[X-fib]

Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe's Chicago buildings are immediately recognizable as his designs: 860-880 Lake Shore Drive, IBM, Federal Center, Illinois Center and on. Few modern architects can make a similar claim for their works. Even those buildings that were Mies inspiration such as Lake Point Tower, or influenced such as the Daley Center, Sears Tower and arguably John Hancock, Marina City, 333 Wacker, etc. etc. are collectively Miesian. They form the basis of 1950s, '60s and early '70s architectual design in Chicago.

Today many view his works as dark, teutonic, or utilitarian to the point of being inhuman. Architecture not as art but as pure form. To others they represent perfection. The absolute definition of form following fuction, free of a concrete blanket and devoid of purposeless ornamentation. Taken in perspective, in their day Mies buildings were a radical departure from the mondane of the earlier modern movement and from the general mediocrity of the period architecture. The reality of Mies concepts is that his narrow interpretation left little room for variability. Even arguably his most beautiful design, Lake Point Tower, is little more than a curvelinear Federal Center. Recognizability had its drawbacks in commonality.

Mies was certainly the most influentual architect of his time, in Chicago at least. Whether his buildings represent perfection or an eyesore is in the beholder. To me a Chicago without Mies would be unimaginable.

[urbanlife]

I really can't wait to go there and see his work in person. I think then I will make my true judgment on how it works and feels.

[spyguy]

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/2472/31192130722b61e7e8atg1.jpg
http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5756/243591918988aa85ccsv9.jpg
http://img385.imageshack.us/img385/966/twobldgshy7.jpg
Not quite in Chicago:
http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/687/166151653afb5127653la3.jpg

Proof enough for me :yes:

[carfreak01]

Modernism works best when it's contrasted with other architecture. Mies got that right with his locations and the fact that he did it first. When cities became inundated with only modern architecture, and pale imitations at that, they became eyesores.

[Arriviste]

Mies and his principles define beauty in architecture for me. The more I learn about him, his buildings, and his theories, the more I appreciate his genius, and understand his downfalls.

[nygirl1]

I won't go with perfection, i'll go with pleasing. In no way is mies an eyesore. You just have to get his work, ther sharp angles and minimalist designs.

[X-fib]

Thanks Spyguy for posting the great pics!

[bryson662001]

Modernism works best when it's contrasted with other architecture. Mies got that right with his locations and the fact that he did it first. When cities became inundated with only modern architecture, and pale imitations at that, they became eyesores.

Bingo!......neither perfection nor an eyesore but a wonderful contribution to the whole.

[Altauria]

I suppose it depends on which side of my brain is throbbing at the time. I'm pretty much on the fence with his works - and the whole style for that matter. On one side I absolutely love the clean, orderly, and logical lines. I can certainly see how some people on this board (like SteelyDan in particular, as he's very outspoken about it) can find perfection and total beauty in these buildings. And other times I see these as ugly monstrosities, and uninspiring boxes. For examples, I love the Seagram Building, but absolutely loath the IIT buildings. More than anything else, I think my reaction to this style very much depends on how it is taken care of.

For this whole style I prefer that strip of Park Ave. in New York over anywhere else.

[Steely Dan]

anyone who would suggest that mies' masterworks are eyesores does not deserve to be dignified with a proper response.

[JManc]

anyone who would suggest that mies' masterworks are eyesores does not deserve to be dignified with a proper response.

:yes:

[mikeelm]

whta's interesting about the 860-880 buildings is since most of the high-rises along Lake Shore Dr. which are also newer buildings, probably built later are mostly brick or concrete structures. I wonder why? I know of 1 other steel apartment on the north side which I think is near Foster Ave.

[X-fib]

whta's interesting about the 860-880 buildings is since most of the high-rises along Lake Shore Dr. which are also newer buildings, probably built later are mostly brick or concrete structures. I wonder why? I know of 1 other steel apartment on the north side which I think is near Foster Ave.

There are steel skeleton buildings next to 860-880 LSD, see spy guys pic.

[Wheelingman04]

Most of his works look okay to me.

