JUNE 2010 » book review

An Insider Explains How Architecture Went Crazy

Exploding the Myths of Modern Architecture
by Malcolm Millais
Frances Lincoln Limited, London, UK; 2009
296 pp; softcover; 405 b&w illustrations; $29.95
ISBN 978-0-7112-2974-7

Reviewed by Clem Labine

This is a book for all of us who are dismayed by architecture critics and clients who fawn over "starchitects" who continue to produce over-budget, poorly functioning, and absurdly inappropriate buildings. Author Malcolm Millais analyzes the pronouncements and posturing of Modernist architects – and shows in exacting detail how most of it is smoke and mirrors. Malcolm Millais should know, because he is a PhD structural engineer who has seen the world of big-time architecture from the inside. In a career spanning more than 40 years, he's been involved with over 100 architectural and engineering projects, working for the famed Arup global engineering firm as well as running his own practice. Millais has also taught in schools of architecture and university engineering departments.

The author's scorn for the fatuous rhetoric of Modernism is not based on any stylistic issues; he's an agnostic when it comes to architectural style. Instead, with an engineer's respect for logical analysis and cost-effective design, he chronicles the enormous disconnect between the mythology of Modernism and the shortcomings of what actually gets built. The underlying problem, Millais contends, is that Modern Movement design is driven by ideology rather than technical and economic soundness. Modernist architects, while claiming to design rational, scientific, functional structures, have in fact created some of the most dysfunctional buildings ever erected, the author asserts.

On his way to debunking many of Modernism's tenets, Millais provides a helpful overview of the history of Modern Movement architecture. He traces Modernism's architectural evolution from early Modernists seeking the perfect glass box through to the deconstructivism and polymorphism of designers like Frank Gehry, Norman Foster and Daniel Libeskind. The author delineates the dozen or so principles that supposedly underpin Modernist design – and then shows in detail how most of these tenets are either wrong or ignored in actual practice.

For example, Modernists adore flat roofs. But flat roofs are notoriously hard to make waterproof, and excessive leaks are one of the major complaints lodged against Modernist buildings. Another Modernist article of faith is that designs and building traditions from previous periods are of no value. The author demonstrates how this continual striving for novelty and rejection of the accumulated experience of traditional architecture has led to fiascos of monumental proportions.

As a case in point, Millais devotes a chapter to the soap opera surrounding construction of the Sydney Opera House. That building is now iconic and takes a great picture. But you might think differently if you had to manage the project (it was 10 years behind schedule), or pay the bills (it cost 14 times the original budget) or use the building (it has mediocre acoustics and is an "opera house" that can't accommodate grand opera).

Most of these problems can be traced to the original architect who was more concerned with how the building looked than how it would actually work or how much it cost. Millais claims: "The Sydney Opera House taught the architectural community that if you were tenacious enough, or perhaps audacious enough, you could get just about anything you wanted built."

Infiltration of the Academies
The question naturally arises, if Modernist buildings have been expensive failures, why has the mythology persisted? Millais provides the answer by tracing the history of how the leading evangelists of Modernism – Walter Gropius and Mies van der Rohe – found themselves in the 1930s heading architecture programs at Harvard and what is now the Illinois Institute of Technology respectively. Their zeal in promoting the tenets of Modernism took on aspects of religious fervor, and many of their student-acolytes became teachers in other schools of architecture without getting much practical real-world experience.

Thus began a self-perpetuating cycle of inbred architectural education that persists to this day. As critic Peter Blake once described it: "Most teachers of architecture now never learned how to build. Their lessons are paper lessons, their theories paper theories." As a consequence, "paper architects" continue to produce "innovative designs" with little attention paid to what the public likes and what clients can afford.

The problem was compounded when concrete and elaborate steelwork assumed a greater role in architectural design, enabling creation of non-orthogonal buildings. But the mathematics required for radical steel and concrete structures became so complex that it is beyond the grasp of most architects (although they won't admit it). They've had to increasingly rely on building engineers for detailed structural design. Millais – an engineer himself – reserves special scorn for what he calls "supine engineers," who bend over backwards to enable architects to build what are basically irrational, uneconomical designs.

Even though the author does not advocate for any particular style, it's clear throughout the book he doesn't like the look of most Modernist buildings, declaring at one point: "Not only did this 'new' Modern Movement architecture fail technically and economically, it also failed culturally as most people simply didn't like it." And he applies adjectives like "unpleasant," "inhospitable," and "ugly" to describe some buildings that are worshipped as iconic by the Modernist faithful.

Millais' book is clearly written, avoids technical jargon, and is accessible to a general audience. Its biggest shortcomings are in the images, which are all black and white and printed on a fairly rough paper, so many are quite fuzzy. The captions tend to be rather cryptic, so frequently the reader has to chase through the text to discover the point the author is trying to make. Also, since the author is British, the majority of his examples are from the U.K. and Europe.

But those quibbles aside, the book will provide moral support to any designer who works in traditional vocabularies – especially those who do battle with design review boards that are pushing for "modern" work. It's an especially good book to give to developers, building committees, and any client who might be entranced by the idea of commissioning "cutting-edge design." One also hopes the volume might be smuggled into the libraries of architectural schools.

The book's message is best summed up by this quote from Louis Hellman that appears on the dedication page: "Modern architecture is like Esperanto, an attempt to invent and impose a common "rational" language, and succeeding only in being incomprehensible and alien to the majority of people." TB

«BACK TO JUNE 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Have something to say about this article? Feel free to comment!

Comments feed