!!!!!!From!Ruskin!to!Aalto;!!!!Prophets!with!a!Message?!

Transcription

1 FromRuskintoAalto; ProphetswithaMessage? Athesissubmittedaspartofpracticeled researchforthedegreeofdoctorofphilosophy oftheaustraliannationaluniversity,july2017. ChristopherJamesRobertson2017. AllRightsReserved.

2 DeclarationofOriginality. Iherebydeclarethatthethesisherepresentedistheoutcomeofthe researchundertakenduringmycandidacy,thatiamthesoleauthor unlessotherwiseindicated,andthatihavefullydocumentedthe sourceofideas,references,quotationsandphrasesattributableto otherauthors. ChristopherJamesRobertsonJuly2017. ii

3 Tomyfatherandthememoryofhisfather. Acknowledgements. Thereasonforthisthesishasitsoriginsinmyownartspractice.Ithasbeen profoundlyshapedfollowingarevelationofthepresenceofgodwhile undertakingamastersdegreeinfurnituredesign,attheroyalcollegeofart, London1984T86.TheexperiencecamewithanoverwhelmingparadigmTshift. ParticulartomyinitialexperiencewasaprofoundvisualTamysticalrevelation ofnatureastheworkofthehandsofgod. ProfessorSusanRobertsonforherpatriarchalgiftingspeakingintomylifeovera longperiodwithclarityofvisionthathasbeenremarkablycorrect. ProfessorCatherineMcDermottforherbookDesign;(The(Key(Conceptsthatvery casuallyaskedkeyquestionsthatwereofdeepimportancesettingmeonthe journeyofresearch. Assoc.ProfessorJohannesKuhnenforhisunwavering,faithfulsupport,forthe privilegeofbeinghislaststudent. RosemaryHillforherprofessionalinterest,adviceandencouragement. Dr.GillianMawbyforherpersonalencouragementandadvice,hernousin writingtoschidtaskingwhatheknewaboutruskinandaalto. ProfessorStephenWildman,DirectoroftheRuskinLibraryandResearchCentre. ForhisprofessionalinsightandencouragementwithacoupleofquotesT exceptionallytastymorselstoahungryresearcher. ProfessorHarryCharringtonforgiftingtimetotalkwithmeoverlunch,his interest,encouragement.hisoffertospeaktomeinbathonthesubjectofaalto strengthenedandreassuredmeatacriticaltimeofisolation. ProfessorPaulPickeringforhissupervision,friendship,relaxedapproach,his insightandkindness.forhispatriarchalgiftingtoseeaheadandkeepme focusedwheninmyheartistruggledtobelieveforcompletion.fordrawingout iii

4 ofmeaconfidenceandknowledgeofmysubjectwheninthepresenceofothers wordsweredifficulttofind. RichardEasonforhisfriendship,conversations,wisdomandencouragement. BobBrown,Dr.loandIanMenziesasaDanielpartners.Dr.Loforholdingme accountableovertheyearstomygifting,supportingitsvalueasan, alloflife vocation.specialthankstobobbrownaccompanyingmefromthebeginning andneverwaveredinhissupport.touseanexpressionmadenotablebythe paintergeorgesbraque wewerelikemountaintclimbersropedtogether. ProfessorEsaLaaksonenasdirectoroftheAlvarAaltoAkatemia,ArneHästesko andstaffatthefoundationtiilimäki,fortheirhelpandtheprivilegeofadesk andaccesstoaalto sarchives. HamishandChristineNicholsonfortheirmemorablehospitalityandcarriageto visitruskin shomeinconiston. Anunknownacademic,aphilosopherofscience,inabriefencounterTIfailedto obtainhisnameandwithoutknowinggavecriticalinputintothethesis. Ms.TatyanaSvetelnikovaasdirectorofTheCentralCityAlvarAaltoLibraryin Vyborgforherpersonaltourofthebuilding. RiittaNikkolaforhercorrespondence,expertiseandencouragementonArmas Lindgren. JenniferRobertsonforonceagaincreatingfabricsfromagivenresource.Asa worldtclassweaverherexpertiseincreatingthespecialfabricsforthesofahas beenagift. MaryLittleandherhusbandPeterWheelerfortheirongoingencouragementand discernment.veryspecialthankstomaryfordevelopingthecuttingpatternsand sewingthefinalfabrics.herexpertisealongwiththefabricsbyjennifer Robertson,havemadeanimportantcontributiontothesofaasanartisticwork. Myfamily,thankyouforyourpatientsupport. MyLord,whohasneverfailedme,encouragedmewithHislovingpresence,with visionsanddreamsofthingspresentandthingstocome.forlessonsdearly learntinthepast,teachingmethecostofgivingupassomethingnottobe repeatedinthefaceofdifficultyandhardship. ThisresearchissupportedbyanAustralianResearchTraining Program(RPT)Scholarship. iv

5 Abstract. Thisthesisanditsassociatedworkscriticallyexploretheshiftinphilosophical viewsonnaturefrom created to machine andtheiruseasanalogiesfordesign andarchitecturefromthemid19 th centurytotheearly20 th century.itraceboth apenetratingdescriptionofa created cosmologyforarchitectureanddesign expoundedbyjohnruskinattheverypointofpointofitsdeclinewiththeriseof scientificmaterialism/reductionismasareplacementcosmologythatgains tractionfollowingdarwin stheoryofevolution.thethesislooksatthe intermediatetensionbetweenthetwocosmologiesoutworkedbyarchitectsand designersoftheperiodastheyengage/disengagetheshiftwithafocusonthe earlymodernistfinnisharchitectalvaraaltotoshowwhatwemightlearnfor thepresent. Thetheoretical/conceptualapproachfortheworkfirstlyestablishesthetwo philosophicalconceptsandtheircharacteristics(whattheyandtheiroutcomes looklike),andsecondlyhowwemightlearnfromthemtounderstandand engagecolquhoun sproblematic closedsystem ofthepresent.colquhoun describescontemporaryattemptsbyarchitectstoengagethe forms ofthe other as inescapablymodern,koestlerdescribesthewiderphilosophical dilemmain1969as rebellioninavacuum. Ishowthattherearemeaningfulandsignificantconnectionstobemade betweentwokeyhistoricalfiguresjohnruskinandalvaraaltoasyet unexplored.alsothemannerinwhicharchitecturalhistorianshaveoverlooked theconnections,andthedifficultytheyhaveinunderstandingaalto,(forthat matterruskinalso)withmultiple,contradictoryevenconfusedexplanations.by embracinganepistemologyappropriatetobothmen sbeliefsfacilitatesamore robustunderstandingofthemandtheirmessageforthecontemporary condition,myselfincluded.thestudiocomponentoftheresearchoffersan informedandchallengingdiscourse.itiscoupledwithanexplorationand approachinthedevelopmentsofartifactsandtheirrelationshipswithinashared epistemology/ontology. v

6 Contents. Acknowledgements III( Abstract V Illustrations X Introduction 1 Chapter1. Ruskin 5 Defininga creaturalview 6 Auerbach screatural 7 Ruskin screature 8 vi