[Marcu]

Mies' works (and the works of his followers) only become eyesores if they're not kept up. Then they start to look cheap and budget-oriented. Otherwise, the works are flawless.

[UrbanSophist]

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5756/243591918988aa85ccsv9.jpg


I mean look at that! It's amazing!

[i_am_hydrogen]

The genius of Mies lies in the power of his imagination. He was able to look beyond the pomp and circumstance of a building’s veneer and imagine what its inner-most soul looks like. And we see his interpretation of that soul whenever we look at the IBM Building, Seagram, 660-680 N LSD, and the like—a building absolutely stripped down to express nothing more than its structural shape, reduced to an abstraction. Simple, repetitive lines. Austere purity. And black. Black: the absence of color. What a beautiful vision of the essence of a building. It’s as if he was striving to allow a building to exist in a state as close as possible to non-existence.

[X-fib]

^^^ Well said!

[Cirrus]

Architecture not as art but as pure form.I reject the claim that modernism was about form after function for two reasons:
1. Modernist buildings only function well given a certain set of imperfect and temporary circumstances.
2. Sculpture was and is very much a part of the program. Modernism was a new paradigm of architectural artistry to be sure, but not at all a rejection of it.

Modernism works best when it's contrasted with other architecture. Mies got that right with his locations and the fact that he did it first. When cities became inundated with only modern architecture, and pale imitations at that, they became eyesores.Bingo.

The whole point of the modernist paradigm (in all its incarnations, including the current versions such as deconstructivism) is to parody whatever is "normal". Modernist buildings work only so long as they remain individually shocking.

I can appreciate how a sharp Meis box would have looked when new, surrounded by heavy, ornate stone buildings. No doubt a striking piece of sculpture. But in walking around the Chicago of today, I am overwhelmed by the inhumanity of modernism. Every successive copycat made and continues to make Meis' work less and less interesting. Every time another building like his is built, all buildings like his become worse.

It’s certainly not a perfect system, but neither is it his fault that the buildings become eyesores over time. It’s the fault of an architectural establishment that lacks Meis’ genius.

[X-fib]

It’s the fault of an architectural establishment that lacks Meis’ genius.

And a failure of architects to bring forth their own visions and in not allowing their designs to be deluded into something that resembles a popular trend.

[Sulley]

Perfection.

[jcchii]

IBM is gorgeous

[MNMike]

I really like that post office building(the one story cube), its simple, but not at all ordinary.

[Jeff_in_Dayton]

Modernism works best when it's contrasted with other architecture. Mies got that right with his locations

You really see that with that Federal Center ensemble. They way it works is that it works in relation to the big blocky period high rises around it, which define urban canyons. Then the two Mies high rises and the low rise postoffice open up the space for the plaza, and work together to play off each other, and the surrounding buildings.

Its a very sucessfull and probably very well-studied urban design. The individual buildings are all great lat Mies too, with the shadowline projecting I-beam detail activating the facades and the perfect porportioning of the facades and windows. Its just supremely elegant and classical.

[vid]

The buildings on Lakeshore Drive are some of my favourites in the world. They'd be even better if they weren't ripped off by every Tom Dick and Harry Architect out there for the better part of four decades.

[X-fib]

^^^^ Like the ones just northwest and west of 860-880. Don't know who the archtitects were but they are sure copies!

[headcase]

^^^^ Like the ones just northwest and west of 860-880. Don't know who the archtitects were but they are sure copies!

On Emporis they are listed as "Esplanade Apartments" 1 and 2, and I'll give you one guess who the architect of record was. It's a tuffy! :shrug: :rolleyes: :shrug:

SSDD

[vid]

:D

Those two are Mies as well. You post kinda stumped me for a second, I was trying to figure out whose they were. :P

Westmount Square in Montreal is also a beauty.

http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=westmount+square

[X-fib]

On Emporis they are listed as "Esplanade Apartments" 1 and 2, and I'll give you one guess who the architect of record was. It's a tuffy! :shrug: :rolleyes: :shrug:

SSDD

Should have guessed! :redface: His buildings are everywhere, including right next door!

