Contemporary European Architecture: Pavilions that Communicate

11/21/12

Pavilions that Communicate

By: Arif Javed

What is the function of architecture that has little to no programmatic elements? Pavillionaire architecture is architecture that generally houses almost no program and is oftentimes temporary in nature. Though it might seem that designing something with no program would be an architect’s easiest job, I think it is the biggest test of an architect’s skill. The function of a pavilion is solely to create a meaningful, memorable spatial experience. In some of the pavilions we looked at in class I noticed that due to this being the central function of this type of architecture some of the projects actually worked as physical commentaries or dialogues on the nature of architecture. In particular, I thought the Barcelona Pavilion by Mies Van der Rohe and Peter Zumthor’s Serpentine Pavilion functioned as such essays on architecture.

The Barcelona Pavilion represents not only a singular vision for what a piece of temporary architecture can be, but also a singular vision for what an architectural space can be. The pavilion is a deep, multi-layered essay on architecture that makes its points while providing examples of them. Mies managed to take all the most basic elements of what constitutes an architectural space and mould them into a spatial experience unlike any other. His consideration for form, material, light, vision, and detail is shown in the way all of these factors form a constant dialogue with each other throughout the project. In this way, it could even be said that the Mies created a communicative building; one that is a treatise on the architect’s ideas of how to use each of the elements to add to the spatial experience. I think that the clarity with which the pavilion communicates Mies’ ideas proves that it is truly a genius work.

Peter Zumthor’s temporary project, his take on the Serpentine Pavilion, was another such project that manages to communicate the architect’s ideas on the nature of architecture with clarity. Ironically, Zumthor made his pavilion a communicative piece of architecture by reducing the actual architectural form of the building. The only things left after his reduction were black rectangular walls that defined a path through the space into a central green space. This reduction of the physical elements showed that Zumthor considered the path or the physical and emotional experience of being led through a space to be the dominant part of the spatial experience. I think that with this project Zumthor truly managed to find his own language with which he could shape a unique and rewarding experience and communicate the idea that the procession or path through a space is just as important, if not more so, than more physical architectural elements. Despite his use of a highly conceptual architectural language for this project, I think the real strength of it is that the average viewer could probably easily understand the underlying concept of the project.

These two projects are both notable examples of pavillionaire architecture simply because they manage to use unimposing architectural elements to define significant spatial experiences. I think the key idea found in both of these projects is that they both stick to a specific language and then use this language to communicate the ideals and motifs that the architects hoped to imbue within the architecture.