7 ColquhounconnectingRuskinandAuerbach 10 Readingacreaturalview 13 Values 14 Morals/valuesinascientificmaterialismworldview 16 Factsandthemachine 21 Ideasofnatureasdesign 26 Acreaturalepistemologyforartspractice 31 Chapter2 34 Ruskin slegacyversestheruskiniantradition 35 Ruskin scontext 46 RomanticismTitsinfluence 47 Ruskin,RomanticismandthePicturesque 51 TheParadoxofRuskin 54 Ruskinandhis alloflifeview asachristian 56 RuskinandAalto 60 vii

8 Chapter3 Aalto 65 Aaltoasexampleanexemplar 68 AppreciatingAalto 69 Aalto shubris,his comedyandtragedy 70 Aalto sbeliefs 71 AaltoandLindgren 74 Goethe,RuskinandAalto 79 OriginsofthePicturesqueinFinland 80 AaltoandtheEnglishPicturesque 82 WhyhavethecorrespondencesbetweenAalto 90 andruskinbeenoverlooked? NarrativespresentinAalto searlywriting 93 Aalto sbeliefs howdoesheavoidaphilosophical 96 machineview? Aalto s complete relationship,his totalwork 97 AaltoandvandeVelde 99 viii

9 Chapter4 StudioWorks 102 Context 104 Ruskin sintroductory 109 StudioproposalsTsmalltables 111 Materials 115 Development 123 Sofa 135 Sofaconstruction 147 Cutlery 158 Material 163 Conclusion 173 Bibliography 177 ix

10 Illustrations. Introduction. Fig.1 Chapter1. Fig.2 Fig.3 Fig.4 Fig.5 Fig.6 ChristopherRobertson, Succulentus II(1995)Chaisewith rotatingback.handwovenwool,leather,steel,foam,s/steel, plywood,feathers.photo:danielbruyn. MillBeach,DurrasN.S.W.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. LeCorbusier,VillaSavoye(1928T31).Poissy,France.Artstore, WayneAndrews:Architecture. 2009ArtistsRightsSociety (ARS),NewYork/ADAGP,Paris/FLC. file:///users/chris/desktop/images%20for%20research./away NEIG_ html AlvarAalto,VillaMairea(1938T39)NoormarkkuFinland.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,ExperimentalHouse(1952T53)Muuratsalo,Finland. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Ruskin sviewfromhisstudyandfinalhome,brantwood,coniston. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. x

11 Chapter2. Fig.7 Fig.8 Murano,Venice.Photo:JenniferRobertson JohnRuskin. CoastScenenearDumbar (1847). Birmingham MuseumsandArtGallery.AccessionNumber:1907P Fig.9. JohnRuskin,PortionofanarcadeonthesouthsideoftheCathedralof Ferrara.PlateXIIISeven(Lamps(of(Architecture.ScannedbyGeorgeP. Landow htm Fig.10 JohnRuskin, LoggiaoftheDucalPalace (1849T1850)Venice. Watercolourovergraphite.Met.MuseumAccessionNumber Fig.11 Fig.12 Fig.13 Fig.14 LeCorbusier, ChapelleNotreTDameduHaut (1953T1955). Ronchamp,France.ARTstor14T03T03/28.ErichLessingCulture andfineartsarchives. 2009ArtistsRightsSociety(ARS),New York/ADAGP,Paris/FLC. file:///users/chris/desktop/images%20for%20research./lessin G_ART_ html. JohnRuskin, InthepassofKilliecrankie (1857).Mooreand Larkin,Art(at(the(Rockface;(the(Facination(with(Stone,Philip Wilson,London,2006.TheSyndicsoftheFitzwilliamMuseum, Cambridge. JohnRuskin, Abbeville (1868).Drawing.AccessionNumber: P.206.TheHigginsArtGallery&Museum,Bedford. thetweektno4.html. JohnRuskin,DucalPalace.Venice.(1852). AshmoleanMuseum. xi

12 Fig.15 AlvarAalto,JyvaskylaWorkersClub(1924T25)Jyvaskyla,Finland. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Fig.16 DucalPalace,Venice.Photo:JenniferRobertson. Fig.17 JohnRuskin,FaçadeatBrantwood,Ruskin shomeconniston, England.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Chapter3. Fig.18 AlvarAalto,VillaMaireafrontentrance. Fig.19 Fig.20 Fig.21 Fig.22 Fig.23 Fig.24 Fig.25 Fig.26 Fig.27 ArmasLindgren, StudyInteriorTurkuCathedral.Nikula,Riitta. Armas(Lindgren(1874E1929.Helsinki:MuseumofFinnish Architecture.,1988.P.126.MuseumofFinnishArchitecture, Originalarchive(SRM:OA),316. Gisellius,LindgrenandSaarinen(1902)Hvitträsk,Kirkkonummi Finland.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary(1927T35)Viipuri/Vyborg, Finland/Russia.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary(1927T35)Viipuri/Vyborg, Finland/Russia.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary,interiorreadinghall(1927T35) Viipuri/Vyborg,Finland/Russia.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryinterior,skylightsinreadinghall (1927T35)Viipuri/Vyborg,Finland/Russia.Photo:Christopher Robertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryceilinginlecturehall(1927T35) Viipuri/Vyborg,Finland/Russia.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. AlvarAalto,acousticdiagramfortheceilinginthelecturetheatre oftheviipurilibrary.alvaraaltomuseum.ref.43t309 RearTwallNilErikssonGöteborgKonserthus(1935),personally addressedandsignedpublicationof1935celebratingtheopening. AaltoStudiolibrary,Munkkiniemi,Finland. xii

13 Fig.28 Fig.29 Fig.30 Fig.31 AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryinteriorrearwall,lecturehall.(1927T 35)Viipuri/Vyborg,Finland/Russia.Photo:Christopher Robertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrarydetailoffrontentrancedoors,(1927T 35)Viipuri/Vyborg,Finland/Russia.Photo:Christopher Robertson. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryfrontentranceaftercompletion1936. Photo:GustafWelin. AlvarAaltoMuseum.Ref.43T004T064. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryaerialview1936.Photo:GustafWelin. Alvar AaltoMuseum.Ref.43T004T017. Fig.32AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary,currentphotographafterrestoration andremovaloftrees.photo:christopherrobertson. Fig.33Ruskin boat JumpingJenny (whitewave)conniston,england. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Chapter4. Fig.34 Fig.35 Fig.36 Fig.37 Fig.38 Fig.39 Fig.40 LakeCowan.Leaf/cutleryincupronickelandstainlesssteel. Montage.Photo:ChristopherRobertson VegetationsurroundingLakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. LakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia.Photo:Christopher Robertson. IslandofMuuratsalo,propertyofAalto sexperimentalhouse,lake PäijäneFinland.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. LakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Eucalyptus(Diptera.NorsemanWesternAustralia.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. UnidentifiedEucalyptumbel.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. xiii

