Mid-Century Moderism at Cranbrook - June 13 to 16

[Packman41]

Michigan Modern at Cranbrook

Into Mid-Century Modernism? June 13 to 16 at Cranbrook
http://michiganmodern.org/

And here is what others are saying about it.
http://www.theatlanticcities.com/des...odernism/5632/

[p69rrh51]

Albert Kahn[[1869-1942)-mid century modern? $375.00??

3 Kahn designs from 1938-1939. They are not exactly what I would consider mid-century modern although a couple of his wartime factory designs could be considered mid-century modern.

[ScienceFair]

Albert Kahn[[1869-1942)-mid century modern? $375.00??

3 Kahn designs from 1938-1939. They are not exactly what I would consider mid-century modern although a couple of his wartime factory designs could be considered mid-century modern.

Cool story bro!

To the OP: looks like an interesting conference, I hope it is well attended.

[p69rrh51]

Cool story bro!

To the OP: looks like an interesting conference, I hope it is well attended.

Thx ScienceFair. Now this is prewar mid-century modern! From Eliel and Eero Saarinen.

203 Cloverly built 1937 Grosse Pointe Farms, MI. Also inludes a short history of the home from The Moorings a publication of the Grosse Pointe Historical Society.

[Jason]

I think the conference is about modernism and design in general, not specifically mid-century modernism, although naturally most of it is about that.

Kahn is included first in the atlantic cities article because apparently he's a significant architect and the only architect that ever existed in detroit. Detroiters have spent long enough telling each other how important he is that other people are starting to believe it.

His only significance [[which is indeed genuinely significant) is his industrial architecture, which changed manufacturing and was an important influence to european modernists. His commercial and residential work is pretty standard and not of particular interest except as local landmarks.

He's included in the conference for his industrial architecture, and then he appears to be tangentially included for his work at cranbrook although that session will basically be about eliel saarinen.


I think it will be a fantastic conference.

[p69rrh51]

I think the conference is about modernism and design in general, not specifically mid-century modernism, although naturally most of it is about that.

Kahn is included first in the atlantic cities article because apparently he's a significant architect and the only architect that ever existed in detroit. Detroiters have spent long enough telling each other how important he is that other people are starting to believe it.

His only significance [[which is indeed genuinely significant) is his industrial architecture, which changed manufacturing and was an important influence to european modernists. His commercial and residential work is pretty standard and not of particular interest except as local landmarks.

He's included in the conference for his industrial architecture, and then he appears to be tangentially included for his work at cranbrook although that session will basically be about eliel saarinen.


I think it will be a fantastic conference.

I am wondering besides the Tank Plant and a couple early WWII plants what other Kahn industrial designs would be considered modern/mid century modern? I have a few in mind, I am just wondering what you think they are?
I also find the only architect that existed here a such pathetic statement! We have a rich history of very talented architects who have helped shape the city/metro area. Although those in the know have long known about Kahn, even FLW called him the greatest industrial architect he knew. Unfortunately the conference seems to be concentrating on a few well known local/statewide architects/designers. There is so much more out there! For me its a total waste of $375.00!

[Jason]

I am wondering besides the Tank Plant and a couple early WWII plants what other Kahn industrial designs would be considered modern/mid century modern? I have a few in mind, I am just wondering what you think they are?

It's hard to say whether the factories are modern. I think part of that decision would have to include the intention of the architect. It's my understanding that Kahn considered his factory design as basically non-architecture, more like engineering projects. He was a functionalist in a literal way. Meanwhile the functionalists in europe in the 20s and 30s were functionalists in a philosophical way. So his factories were an inspiration to the european avant garde but kahn was not a modernist.

The other way which he relates to modernism is that his factory designs advanced industrialization, which in turn enabled consumerism. This opened up the role of the industrial designer to a degree that it hadn't existed before. So now you can have designers designing radios and cars and everything else, designed to be mass produced.

So Kahn himself wasn't a modern architect or designer but he's still relevant to the story and that's why he's included in this conference.

