Farnsworth House

Built in 1950 by Mies van der Rohe, the Farnsworth house is an example of modernist architecture. The aspect of the house that I found to be the most interesting was the use of I-beams. The first thing that I noticed while looking at the house is that it appears to be floating above the plane on which it rests. This was made possible by the extending the external structure of the house another 5 feet below the the floor, creating stilts. I found the choice to expose the I-beam to be particularly beautiful. The way the floor and roof attach to the structure was done in a minimal, simplistic fashion. There are no visible weld or fasteners. Everything is ground smooth and painted white. By having minimal joints and surface variation, the beams are allowed to stay true to their original shape and function. There is no attempt made to “cheat” in regards to materials. Mies also made a choice to not cut or form the beams in any manner. Keeping the material clean and true to its original form allows the viewer to focus on the details that are created along the window frame and roof. 

Having the external beam structure gave Mies some options as far as window placement and size. He was not limited by the typical stud layout of wall but only by the grid that he created. The reduction of number of vertical members allowed Mies to use very large floor to ceiling glass windows to enclose the house. Being only 1/4” thick glass, it was very crucial that the structure was engineered correctly to reduce the load placed on the windows.

The large windows and external structure allowed the space to be an open plan. Along with the open feeling comes the feeling of vulnerability. Within the space there are only two enclosed rooms, the main bathroom and guest bathroom. Everything else is open. Whomever lived in the house had almost no privacy from spectators coming to look at the house. This allowed the house to become more about experiencing the site then the architecture. It seems as though the space was built to provide the perfect shelter for observing the changing of seasons.

There is a lack of enclosed private spaces in the house, but that is nothing compared to the lack of storage. There is almost no storage at all. Except for a few cupboards to put dishes in, there is nothing else. It is my thinking that Mies did not want to ruin the space and view that he painstakingly created by cluttering it up with useless closets and storage spaces. From an outsider perspective you could see directly through the house from almost any positioning. This had to have made the occupant felt uncomfortable. The openness created a stage like atmosphere where whoever was living in the house would have been on display.

Charnley House

Built in the early 1890’s, the Charnley house was designed by Louis Sullivan, with help from a young draftsman named Frank Lloyd Wright. The first thing that struck me about the Charnley house was the simplistic nature of it compared to other houses from that timer period. I was able to understand the layout of the floor plan with only a few laps around the interior of the space. Unlike the Queen Anne, this floor plan was straight forward and fairly symmetrical. There was a less noticeable division of the service and the served. The simplicity of the space made allowed me to focus more on the details of the building. The first detail that caught me totally off guard was the sky light in the center of the house. Much like a commercial building, the skylight opened up the center of the space allowing natural light to flood the main level. This architectural move also helped define the remaining floors by creating a void to work around. A similar building that comes to mind is Milwaukee’s City Hall, only their skylight is done on a much grander scale. On the exterior of the building there were several elements that drew my attention. The first would be the heavy stone base of the building. Typical of the classical revival style in America, the heavy stone bases paid homage to classic Roman and Greek structures. The visual weight served to ground the structure and give it a more dominating presence among the other structures within the neighborhood. Another element that made me do a double take was the style of brick the was used on this house. The bricks that were used were referred to as “Roman Style.” This meaning that were we longer than a standard brick, but still had a similar height. This allowed the facade of the building to have fewer vertical mortar lines, thus adding to the linear quality of the building. The columns that were used on the second story porch were a derived from traditional Italian columns. The have almost no ornamentation or capital details on them. It seemed as if Sullivan wanted them to flow in the rest of the building with relative ease. The roof was a bit of confusion for me. Before this house, I had not seen a low roof line like this one. It almost seemed to verge on the beginnings of prairie style. This made me question how much influence Wright had into the overall design.