14 Fig.41 Fig.42 Fig.43 Fig.44 Fig.45 Fig.46 Fig.47 Fig.48 Fig.49 Fig.50 Fig.51 Fig.52 Fig.53 Fig.54 Fig.55 Fig.56 Fig.57 Fig.58 Fig.59 Fig.60 InteriorofAalto shome,turkulate1920 swithmarcelbreuer Wassilysteeltubechairs. AlvarAaltoMuseumRef.91T005T010. AlvarAalto,VillaMairea(1938T39)interioroflivingroom. Alvar AaltoMuseum.Ref.Av1983. AlvarAalto,B/WphotographofcolumnsParthenon,Greece (1933). AlvarAaltoMuseum.Ref.E31T2. Pinus(SylvestrisgrowingaroundVillaMairea. EucalyptusSalubris,LakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia. Photo:ChristopherRobertson. UnidentifiedEucalyptumbel.PhotoChristopherRobertson. Detailof1 st teststemandlegjunction.photo:christopher Robertson. Detailof2 nd teststemandlegjunction.photo:christopher Robertson. Detailof3rdteststemandlegjunction.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Detailof4thteststemandlegjunction.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Detailof5thteststemandlegjunction.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Detailof6 th teststemandlegjunction.photo:christopher Robertson. Detailshowingassemblyoflegsinclampingsystem.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Lowtable,stainlesssteel,redash.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Lowtable,stainlesssteel,acetal,acryliccoatedRFR.Photo ChristopherRobertson. Lowtable,stainlesssteel,ebonizedeucalypt,acryliccoatedRFR. PhotoChristopherRobertson. EucalyptumbelLakeCowan,Norseman.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Prototypesmalltable,stainlesssteel,Victorianash,acryliccoated RPR.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Detailofprototype.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. UnidentifiedEucalyptumbel.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. xiv

15 xv Fig.61 Prototypelowtable.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Fig.62 Detailoffootoftable.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Fig.63 DetailoffiveleggedtableunderTframe. Fig.64 IslandsonLakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia.Google satelliteimage. 2009MapDataSciencesPtyLtd,PSMA.Image 2009DigitalGlobe. Fig.65 IslandsonLakeCowan,NorsemanWesternAustralia.Google satelliteimage. 2009MapDataSciencesPtyLtd,PSMA.Image 2009DigitalGlobe.Montagewithphotographofmodel. Fig.66 Modelofsofa,stone,stainlessandgessooverMDF.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.67 JohnRuskin, MountPilatus (1854) RuskinLibrary,Lancaster University.Usedwithpermission. Fig.68 AlvarAalto, imaginarymountainsketch conceptualizingthe ViipuriLibrary. AlvarAaltoMuseumRef.43T2815. Fig.69 AndreaMantegna,( AgonyintheGarden (1458T60).NG MANTEGNA&mode=artist&frm=1 Fig.70 FraAngelico, SermonontheMount,(Artstor, SCALA_ARCHIVES_ Fig.71 FraAngelico, ThetemptationofChrist,Artstor,SCALA ARCHIVES_ Fig.72 AlvarAalto, SavoyVase (1936) Iittala,Finland. Fig.73 SectionthroughaFinnishbirchtree.Photo:HeikkiDilstrom. Fig.74 ImageofpaintedceilingatHvitrask,KirkkonummiFinland.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.75 ReferenceislandonlakeCowanwithmirage.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Fig.76 ZigTzagspringswithtiestoformtheundersideoftheseat.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.77 DetailofundersideofseatwithtieTdowns.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Fig.78 Coilspringassemblytoformtopofseatwith6Twayties.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.79 Coilspringassemblyfortop.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Fig.80 Detailof1 st layerofhorsehaircoveredwithhessianonunderside.

16 Fig.81 Fig.82 Fig.83 Fig.84 Fig.85 Fig.86 Fig.87 Fig.88 Rearview,2 nd layerofhorsehairtotopandundersideshowingties toholdhairinplace.photo:christopherrobertson. Frontviewwith2 nd layerofhorsehairpriortolayeringwithcotton feltandcalicocover.photo:christopherrobertson. Detailofhorsehairandstuffingties.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. Calicocoverovercottonfeltpriortoupholsteryfabric.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Steelframeforbaseandback.Photo:ChristopherRobertson. BacksprungwithzigTzagandcoilsteelspringsforlumbarsupport andshape.photo:christopherrobertson. DetailofcoilandzigTzagspringassemblywithties. Layerofhessianoverspringassembly. Fig.89Sofa,overheadview,handwoven,feltedwoolandsilkfabrics. Photo:DavidRobertson. Fig.90 Fig.91 Fig.92 Fig.93 Fig.94 Fig.95 Fig.96 Fig.97 Fig.98 Sofa, S E (2009T2017)wood, stainlesssteel,steelsprings,hair,jute,hemp,cottonwadding, handtwovenwoolandsilkfabricsbyjenniferrobertson.photo: DavidRobertson. EucalyptleafwithsaltencrustationonLakeCowan.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Eucalyptleafwithsaltencrustation,LakeCowan.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Variousshapetypologiesineucalyptandhakealeaves,some generatedbyinsectattack.photo:christopherrobertson. Typologiesinsampleeucalyptleaves.Photo:Christopher Robertson Typologiesinsampleeucalyptleaves.Photo:Christopher Robertson. Variousleafformssomeshowingmodificationfollowinginsect attack.photo:christopherrobertson. Diagram,JohnRuskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture( of(the(nations(of(europe(considered(in(its(association(with(natural( Scenery(and(National(Character:Bibliobazzaar,2007.p.244. Firstprototypesinhollowformstainlesssteel.Photo:Christopher Robertson. xvi

17 Fig.99 Fig.100 Hollowtablewareinmonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Hollowtablewareinmonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.101 HollowtablewareinMonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Fig.102 Hollowtableware,oxidizedmonelandstainlesssteel.Photo: ChristopherRobertson. Conclusion. Fig.103 JohnRuskin,AustralianOpal.Watercolour/engraving/print Frontspiece,Works,facingXXVI.ScannedbyGeorgeP.Landow. JohnRuskin,Works.TheLibraryEdition.Eds.E.T.Cookand AlexanderWedderburn.39vols.London:GeorgeAllen.1903T xvii

18 Introduction. Fig.1. ChristopherRobertson.SucculentusII.(1995). AsaChristianandartist,mybeliefs/experienceconditionmypractice.Forthe mostpartihaveremainedsilentaboutthenature,meaningsandcomplexitiesof itasinegotiatewithinthecurrentmodernistandlargelysecularparadigm. Withoutbeingabletoarticulateitindetail,Ihadcometoconsidermyselfas havinga19 th Centuryontologyandepistemologyofartspractice,asitwasthe mostrecentexpositionofachristiancreatedviewofnatureasanontologythat affectedthewidersociety. 1 1 AlanColquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.CambridgeM.A:TheMIT Press,1989.p.vii.Colquhouninhisreferencetoacreatedviewofnatureusesthe generaltermof vitalistic. Whilsttherewerearangeofvariablesintheirbeliefs itwouldbefalsetosuggestthatpugin,ruskin,morrisandmanyoftheenglish 1

