Serra / Kahn / Monumentality

•

https://www.artsy.net/artwork/richard-serra-the-drowned-and-the-saved

"The Need for a New Monumentality", is written by author Gideon (1944) in a pamphlet of collected texts on modern style's reflections on different disciplines. In the text, Gideon also references these disciplines, their relations with architecture -for him, which need to be strengthened- and ultimately the Nine Points Manifest.

Together with the lecture on the New Monumentality, I understood that there was a search for a novel definition of monumentality in the modern movement. Its ethics and government who support the monuments, effect of them, their architectural expressions were told by Gideon in detail.

He first mentions that rather ancient concepts of war, kingdom etc. had been presented in the monuments like Arc de Triomphe. The impressive scale and ornamentation with them reflect a certain period, which can not respond to modern time's needs and discussions. This statement was right to me as well. I think that in 1940-50's, for example, although the effects of World Wars were heavy and society and art, people were looking for an expression towards war different than the praise of the King for whom they fought, etc. The technology invented for these wars resulted in so much destruction in people's lives that, together with the changing perspectives towards state, nation, individual, etc., people would not feel connected to Arc de Triomphe kind of a monument. The new monument is different in style but also evokes different feelings in humans.

This part of the text reminded me of artwork of Richard Serra: The Drowned and the Saved, 1992. For the Memory of Auschwitz. Although this piece was created years later the war and Gideon, in Hal Foster's book, Art-Architecture Complex (2011), he mentioned the statue as abstract yet very impressive artwork. I could feel the same with him even just looking at the picture.

But before going so far in history, another point that is significant for me was how monumentality was present in Louis Kahn's institutions. He would mention the institutional buildings as being above as if divine.

I liked the impression that he created with the plasticity and light. Complex plans and vast spaces also give a different feeling than the street, the villa, or public housing. His way of creating these impressive spaces had references from history. On the other hand, historical pieces are not fragmented, or periods are not selected to create an eclectic style in his buildings. He found some forms and ideas that evoked the awe towards the institution. Using -not only- these and modern building technology, he could create those sculptural forms.

Nevertheless, I couldn't feel safe about this feeling: the power exerted on us, the public, by the government/institution. These effects that I mentioned above may not be very innocent as in a library. In fact, when the building makes us feel small, this is not humane even if it claims to be educative, etc. I think this may be a shift from that period to ours. How different we perceive the power of the state, capital, and liberation today?

I want to clarify that Louis Kahn's buildings were charming to me. Maybe, since I can not experience the space, I can not know how huge/horrifying or ecstatic they are. But I kept thinking about how a contemporary society would be -is- effected by them. How do we evaluate the ethics and architectural success of these kinds of buildings, for example, Starchitect museums, today?
Maybe, the unit/cell of society, family, or individual needs to feel these emotions towards his/her living space, the home.

With the pandemic, one starts to evaluate the house spatially in detail and questions the relation of well-being with the house. Then, instead of a machine to live in, I would rather be experiencing my home.

Walls washed with light, a space that is wide and sacred.