[ChicagotoRoanoke]

His works influenced an entire era of skyscrapers and without doubt have made a HUGE positive contribution to Chicago and it's arcitectural diversity and beauty. That being said, I got my doctorate at IIT and NO ONE (well at least no one I've met) would call that place a warm and inviting campus. Too much Mies makes a place cold and austere. Completely agree that it works best in contrast with other more ornate architecture.

[canucklehead2]

An original Mies project to me is as close to modernist architectural perfection is as possible, and all the cheap imitators are as worse as modernism can get. I just hope that all of his buildings are delcared historical sites so they can never be altered or demolished....

[X-fib]

His works influenced an entire era of skyscrapers and without doubt have made a HUGE positive contribution to Chicago and it's arcitectural diversity and beauty. That being said, I got my doctorate at IIT and NO ONE (well at least no one I've met) would call that place a warm and inviting campus. Too much Mies makes a place cold and austere. Completely agree that it works best in contrast with other more ornate architecture.

I can say I had the same feelings about ITT on past visits. And with similar impressions while walking through the canyon formed by 1 and 2 Illinois Center. Although the buildings themsleves are typical Mies the tightly packed arrangement of structures is particularly dark and cold. Contrary to the Federal Center where the varying heights create a lively inviting open space. So what does it say about Mies designs if his works only fit well into an environment with other non-Miesien buildings?

[vid]

"So what does it say about Mies designs if his works only fit well into an environment with other non-Miesien buildings?"

I think it said that he was very supportive of architectural diversity. to design your buildings do that they can't be near your buildings takes gut. :) Balls, even.

Although TD Toronto doesn't look too cold. Except the winter pictures of it, of course.

[oliveurban]

Perfection in my eyes. When done well, with close attention paid to certain details, refined and maintained fully, it works for me.

[Jeff_in_Dayton]

So what does it say about Mies designs if his works only fit well into an environment with other non-Miesien buildings?"

Well, there is the Farnsworth House, which is a perfect work of architecutre that is remarkably sensenative to its natural context.

And Mies did a series of country houses in Germany that are quite good too (but in brick, not steel. People often forget Mies was a master of working with brick).

I was lucky to get a tour of the Farnsworth House when it was still owned by Lord Palumbo (and furnished). That the house was somewhat open to the public was not well know, so when I found out I immediatly made reservations and drove out to Plano for a tour, which also included Palumbo's sculpture garden in a big prairie somewhat removed from the house.

[X-fib]

[QUOTE=Jeff_in_Dayton;2501426]You really see that with that Federal Center ensemble. They way it works is that it works in relation to the big blocky period high rises around it, which define urban canyons. Then the two Mies high rises and the low rise postoffice open up the space for the plaza, and work together to play off each other, and the surrounding buildings. /QUOTE]

I agree that the Federal Center works and, at least in my perspective is one of Mies' finest accomplishments, near perfection. LPT is a fine Mies inspired design that also works extremely well, especially or inspite of its isolated locale. However I don't agree that all of Mies' buildings are well placed. IBM is totally out of sync with its surroundings. Prior to IBM, Marina City stood as an icon. Post IBM, Mies building totally dominates the location distracting, and not in any way blending, with the beauty of MC. One wonders how different this set might be with a more LPT like IBM! Now Trump will surpass IBM, but at least Trump gives homage to both IBM, in the windows, and MC,through its curved face. One and Two Illinois Center are other Mies examples that I don't think work well at all.

[ThatOneGuy]

Absolute perfection. The simplicity and darkness of his designs, mixed with a sort of mesmerizing aura allow the building to fit in any location. Many of the lobbies, I've noticed, have large, open spaces with few columns and large, clear glass windows to allow as much light as possible, and to maybe make it feel less bulky. Looking up at the TD center gave me chills of awe. Yamasaki's WTC gave the same effects.
Pure, cold simplicity and a blacker black than the blackest black truly gives his buildings a feel, and a darkened soul unlike any other.