19 After23yearsofworkingthroughmultiplechallenges,theinquisitivepurchase ofcatherinemcdermott sbook,design:(the(key(concepts(2007)atarnolfini s bookshopinbristolpiquedmyinterest.itwaswithgenuine,thoughinformal, questionsthatmcdermottraisesoverthenatureof19 th centurydesignpractice, itsuseofnatureanalogies,andtheimplicationoftheirlossintocontemporary artspracticethatprovidedmewithconfidencetoembarkonthisresearch. WhilstaChristiancreationtraditionanditsuseofnatureanalogieslaida foundationofmoderndesign,whatwasbuiltuponthatfoundationwaslargely expoundedwithaphilosophical,machineviewwithitsownanalogiesfor nature. 2 Giventheprofoundnatureoftheseismicshift,whatispuzzlingisthat apartfromtheoccasional,lonevoice,thereappearslittledesiretobeginto engagewiththeconsequencesandtheramificationsthroughtimetothe present. 3 Ratherthefocushasbeenontheliteralmachine,industrialization, technology,progress,socialization,economy,ecologyandcontemporaryideation anditsconsequencesasanatural,evolvingphenomena. Beforehisuntimelydeath,theinfluentialBritishartcriticandtheoristPeter Fuller(1947T1990)wasanexceptionalvoiceandinfairnesstothearchitectural historianandessayistalancolquhoun,inhiscritiqueofmodernisminmodernity( and(the(classical(tradition(1989),alsohighlightstheconditionofthe philosophicalchangeinexaminingthepresent,thoughlessinclinedtolook further.hewrites: Yet(all(the(theories(of( deconstruction (that(purport(to(show(that(philosophy( is(dead(are(presented(within(the(format(of(philosophy(itself;(they(do(not( accept(passively(the(relativism(they(appear(to(be(celebrating.(it(is(this( apparent(paradox(that(leads(both(to(the(provisional(acceptance(of( contemporary(pluralism(in(architecture(and(to(a(deep(concern(over(the( absence(of(any(coherent(discourse. 4 ( FreeArchitectureexponentswereanythingotherthanChristian,atleastintheir formativeworks. 2 Note:TheItalianFuturistsrejectednaturealtogetherforanartificial,scientific, rationaluseofmaterial,creatingapurelymechanicalart,aspiritualizationnot boundbynature.see;reynorbanham,(theory(and(design(in(the(first(machine( Age.London:ArchitecturalPress,1962.pps.130, RichardSlaughter,'WelcometotheAnthropocene.'Futures,no Ibid.p.xi. 2

20 Thequestionsexploredinthisthesisarefourfold: (1)WhatarethehistoriesofaChristiancreatedviewofnatureanda philosophicalmachineviewofnaturetwhatdotheylooklike? (2)HowdoesaChristiancreatedviewofnatureanditsanalogieshavesuch impactforchangeandsignificanceinthe19 th Century? (3)HowfarcanwetraceaChristiancreatedviewofnatureintomodernism,are thereexamplesorarewelookingatdemonstrably,mutuallyexclusive ontologies? (4)Inlightoftheresearch,whatunderstandingsaretheretobefoundtoinform myownandwidercontemporarypractice? Asakey19 th centurywriter,johnruskinisanobviouschoiceasanexpounderof achristiancreatedviewofnatureanduseofnatureanalogies.examplesof practitionersthattookachristiancreatedviewand/oritsanalogiesinto modernismfirstpointedtoscandinavia. 5 Afortuitous,concurrentreadingof Ruskin sthe(stones(of(venice(1851t53)andthefinnisharchitect,alvar(aalto (1998)(practice1922T1976)showssimilaritiesintheirwritings,thoughIfound littleevidenceofarchitecturalhistoriansconnectingthemboth.lightcameinthe formofanunpublishedmastersthesis;gillianmawby, TheLampofObedience: JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda'propersense'ofFreedom ((2001).Itincludeda personalletterfromaalto sfriend,confidantandbiographergoranschildt saying; AaltoknewRuskinwell,hisbigloveofVenicewasinpartinspiredby him. 6 Forthestructureofthethesis,Chapter1establishesthehistoricaland philosophicalcontextthatisinclusiveofruskinandaalto speriodandhighlights it simplicationsforthepresent.chapter2hasafocusonruskin,chapter3on AaltoandChapter4onmyownworks.ThroughoutthesethreechaptersIengage atriangulated,dialecticapproachtoweaveasynthesisofthreeprotagonists.in short,ireflectuponmypracticeandtheideasthatunderpinit,inathreetway conversation. PeterFullerpersonallyexperiencesadiametricchangetohisphilosophical positiontoargueforruskin slegacy,alegacythatibelieveaaltoshares.inhis booktheoria:(art(and(the(absence(of(grace((1998)fullerwritesthatruskinwas:...(the(inspiration(of(a(continuing,(if(neglected,(romantic(tradition.(far(from( being('escapist',(this(tradition(has(expressed(imaginative,(spiritual(and( 5 Followingaquestion,DrRobertBellsuggestedthatIlooktoScandinavia. 6 GillianMawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda'Proper Sense'ofFreedom.'LancasterUniversity,2001.Appendix. 3

21 aesthetic(insights(which(modernity(disregarded.(today(those(insights(are( coming(into(their(own;(as(we(struggle(to(find(our(way(out(from(under(the( rubble(and(ruins(of(modernity,(ruskin's(critical(enterprise(seems(to(acquire(a( renewed(relevance.(he(was(in(effect(the(first(postemodernist(e(and(his(thinking( about(art(runs(deeper(than(many(of(those(who(came(later.(perhaps(that(unity( between(scientific,(spiritual(and(aesthetic(life,(which(ruskin(longed(for,(is( again(becoming(possible...he(provides(clues(not(only(to(the(spiritual(and( aesthetic(dilemmas(of(his(time,(but(also(for(our(own. 7 ( ( Thetitleofthethesis, FromRuskintoAalto;prophetswithamessage asksa legitimatequestion,whatdoesanunderstandingofanyconnectionsbetween bothmenandtheirmessageshavetosaytomyownunderstandingofmy positionandpracticeinthecontemporarycontext? 4

22 Chapter1. The(result(of(our(historical(enquiries(thus(depends(on(the(philosophical( views(that(we(have(been(holding(before(we(even(begin(to(look(at(the( evidence.(the(philosophical(question(must(therefore(come(first. (C.S.Lewis Miracles.1947.p.12.) Fig.2. MillBeach,Durras. EstablishingthehistoricalcontextiskeytobegintoappreciateRuskinand Aalto sontologicalandepistemologicalpositionstoinvitearetreadingoftheir work.thoughnotdirectlyattemptingtoaddresstheproblemofworldviews, Tournikiots(2012),inobservingthewrittenhistoriesoftheModernist Movementinarchitecturewrites; Onewayoranother,thehistoryofmodern architectureiswrittenbackwards,takingitsbeginninginthepresentand 5

23 projectingatheoryofarchitectureontothepast.whatappearstobethe beginningofthenarrativeisarepresentationoftheend. 8 DrawingattentiontoC.S.Lewis squoteabove,itisalsoessentialtoconsiderthe premiseandnatureofeachworldviewunderexaminationtomovefrom argumenttoappreciation.argumentisonlyfruitfulwhenthepremiseisagreed upon,andwhendealingwithworldviews,asthisthesisdoes,appreciationbegins tofacilitatetheevaluationofwisdomandmeaningsfoundineachoftheir writingsandpractices. BothRuskinandAaltositwithinaperiodthatexperiencedprofoundchange, bothontologicalandepistemological,covering1840 stothe1970 s.thischapter throughanelaborationofkey,philosophicalfoundationswillprovidesome contexttotheirapproaches,andinturninformareadingofmyownandwider contemporaryartspractice.thethreadsthatinterlacebothmenintheperiod areajudeo/christiancreatedviewofscienceandnature,thepicturesque, romanticism,classicism,darwinism,modernism,scienceasreason, industrializationandtheriseofconsumerism,individualismandamachineview oftheworld.anexaminationbringssomeinsighttothechangingmilieuin question.itiswherewebegintofindbothruskinandaaltothathelpsustoread andappreciatetheminchapters2and3respectively. Defininga creaturalview. Ihavechosenthewords creatural and creaturalview todescribeanddefine thejudeo/christianphilosophicalworldview,of Natureascreated asananalogy fordesign,whatitanditscharacteristicsmightlooklikeinamodernistcontext. Asanontologyandepistemologyitcanbedifferentiatednotonlywithclassicism asruskindoesforarchitecture,butalsotoaphilosophical machineview,and itsuseofamachineanalogyfornature, Natureasmechanism fordesignthat emergesandgainstractiontowardsthelatterhalfof19 th century.asatypical expressionandexperienceofthischangingofworldviews,theearlymodernist architectandphilosopher,berlagewrites: As(our(new(concept(manifests(itself,(what(spiritual(idea(shall(serve(its( foundation?(who(can(answer(this?(christianity(is(dead,(and(only(the( 8 TomSimons,ed.,Quo(Vadis(Architectura,vol.4,TheNilsEricWickbergLectures 2009/210.Helsinki:AaltoUniversityPublications.2012.p.179 6

