REVIVING CHERMAYEFF’S PATIO HOUSE: A DEEP ENERGY RETROFIT AND RENOVATION OF AN ICONIC MID-CENTURY MODERN HOME

Buildings in the mid-twentieth century were conceived within a bubble of expectation of boundless energy, a situation that was short-lived, and a mindset set that is hard to comprehend these days. Nowadays, it is easy to understand that the thermally flimsy products of this era require some dramatic invention-what we often call a “deep energy retrofit” (DER)-and there is an emerging set of standard responses to such envelope enhancement. But some of these buildings have high architectural significance, and deserve a more design-oriented solution than simply wrapping them in an insulative swaddle. This is the story of one such building.

Preserving the past or past preserving: sustaining the legacy of postmodern museum architecture

The publication of Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture in 1964 signaled the end of Modernism.The reality was that the modern movement had already jettisoned its ideological underpinnings and had become merely another‘style.’The avant garde architects in Europe and in North America were ready to move on and saw Postmodernism as a liberating antidote to the strictures of high Modernism.Historic architectural styles,which had been vilified as antiquated and out of step with modern culture,were revived,reinterpreted,and manipulated.However,Postmodernism,which had burned brightly during the 1970s and 1980s,was superseded by other architectural movements,namely,Deconstructivism,Pluralism,during the waning years of the 12th century.Even though new building forms and design theory changed during Postmodernism,building technology remained the same.Exterior walls continued to be built as skins,comprised of either glass,masonry,metal,or synthetic cladding,which were hung of steel or concrete framing.Rubberised membranes covered essentially flat roofs.Moisture infiltration was managed in ever complex composite wall assemblies.More important,environmental systems decoupled nature from interiors and were designed to manage ever demanding humidity control requirements.Through the development of new building technology,Modernism severed design style from traditional construction.In re-introducing historical forms back into architecture,Postmodernism complicated constructability.Moreover,Postmodernism and its successors rarely developed new technological ideas by introducing more intricate building forms,which were based on theoretical ideas rather than technical ones,while continuing to employ Modernism building technology into their buildings.This inherent paradox is the most consequential challenge in preserving Postmodernism.Today,approximately 40 years after its inception,we must consider if,in some cases.is it tenable to preserve Postmodern buildings?This paper reassesses three museums of the Postmodern era through the twin lenses of historic preservation and their legacy as cultural artifacts.It analyses how three iconic Postmodern museums,the Wexner Centre for the Arts in the USA,the Neue Staatsgalerie in Germany,and the Hedmark Museum in Norway,became cultural artifacts and how each of them present technical challenges for their future preservation.These museums represent late 20th century theoretical ideas,which were more a melding of pluralistic influences than design ideology,and the utilisation of Modernist technology.All of which present unique conditions for conservation.

White,everything white?Josef Frank’s Villa Beer(1930)in Vienna,and its materiality in the context of the discourse on‘white cubes’

In 2017 a group of conservators-restorers conducted a conservation-science study of the materials used in the construction of Josef Frank’s main work,the Villa Beer(1930)in Vienna-Hietzing,and of the building’s surfaces.The study was an opportunity to find evidence indicating whether the contemporary description of the wall colour as a non-colour white corresponded to physical reality.The notion‘Weiss,alles Weiss’(‘white,everything white’),celebrated as‘an expression of values and of the times’(Hammann,1930),will be identified as a cultural construct that stands in contradiction to the actual materiality of the buildings of the period.We must rewrite the colour history of Modern Movement architecture.The‘White Cubes’were never white.

Modern Built Heritage Conservation Policies: How to Keep Authenticity and Emotion in the Age of Digital Culture

The Modern Movement has demonstrated its long-term legitimacy as a lasting concept endowed with longevity.Relating technology,spatial form and social commitment to one another,through an optimistic faith in progress,modern architects sought to attain new heights of functionality and flexibility in use.The current challenge is to find ways to deal with the conservation of this recent legacy in the continuously changing context of current times,including physical,economic,functional,and fast-moving socio-cultural and political values.To address these questions,‘Modern built heritage conservation policies’explores the restoration and renovation pro­cesses undertaken in some paradigmatic case studies:the Tugendhat House(Mies van der Rohe and Lilly Reich,Brno,Czech Republic,1929-1930),the Crown Hall(Mies van der Rohe,Chicago,USA,1950-1956),the National Mu­seum of Western Art(Le Corbusier,Tokyo,Japan,1959)and the Gulbenkian Foundation(Alberto Pessoa,Pedro Cid e Ruy d’Athouguia,Lisbon,Portugal,1959-1969).