, indeed, the glass would be a bit of
a nonsense if the trees did not shade it, and in the recent scorching
fall, the sun reaching in through the bare trees created such a greenhouse
effect that parts of the interior were acutely uncomfortable - the house
would have been better off without its glass walls.
When Philip Johnson says that the place is not a controlled environment,
however, it is not these aspects of undisciplined glazing he has in mind,
but that "when it gets cold I have to move toward the fire, and when
it gets too hot I just move away." In fact, he is simply exploiting
the campfire phenomenon (he is also pretending that the floor-heating
does not make the whole area habitable, which it does) and in any case,
what does he mean by a controlled environment? It is not the same thing
as a uniform environment, it is simply an environment suited to what you
are going to do next, and whether you build a stone monument, move away
from the fire or turn on the airconditioning, it the same basic human
gesture you are making.
Only, the monument is such a ponderous solution that it astounds me that
Americans are still prepared to employ it, except out of some profound
sense of insecurity, a persistent inability to rid themselves of those
habits of mind they left Europe to escape. In the open-fronted society,
with its social and personal mobility, its interchangeability of components
and personnel, its gadgetry and almost universal expendability, the persistence
of architecture-as-monumental-space must appear as evidence of the sentimentality
of the tough.
ANATOMY OF A DWELLING
With very little exaggeration, this baroque ensemble of domestic gadgetery
epitomizes the intestinal complexity of gracious living – in other
words, this is the junk that keeps the pad swinging.. The house itself
has been omitted from the drawing, but if mechanical services continue
to accumulate at this rate it may be possible to omit the house in fact.
SUPER-COUPE DE LONG-WEEK-END, 1927
Dallegret's 20-20 hindsight and foresight produced this historical capriccio
from. the First Machine Age well before the present article was first
mooted. In the mode of its time, services are in a separate outhouse instead
of beeing a mechanical clip-on.
TRAILMASTER GTO TRANSCONTINENTAL
Trailmaster GTO + 2 with beefed rear axle and drive-train
Transcontinental “Instant Split-Level” trailer home
U-Tility Life-Support pack
The present mobile home is a mess, visually,
mechanically, and in its relationship to the permanent infrastructure
of civilization. But if it could be rendered more compact and mobile,
and be uprooted from its dependency on static utilities, the trailer could
fulfill its promise to put a nation on wheels. The kind of mobile utility
pack suggested here does not exist yet, but it may be no farther over
the hill than its coming-attraction. style would suggest.
The Environment-Bubble
Transparent plastic bubble dome inflated by air-conditioning output
In the present state of the environmental art, no mechanical device can
make the rain go back to Spain; the standard-of-living package is apt
to need some sort of an umbrella for emergencies, and it could well be
a plastic dome inflated by conditioned air blown out by the package itself.
TRANSPORTABLE STANDARD-OF-LIVING
PACKAGE
To the man. who has everything else, a stadard-of-living package such
as this could offer the ultimate goody - the power to impose his will
on any environment to which the package could be delivered; to enjoy the
spatial freedom of the nomadic campfire without the smell, smoke, ashes
and mess; and the luxuries of appliance-land without those encumbrances
of a permanent dwelling.
POWER-MEMBRANE HOUSE
The goal of present trends in domestic mechanization. appears to be ever-more-flimsy
structure that is made habitable by ever-more-massive machinery, and the
Power-membrane house then pushes this idea to its logical/illogical conclusion
- the open plan to end open plans, a walless, garden house sheltering
under the spreading arms of the ultimate appliance. Architecture-world
faint hearts who fear this total conditioner as the leviathan that will
trample down their ancient should observe how near Dallegret has come
to making a monument of the Power-Membrane; like true-blue breeding, architecture
will out, even in the most unlikely circumstances.
Art in America
Number Two, April, 1965
|