24 preliminary(stirrings(can(be(felt(of(a(new(world(concept(based(on(the( consequences(of(scientific(progress. 9 Inthetransitioningfroma creaturalview,toa machineview,asberlagespeaks of,itisverydifficulttopindownanindividual sbeliefs;theyarejustaslikelyto harbourcontradictionsthatareneverfullyresolved.thatwouldincludebysome degreeaalto,andtothestudyofhispeerssuchaslecorbusier,lloydwright, GropiusandclearlyBerlagehimself.Aphilosophicalmachineviewbecomesso dominantintellectuallyinaalto stimeitwouldbedifficultforanyonetoopenly expoundacreaturalview,andatthesametimebeacceptedpartofthe mainstream.ifthereareattemptstosubvert,howeversubtle,abinaryviewof beliefandscience,thenthisbeginstodefineaalto sposition.weseethisvery earlyinhiscareerinhisintroductiontohis1925lecture, Abbé Coignard s Sermon. 10 Todefineanddescribeacreaturalview,IhavepartiallyborrowedErich Auerbach suseoftheterm creatural fromhisbookmimesis,thoughheusesthe wordwithadifferentpurpose,describingasimilarconceptbutinliterature. ProvidentiallyitdovetailswithRuskin sdescriptionofmanas creature overlappingtheoriginalmeaningofthewordbothinhistoryandcontent.myuse oftheword creatural isamixtureoftheoriginalmeaningofthewordandasa meansofdescribingtheparticularjudeo/christiantradition,acontinuitythat penetratesthroughhistoryasauerbachdescribesit,andiwillarguethatishow Ruskinreadsitalso. TheCollinsEnglishDictionarydefinescreaturalas somethingthathasbeen created,whetheranimateorinanimate,ittracestheoriginoftheword backtothe13 th Century. 11 Auerbach screatural. 9 RaynorBanham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.London: ArchitecturalPress.1962.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Collins(English(Dictionary,10theditioned.HarperCollins

25 ErichAuerbachcoinshisownversionoftheword creatural inhisbookmimesis, firstpublishedin1946todescribeaspecificallychristianperspectiveinthe historyofliterature. 12 InafootnotetohistranslationoftheMimesistextfrom GermantoEnglish,TrasktranslatesKreatürlichesasa...neologismofthe1920's todescribethesufferingtowhichmanissubjectasamortalcreature identifying itasacentralfocusinthechristiantraditionpostthecrucifixionofchrist. 13 Auerbachsusehadanadditionalmeaning,forhis creaturalrealism wasaterm heusedtoacknowledgethecrucifixionaccountasembodyingamixtureofstyles thatclearlydistinguishesitfromtheclassicalliteraturethatprecededit.itisa deeplysignificantchangeasclassicismisstrictly,stylisticallyexclusive.ithas furtherimplicationsforauerbachinthatitsharessimilaritieswiththeancient Hebraicwritings.Bothtextshediscoversshowamorerealisticrepresentationof reality,bothfortheirdeeplypsychologicalportrayalofthesubjectandtheirlack ofstylisticinhibitingtreatment. 14 InhissearchforahistoricalprecedenttoModernrealismAuerbachfoundthat: (...(from(the(middle(ages(on(through(the(renaissance(a(serious(realism( existed.(it(had(been(possible(in(literature(as(well(as(the(visual(arts(to( represent(the(most(everyday(phenomena(of(reality(in(a(serious(and( significant(context.(the(doctrine(of(levels(of(style(had(no(absolute(validity.( However(different(medieval(and(modern(realism(may(be,(they(were(at(one(in( this(same(basic(attitude.(and(it(had(long(been(clear(to(me(how(this(medieval( conception(of(art(had(evolved,(and(when(and(how(the(first(break(with(the( classical(theory(had(come(about.(it(was(the(story(of(christ,(with(its(ruthless( mixture(of(everyday(reality(and(the(highest(and(most(sublime(tragedy,( which(had(conquered(the(classical(rule(of(styles. 15 Auerbach suseoftheterm creatural appearstorelatetotheoriginalmeaningof theword,forhecould,ineffect,haveusedanywordforhisneologism. Ruskin screature. 12 AlanColquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.Seeintroductionfor synopsispps.xvii xxiv, ErichAuerbach,Mimesis:(The(Representation(of(Reality(in(Western(Literature, 50thanniversaryed.Princeton,N.J:PrincetonUniversityPress,2003.p Colquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.p.xviii. 15 Ibid.p.55. 8

26 Ruskinconsistentlyusestheword creature toexpoundhisconceptofman.itis manascreatedandrelationaltothecreator,securedintheprofoundvaluesof significancethatembodytherelationship.itiscentraltohisargumentsabout man,designandworkmanship.inexpoundingacreaturalview,ruskin swriting firstlycanbeseentobringanendtothedominanceofneoclassicismandits demandsontheartistforsubservienceandidealism.secondly,itspeakstothe riseofscientificmaterialismanditsapotheosis:industrialisation.bothare,for Ruskin,oneandthesameintheirtreatmentandviewofman. 16 Heissimilarly identifyingandarguingfortherealisminthechristiantraditionofthevisualarts asseeninthemedievalperiod. Ruskin spositionisneithercombativenordefensive;itisauthoritative.histext, Youmusteithermakeatoolofthecreatureoramanofhim.Youcannotmake both, embodieshisbeliefintheverynatureandidentityofcreatedmanverses manastoolormachine. 17 Hewrites: ( Understand(this(clearly:(You(can(teach(a(man(to(draw(a(straight(line(and( cut(one;(to(strike(a(curved(line,(and(to(carve(it;(and(to(copy(and(carve(any( number(of(given(lines(or(forms,(with(admirable(speed(and(perfect(precision;( and(you(find(his(work(perfect(of(its(kind;(but(if(you(ask(him(to(think(about( any(of(those(forms,(to(consider(if(he(cannot(find(any(better(in(his(own(head,( he(stops;(his(execution(becomes(hesitating;(he(thinks,(and(ten(to(one(he( thinks(wrong;(ten(to(one(he(makes(a(mistake(in(the(first(touch(he(gives(to(his( work(as(a(thinking(being.(but(you(have(made(a(man(of(him(for(all(that.(he( was(only(a(machine(before,(an(animated(tool.( Ruskin sconceptofmanisrealandimmediate,hisideaoftheartist/workmanas avaluedindividualwhilstrelatinghimtothewhole,equallyaddressesthe intendedpurposeofworkinrelationaltermspsychologically,sociologically,and spiritually.incontrasttoagrowingmechanisticviewhewrites: We(have(seen(that(all(great(art(is(the(work(of(the(whole(living(creature,( body(and(soul,(and(chiefly(the(soul.(but(it(is(not(only(the(work(of(the(whole( creature,(it(likewise(addresses(the(whole(creature. 18 ( ( ( ( 16 Note:IfweusebothBoyle sargumentandsubsequentlythomson suse, materialismisanancientgreek,epicureanideaandisnotnew.itisclassical. 17 Ruskin,On(Art(and(Life.p Ruskin,The(Stones(of(Venice.p