I also find the only architect that existed here a such pathetic statement! We have a rich history of very talented architects who have helped shape the city/metro area. Although those in the know have long known about Kahn, even FLW called him the greatest industrial architect he knew. Unfortunately the conference seems to be concentrating on a few well known local/statewide architects/designers. There is so much more out there! For me its a total waste of $375.00!

We do have a rich design history and this conference is bringing attention to it. Every architect around the world knows who eero saarinen is, but I don't think many associate him or his father with detroit. Everyone knows the eames, but I don't think many associate them with Detroit. Yamasaki isn't in the same league as them but awareness of him seems to be growing and hopefully so is the Detroit connection. I'm not sure how much anyone associates Knoll with Michigan either. Cranbrook is relatively well known but not as well known as it should be imo.

Kahn is not in the same league as those other architects and other than his tangental connection to modernism he's not of any noteworthiness or interest to anyone except for locals. People in the Detroit architecture/preservation echo chamber have a distorted sense of what is important and would have you think that he was a great, significant architect but he wasn't. His commercial and residential work was competently executed and unremarkable. The same goes for a lot of the other architects that are talked about [[Wirt Rowland comes to mind as well).

If someone were to do a documentary about Detroit music, what would be included? Maybe motown which spread across the world and changed the history of music forever? Maybe techno, where Detroit was one of the birthplaces of a new genre? But why not skip those and do a documentary about some random cover band that has been playing bars for 30 years? Even if they do a good job and the people at the bars like them, they're not significant.

I personally think that Detroit is a city that has changed the world and our heritage is something that is of interest to the world. But I know the difference between what's important to a national or international audience and what isn't, and for the subject of the conference they got their selection right. I think visitors will be surprised and impressed and locals will be [[or should be) proud.

[southen]

so I understand, kahn and rowland, are just in an echo chamber? these are the same gentlemen who designed general motors, the fisher, penobscot and guardian no? buildings any city would love to have...

[p69rrh51]

so I understand, kahn and rowland, are just in an echo chamber? these are the same gentlemen who designed general motors, the fisher, penobscot and guardian no? buildings any city would love to have...

I would add Kahn's early residential to the list also.
As for Yamasaki I would place his work on par or above the Saarinen's work, but its all subjective as all three created a wide variety of terrific buildings/monuments.

As for the conference its the usual suspects. Not even a mention of one of Michigan's best known modern architects that I could see-Alden B. Dow.

One of Dow's lesser known works, 22581 Statler built in 1950 Saint Clair Shores, MI.

[p69rrh51]

Another ignored architect Alexander Girard.


55 Vendome built in 1952 Grosse Pointe Farms, MI.

[p69rrh51]

UofM Professor/architect George Brigham.


855 Ellair Place built in 1951 Grosse Pointe Park, MI.

[p69rrh51]

Even a more traditional style architect Isodor M. Lewis got it right with:


850 Whitmore built in 1952 Palmer Park Apartment Building Historic District Detroit, MI.

[p69rrh51]

Lesser known architect Donald Paul Young gave us this gem.



1751 Seminole built in 1957 Indian Village Historic District Detroit, MI.

[p69rrh51]

For $375.00 I would rather get to know locals like D. Peter Else better as opposed to the same old same old.


6070 Eastmoor built in 1970 Bloomfield Hills, MI.

[p69rrh51]

W. Hawkins Ferry's designs would probably gather a crowd at a Michigan Modern seminar.


338 Notre Dame built in 1949 City of Grosse Pointe, MI.

[canuck]

I dont know about the last couple of examples p69, I mean I think the last one is where a lot of architecture became non-architecture in a big way. Proportional design in the fenestration on 338 Notre Dame is way off, them two windas at the top left are squished in one corner way up; orphans. The overall is bland in the extreme. Compare it with the Cloverly Road one by the Saarinens, the elegance is in its simplicity but especially in how all elements are balanced.

[Jason]

southen:

No, they were just normal architects of the time. It's people today who are in the echo chamber, telling each other how great and important some of those architects are, and then repeating it to themselves over and over.