27 ColquhounconnectingRuskinandAuerbach. InhiscollectionofoutstandingessaysentitledModernity(and(the(Classical( Tradition(1989),AlanColquhounlooksatAuerbach scomparisonofclassical andcreatural(myterm)onlytosuggestthatacloserexaminationofachristian visualsystemmayprovidesomeunderstandingofitsplaceandinfluencein history.inwritingtheessays,colquhounisaddressingthepresent,theclosed philosophicalsystemofmodernismandthecontradictionswithinit;whathe callsthe inescapablymodern. 19 InlookingattheproblemswithModernismhe appearstogobacktoitsrootsinsearchforanunderstanding.colquhounhas RuskininmindinlookingatAuerbach scomparisons,butheissurprisingly dismissive. ColquhounlimitshisreadingofAuerbach sanalysistoalinguisticandstructural comparison;aclassicalversesvernacular.whilstauerbachlooksattheir comparativeoutcomesforrealism,colquhounignoresthis,insteadhe acknowledgesthechristiangothicarchitectureasessentially paratactic in construction,thelayingsidetbytsideincompositionversesclassicismas hypotactic,thesubordinationofonepartinthecompositiontoanother.healso notesclassicism suseofsymmetryversusthegothicasasymmetrical,andthat Gothicwasitselfbasedonantiquearchitecture. 20 Colquhounfailstograsp Auerbach sobservation,thattheearlychristianliteratureisinclusiveinthe broadersense,thatitadapts,thatitisnontidealisticincontrasttoclassicism, henceitsrealismandalsoitsfreedom. 19 Ibid.Introduction. 20 Ibid.p

28 Fig.3. LeCorbusier,VillaSavoye(1928T31)Poissy,France. BothLeCorbusierandAaltowereexposedtothewritingsofRuskinandweseea contrastintheirwork,forexampleinlecorbusier svillasavoyewhenwe compareitwithaalto svillamairea,bothbuiltinruralsettings.aalto,asruskin advocates,developshisarchitectureinrelationtolandscapeinkeepingwithit, andmanasapsychologicalandspiritualbeingisatitscentre.manisnotthe analogyforit.lecorbusier,thoughheinitiallydrawsuponruskin,revertsback toplatonicideals. 21 UsingAuerbach swordsfromhisanalysisofhomer sodyssey(wecoulddescribe LeCorbusier svillasavoyeas attheforefrontofthepicture, imageof perfection, perfectlydescribed, nobackground, delightinthephysical 21 JanKennethBirksted,'ThePoliticsofCopying:LeCorbusier's'Immaculate Conceptions.'Oxford(Art(Journal,No pps.305T326.Birkstedbrings togetheranumberofdescriptionsofthevillasavoye,includingafascinating backgroundbehindlecorbusier slikelyneotclassical,late18 th century inspirationforit.p= 11

29 existence, notpsychological. Incontrast,Auerbachdescribesthecreatural literatureas deeplypsychological, obscure, fraughtwithbackground and orientatedtowardstruth,tthatis,intherepresentationofreality. 22 Fig.4.AlvarAalto,VillaMairea(1938T39)NoormarkkuFinland. RemarkablyAaltohimselfmakesacomparableobservation20yearsearlier wherehecompareshomers(iliadwiththefinnishpoetryepickalevala:(..the(finnish(epic(almost(seems(to(weave(a(tapestry(in(which(every(part( belongs(to(a(constantly(active(nature,(whereas(the(iliad(explains(what(needs( explaining,(but(does(not(touch(nature. 23 ( 22 ErichAuerbach,Mimesis:(The(Representation(of(Reality(in(Western(Literature, 50thanniversaryed.Princeton,N.J:PrincetonUniversityPress.2003.pps.11T Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.trans.TimothyBinham.Helsinki:Otava Publishing.1997.p.171.AlvarAalto,Finland(as(a(Model(for(World(Development,( Suomalainen(Suomi,(No.(5,(1949.(Seealsop.160.Own(Words,whereAaltowrites 12

30 ColquhounlooksuponRuskin swritingonarchitectureasanattempttoreverse thestatusoftheclassicalandnontclassicalsoas toestablishmedievalartas superiortoclassicalart. ColquhounappearsunawareofAuerbach sargument for difference. IfwelookattheheartofRuskin scriticismofclassicismverses Gothic,wehavetwodifferentsetsofvalues.TheheartofRuskin swritingon architecturewasnotaboutstyle,ofvaluingonestyleaboveanother,but deontological,aboutwhatandhowvaluesthemselvesareworkedoutinthe architecture,valuesexpoundedfordeep,relationaloutcomes. Readingacreaturalview. A creaturalview canbereadascontinuousinthechristiantradition,witha consistencyinitscharacteristics.parallelscanbefoundbetweenruskin s writingonthemedievalchristianartistsandbuildersandtheinfluenceofthe Christian creaturalrealism inliteratureasauerbachreadsit.auerbachtraces hiscreaturalrealismfromthewritingofthegospels,particularlymanifestinthe medievalperiodthroughtotheendofthe16 th Century. 24 Hewritesofitbeing displacedby advocatesofarigorousimitationofantiqueliterature. 25 InThe( Country(and(the(City(1973)WilliamselegantlycritiquestheRenaissance adaptionofclassicalmodesinliterature.hewrites thatstepbystep,theseliving tensionsareexcised,untilthereisnothingcountervailing,andselectedimages standasthemselves;notasalivingbutinanenameledworld. 26 Itwasthis rigorousimitationinthevisualartsthatruskinandotherromanticswere effectiveinpullingdowninthe19 th century,retestablishinga creaturalview. No soonerhadtheysucceeded,theyweretoencounteranascendingmachineview. thattheiliadcouldbeaccommodatedwithinthefinnishlanguagebutnotthe KalevalawithintheGreeklanguage. 24 Auerbach,Mimesis:(The(Representation(of(Reality(in(Western(Literature.pps. 554, Ibid.p RaymondWilliams,The(Country(and(the(City.NewYork:OxfordUniversity Press,1973.p

31 Values. BothRuskinandAaltoarguedforarchitectureasamoraldiscipline.Inanearly, fortuitous,andconcurrentreadingofruskinandaalto,thiswasthefirst connectionbetweenthemthatpiquedmyinterest.inhisintroductiontothe( Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture,Saintwritesthat Ruskinranksastheforemost Englishspeakingphilosopherofarchitecture,itsgreatmoralist,idealistand conscience. 27 ForAalto,followingtwogenerationslater,architecturewasa predominatelymoralmatter. 28 WhatmakesAaltosuchavaluableexampletostudypostRuskinisthe consistencyinhisphilosophicalapproachthroughouthiscareerinaperiodof unqualifiedchange. 29 ForbothRuskinandAalto,theirdeontologicalapproach, understandingandapplicationofvalues,determinestheirpracticesandoutlook, itistherudderfortheirboatsinchangingcurrents. Writingonarchitectureinthe1850 s,ruskinarguedforagenuinechristian architecturewithafocusonchristianmoralsandvalues.indoingsohechoseto use,thoughnotexclusively,theexampleofmedievalchristiangothicasa contrasttothethencurrentappropriationofamixofforeignstylesandtheir valuesthathadbeengeneratedbynumerousfactors,includingincreasedlevels oftravelandtradeovertheprevious200years. 30 Thismixtureofstyleswas dominatedbyneoclassicismandwastobeaparticularfocusofcriticismby Ruskin.Thepressureoframpantindustrialization,whichinitselfbroughtwithit newopportunitiesinmaterials,processesandtechnology,nevertheless compoundedtheproblem.ruskin shopewastoexpoundanalternatetothe pluralisticengagementofstyleandvaluesinwhatwasknownasthe Thebattle 27 JohnRuskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint,ed. London:Century.1998.p.xi. 28 GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words,trans.TimothyBinham.Helsinki: OtavaPublishing.1997.pps.261T262.Lecture,MunichNov15,1957. Schooner Wohnen. (MorebeautifulHousing)AaltoArchives. 29 TomokoSato,JuhaniPallasmaa,ed.Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of(Shigeru( Ban.London:BlackDogPublishinginassociationwithBarbicanArtGallery p EdwardLucieTSmith,Furniture:(A(Concise(History.London:Thamesand Hudson.1979.p.58.SeeChapter5.1600T

32 ofstyles thatragedthroughoutthe19 th Century. 31 Ruskin schoice,his endorsementofmedievalgothicasamodelforarchitectureappearsparadoxical; foritalsoincludesamixtureofstylesascolquhounhasnoted.however,itwas thevaluesthatweredemonstratedinthegothicthatcaughtruskin sattention, hencehisexegesistobefoundinthe(seven(lamps(of(architecture(1849)and subsequentlythe(stones(of(venice((1851t53). 32 SaintnotesthatitwasAugustPuginwholaidthefoundationandposedthe questionsforruskin sstudiesandlaterwilliammorris sworkingoutofthem. 33 Ruskin suseofmoralsas truth,whenviewedbyanalogy,asdoor,frameand structure,ispivotaltohisargumentandourunderstandinghiswork.adoor detachedfromaframefromwhichithinges,nolongerservestheroleofadoor. Whentested,appearsproblematicandillusionary;itisformwithoutsubstance. InThe(Seven(LampsRuskinattemptstogiveusafixedpointofreference,asina doorhingedfromaframeandstructure,andentryintoaninteriorofbeautythat transcendscultureandtime.bylookingback,ruskinismakingconnectionstoa wayforward,astheensuinginfluenceofhisworkdemonstrates.ruskin sideas werenotaboutatransthistoricalstyle,asheisoftenread,butvaluesastruth, hencetransthistorical.thisisaffirmedinhisdefinitionofthepurposesinwriting The(Stones(of(VeniceasquotedbyJanMorris(1981),andinadvertentlyby BerlagewhenhedecriesRuskinasamere philosopher, astudent,notateacher ofstyle TheEnglishFreeArchitecturemovementthatgrewoutoftheworkofRuskinis notedforitsfocusonconstituentsotherthanstyle.inthesamewayaalto, thoughinfluencedby internationalstyle,isnotpreoccupiedwithstyleitself. RatherAaltoengagesthedevelopmentofhisarchitecturalworksthroughaclear andconsistentsetofvaluesthatdeliversuniqueoutcomes.thatisattheheartof theparadoxofaaltothatgoldhagenattemptstoresolveinherarticle, Ultraviolet:Aalto sembodiedrationalism ((2008).AsGoldhagenelaborates; thoughaleadingmodernistaaltodefiesmodernistconvention JohnSteegman,Victorian(Taste.London:CenturyHutchinson.1987.See Steegman sdetaileddiscussion. 32 AlanColquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.CambridgeM.A:The MITPress.1989.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p.xiii. 34 JohnRuskin,The(Stones(of(Venice,ed.JanMorris.London:Faber,1981.p ReynerBanham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.London: ArchitecturalPress.1962.p S.W.Goldhagen,'Ultraviolet:AlvarAalto'sEmbodiedRationalism.'Harvard( Design(Magazine,No.27,no.Fall2007/Winter.2008.pps.38,39. 15

33 WhilstRuskiniswritingThe(Seven(Lamps,theideasofscientific rationalism/materialismbegintogainsignificanttractionmorebroadly.we begintofindacomplexityintheslipperybattlefortheverynatureofvalues,the natureofmoralsandhowruskinissubsequentlyread.intheirefforttoassert theirclaimforhegemony,particularlypostt1860followingdarwin spublication ofon(the(origin(of(species,scientificmaterialismwelcomesthisunhingingof valuesfromatheologicalsystem,initiallybelievingthatvaluescouldbefoundin nature. 37 AsRuskinwaschampioningJudeo/Christianvaluesforarchitecture, thefoundationforthosevaluessufferedlongttermrepudiationinthewider society.ruskin stiming,lookingback,evidencesthepropheticnatureofhis work.inhisuseofchristianvalues,ruskinunderstoodthemtobecontinuous: past,presentandfuture. Morals/valuesinascientificmaterialismworldview. RichardSlaughterinWelcome(to(the(Anthropocene(2012)isnotaloneinraising thevaluesquestionindealingwithbigcontemporaryproblems. 38 Itismyown context,particularlywhendealingwiththedevelopmentandcommercialization ofdesignanditsconsequencesthatiengageinchapter4.whatismost frustrating,giventhecontemporarycondition,isthelackofunderstandingofthe natureofvaluesasruskinunderstoodandengagedthem.aaltowritesofhis ownfrustrationin1939of nihilistattitudestovaluesthatisattherootofthe present,chaoticsituation. 39 Itisworthlisteningtovariousvoicesspeakingon valuesinthemodernperiod,eveniftheydonotattempttoprovideanswersto theirownquestionsorcondition.itisaquestionandconditionthatcouldonlybe describedasstagnant. SpeakingataNobelsponsoredsymposiumin1969,overacenturyafterthe publicationofthe(seven(lamps,monodandothersaddresstheworkofwolfgang KohlerusingthetitleofKohler sbookthe(place(of(value(in(a(world(of(facts (1938).Thespeakersatthesymposiumgrapplewiththenatureofvaluesina scientificmaterialismworldview.amongthoseinvitedtospeak,monodargues thatwhilstsciencecanprovidenoanswerstotheproblemofmeaningorvalues, hesaysthat Scienceinitsdevelopmenthasgraduallyattackedanddissolvedto thecoretheveryfoundationsofthevariousvaluesystemswhich,from 37 The(Grove(Dictionary(of(Art.(From(Monet(to(Cezanne:(Late(19thECentury(French( Artists(/(Edited(by(Jane(Turner.London:Macmillan,2000.p RichardSlaughter, WelcometotheAnthropocene. Futures,No pps. 119T Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.trans.TimothyBinham.Helsinki:Otava Publishing.1997.p