Every architect on the planet should know who Eero Saarinen is. Every furniture designer on the planet should know who the Eames are.

Are the buildings you listed bad buildings? Not really. I have a beef with the Fisher Building because its confusion of watered down styles tell me that they were directionlessly pandering to the public's tastes, but that's a different story. Out of the buildings you listed, the Guardian Building is a noteworthy enough example that it's usually included in books about art deco architecture. The GM Building is noteworth for its size but is otherwise run of the mill standard neoclassical. imo the Penobscot is a good and early example of art deco from 1928 [[looks like it could have been built in '29 or '30) but there are so many great examples of art deco across the country that it wouldn't be near the top of many lists.

So you're from Detroit and you can tell me who Albert Kahn and Wirt Rowland are. Albert Kahn was the founder and one of the designers of Albert Kahn and Associates and Wirt Rowland was the lead designer of what is now called SmithGroup. At the time they were the city's two biggest corporate design firms and did a huge amount of work throughout the city.

Every city has a few bigger firms who did a lot of work in that city. What were the two biggest architecture firms in Philadelphia in the 1920s? Or Los Angeles? Or San Fransisco? Or Boston? Or any other major city? Do you know? I sure don't! There's a Wirt Rowland for every one of those cities. All of those cities have buildings and architects of comparable quality.

You live in a building designed by Mies, and I've seen from some of your pics on flickr that you have furniture be Le Corbusier and the Eames. These are people that literally changed the course of history. Every designer around the world knows those names and for good reasons.

The people covered by the conference are important to varying degrees, and are the best Michigan has to offer. Louis Kampfer is by no stretch of the imagination a significant architect but it seems like the local architecture/preservation/hobbyist people know more about him than the various designers who passed through cranbrook.

p69rrh51:

Dow is getting a session dedicated to him and I'm sure he'll be brought up in some of the general panel discussions. One of his buildings is also included in the WSU walking tour.

The conference is being put on in part by the State Historic Preservation Office, and they really do know their stuff and they also care about "the little guy". They're doing a "Michigan Modern" project to promote our modern architecture heritage, and their blog is linked to in the first post, and they've posted plenty of gems by lesser-known architects. They also have a flickr account. They've posted buildings that I didn't know about, and they've posted buildings that I did know about but after giving them a second look, appreciated more. I'm sure there's a good book's worth of lesser known buildings, but it's hard to find fault in them choosing Eero Saarinen over Donald Paul Young for example.

canuck: Hawkins Ferry was a tremendus patron of the arts who we should all be thankful for. He also had the good fortune of attending cranbrook and then harvard and being taught by some of the greatest architects of the time. And he also had enough money and connections to get stuff built if he wanted... But I have to say he wasn't very good at it!! Honestly if I saw that house I'd assume it was the work of an over ambitious contractor.

[canuck]

southen:


canuck: Hawkins Ferry was a tremendus patron of the arts who we should all be thankful for. He also had the good fortune of attending cranbrook and then harvard and being taught by some of the greatest architects of the time. And he also had enough money and connections to get stuff built if he wanted... But I have to say he wasn't very good at it!! Honestly if I saw that house I'd assume it was the work of an over ambitious contractor.

Yes, that is the feeling I got from seeing this. Some contractor drew this on a napkin and got it stamped by an architect.

I find the houses by Dow and Brigham interesting precursors of the "Look-at-my-garage-it's-now-what-a-house-is-all-about" category of suburban housing.
The Brigham is hodge-podgey in the extreme.

I find the Girard and Young houses pleasant enough. It is hard to tell from one picture but the Girard one does a good job of landscape integration.

[southen]

southen:

No, they were just normal architects of the time. It's people today who are in the echo chamber, telling each other how great and important some of those architects are, and then repeating it to themselves over and over.

Every architect on the planet should know who Eero Saarinen is. Every furniture designer on the planet should know who the Eames are.

Are the buildings you listed bad buildings? Not really. I have a beef with the Fisher Building because its confusion of watered down styles tell me that they were directionlessly pandering to the public's tastes, but that's a different story. Out of the buildings you listed, the Guardian Building is a noteworthy enough example that it's usually included in books about art deco architecture. The GM Building is noteworth for its size but is otherwise run of the mill standard neoclassical. imo the Penobscot is a good and early example of art deco from 1928 [[looks like it could have been built in '29 or '30) but there are so many great examples of art deco across the country that it wouldn't be near the top of many lists.

So you're from Detroit and you can tell me who Albert Kahn and Wirt Rowland are. Albert Kahn was the founder and one of the designers of Albert Kahn and Associates and Wirt Rowland was the lead designer of what is now called SmithGroup. At the time they were the city's two biggest corporate design firms and did a huge amount of work throughout the city.

Every city has a few bigger firms who did a lot of work in that city. What were the two biggest architecture firms in Philadelphia in the 1920s? Or Los Angeles? Or San Fransisco? Or Boston? Or any other major city? Do you know? I sure don't! There's a Wirt Rowland for every one of those cities. All of those cities have buildings and architects of comparable quality.

You live in a building designed by Mies, and I've seen from some of your pics on flickr that you have furniture be Le Corbusier and the Eames. These are people that literally changed the course of history. Every designer around the world knows those names and for good reasons.

The people covered by the conference are important to varying degrees, and are the best Michigan has to offer. Louis Kampfer is by no stretch of the imagination a significant architect but it seems like the local architecture/preservation/hobbyist people know more about him than the various designers who passed through cranbrook.

detroit is known throughout the country as having great examples of pre-depression architecture and pre-depression skyscrapers. just because of the examples ive listed YOU personally only care for the guardian doesnt make any less important or well designed in the eyes of many others.

i think you made my point when you said how many other cities had guys like rowland + kahn. well based on the quality of structures, not many, but how many architects outside of of new york and chicago were known to anyone? you are examining a field that produces very few stars, especially at the time these buildings were being constructed and you seem to be placing the importance of the architect based on how they changed history. i just find the criteria to be a bit unfair and if all architects were judged on that criteria there were would be few at the top of that mountain.

[p69rrh51]

I agree with southen! For one Modern is not that well excepted outside of smallish but fanatical following. Second there is only a very small group architects at the top of the heap from any city. Most cities have designs from many outside firms. Detroit is the only city where most[[but not all) of its architecture was designed by firms located in the metro Detroit area that I have found in my research. Of the 4,000 ish buildings I have cataloged under 100 are designed by outside firms.
Also its Louis Kamper not Kampfer and Jason you are clueless if you say he is not signifcant, and I challenge you to prove that he is not!

[p69rrh51]

Yes, that is the feeling I got from seeing this. Some contractor drew this on a napkin and got it stamped by an architect.

I find the houses by Dow and Brigham interesting precursors of the "Look-at-my-garage-it's-now-what-a-house-is-all-about" category of suburban housing.
The Brigham is hodge-podgey in the extreme.

I find the Girard and Young houses pleasant enough. It is hard to tell from one picture but the Girard one does a good job of landscape integration.

Canuck not all Dow is garage first oriented.



1000 Berkshire built in 1932 Ann Arbor, MI.

[p69rrh51]

A design by James R. Smith.


229 Lothrop built in 1950 Grosse Pointe Farms, MI.

[p69rrh51]

The Marel Breuer designed Library. One of the few designs by an out of towner. The Library itself is pretty much loathed by most Grosse Pointers.


Central Branch Grosse Pointe Public Library 10 Kercheval built in 1953 Grosse Pointe Farms, MI

[p69rrh51]

A design by Meathe, Kessler & Associates.


Jennie May Fleming Elementary School 18501 Waltham built in 1964 Detroit, Public Schools Von Steuben Neighborhood Detroit, MI.

[p69rrh51]

Another local not known for modern getting it right, Robert J. West.


900 Whitmore built in 1938 Palmer Park Apartment Historic District Detroit, MI.