34 prehistorictimeshasservedastheethicalframeworkforhumansocieties. 40 For Monodthereisanironyinwhatheobserves,thatitisthesevery valuesystems thatare attherootofthediscoveryofthescientificmethod. 41 Neverthelesshe arguesfortheneedtodevelopa radicallynewfoundation proposingoneby commonagreementorconsensus.heobserves: The(most(significant,(the(most(profound,(the(most(disturbing((and(to(many( the(most(frightening)(consequence(of(the(development(of(science(lies(not(in( the(industrial(and(technical(revolution,(but(in(the(agonizing(reappraisal,( which(science(forces(upon(man,(of(his(deepest(rooted(concepts(of(himself( and(his(relationship(to(the(universe. 42 (( Chigas,anotherspeakeratthesamesymposium,viewstheconsequenceof scientificrationalismandmaterialisticphilosophiesassociatedwithit,asbeing anthropophagic orcannibalistic. 43 Hepointstoagradualchanginginhuman thoughtfromtheendofthe15 th Centuryfroma theological toan anthropocentric one,wheremanbecomesitscenter its Existant. 44 Incontrast,afellowspeakerHayashi,presentedafunctionalistviewofvalues, speakingabout discontinuousvaluesystems underpressurefrom social tensions asaresultofeverchanging desiresandfunctions. 45 Hayashitalks abouttwokindsof desires, individual,and nontindividual,andtwotypesof functions, fundamental and elastic. HeidentifiesnonTindividualisticdesires andfundamentalfunctionsasgenerallyworkingwelltogether,whilst individualisticdesireshavethepotentialtogeneratefrictionsinfundamental functions.hearguesfortheneedforelasticitytorelievesocialtensionsinthe future. Writingontechnologyandchangebetweenthe19 th and20 th CenturyRieger (2005)notesthat technologicalchangeappearedliterallytosubstantiatechange andtolendphysicalexpressionsto, progress and decay. 46 Thishelpsusto understandhayashi sperspective;theideaoflinkingvaluestoenvironmental 40 SymposiumNobel,The(Place(of(Value(in(a(World(of(Facts:(Proceedings/Edited( by(arne(tiselius(and(sam(nilsson.newyork:wileyintersciencedivision,1970.p Ibid.p Ibid.p Ibid.p Nobel,The(Place(of(Value(in(a(World(of(Facts:(Proceedings(/(Edited(by(Arne( Tiselius(and(Sam(Nilsson.p Ibid. 46 BernhardRieger,Technology(and(the(Culture(of(Modernity(in(Britain(and( Germany,(1890E1945.CambridgeUK:CambridgeUniversityPress,2005.p

35 changeandideasofhistory,riegerwrites, inordertocreatethenew,theoldor traditionalhadtobedisplacedandoftendestroyed. 47 InthelinkingoftechnologyandnewvaluesystemsHayashibringstogether capitalism,industrialproductionandconsumerism.colquhounlinksafunctional viewofvaluestotheperiodoftheindustrialrevolutionbeginninginthe17 th Century.Hewrites:itwasa Theoryoffunctionalismwhichattributed transcendentalvaluetofunctionitself. 48 Theideathatvalueschangeand developwithhistoricaltimeisbynowsoingrainedintocommonwisdomthatit isdifficulttoimagineadifferentpointofview. 49 Linkingvalueswithfunction,capitalismandcommercializationwithindesign itselfisalsonotedbyheskettandtheenglishcontemporarywriteronthearts PeterDormer.Heskett,inhisperceptivebookIndustrial(Design(1980),asserts thatcontemporaryvaluesfordesignaredrivenbycommercialization. 50 Thisis somethingheshareswithdormer,thoughdormerclaimsthatvaluesare negotiatedbetweendesignersandmanufacturers. 51 Chigasdescribesvaluesasnolongerhavinganylinktoavaluesystembutas nowplayedoutthroughscienceinagameofchance.helamentsoverthe environmentalproblemsofscientificmaterialisminthelatesixties,and identifiesitwiththecontemporaryphilosophicalstateofman: 52 Man(has(been(downgraded(and(become(an(instrument(of(his(sensorial( experiences,(his(language,(and(his(reason,(no(longer(being(his(own(master.(he,( who(was(the(being,(became(the(existant.(a(quotation(from(michael(foucault( illustrates(this(tendency:("in(our(days,(one(cannot(think(but(on(the(vacuum(left(by( the(disappearance(of(man.(this(vacuum(does(not(mean(an(absence,(it(does(not( determine(a(void(that(must(be(filled.(it(is(nothing(more,(and(nothing(less,(than(the( development(of(a(space(where(it(is(at(last(possible(to(think(anew. 53 ( HarveyquotingMarx sgrundrisse,pointstotheriseofcapitalismandstates: For thefirsttimenaturebecomespurelyanobjectformankind,purelyamatterof 47 Ibid.p Colquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.p.x. 49 Ibid.p JohnHeskett,Industrial(Design.(London:ThamesandHudson, PeterDormer,The(Meanings(of(Modern(Design:(Towards(the(TwentyEFirst( Century.London:ThamesandHudson,1990.p Nobel,The(Place(of(Value(in(a(World(of(Facts.(Proceedings/Edited(by(Arne( Tiselius(and(Sam(Nilsson.p Ibid.p.75,Foucault,M.Lesmotsetchoses.Gallimard,1967,p

36 utility;ceasestoberecognizedasapowerforitself;andthetheoreticaldiscovery ofitsautonomouslawsappearsmerelyasarusesoastosubjugatetohuman needs Harveyalsoidentifiesmodernismanditswritingsas anexperienceof progressthroughmodernization,emphasizingthetemporality,theprocessof becomingratherthanbeing, identifyingacriticalontologicalchange. 55 Kashiwagi commentsondesignposttheeconomiccrisisof1985 economic logicbecomesauniversalvaluerankingscale. 56 Heacknowledgesvaluesother thanthosethatareeconomic,butsaystheyhavebecomecolonizedandthus compromisedbytheeconomic.dormernotesthat Advertisershelptomakethe valuesthatshapeconsumerism. (Hegoesontosaythat: All(design(involves(the(expression(of(values,(whether(overtly(or(covertly(...(Our( late(twentieth(century(relationship(with(consumerism(is,(however,(equivocal.( For,(while(we(recognize(the(success(and(the(pleasures(made(possible(by(the( culture(of(consumerism,(the(current(spiral(of(excess(cannot(continue(without( national(and(panenational(frameworks(to(govern(the(manufacture(of(things( we(consume. 57 Toshowhowconfusinganunderstandingofvalueshavebecome,Dormergoes ontosaythatanalternativesetofvaluesbeintroduced,togovernexistingvalues indesignandmanufacture. AccordingtoAlexander(2001)whenspeakingofthepostTmodernconditionof thelate20 th Century,inapluralisticworldvaluesbecomea matterofopinion andnotintrinsictothenatureoftheworldatall. 58 AlexandersharesKohler s view,wherekohler(1938)describesvaluesasphenomenological,orexaminable by thephenomenologicalmethod, whatmightbecalledthe qualitativeanalysis 54 DavidHarvey,The(Condition(of(Postmodernity:(An(Enquiry(into(the(Origins(of( Cultural(Change.Oxford,England;Cambridge,Mass:Blackwell,1989.p Ibid.p.204.SeealsoBanham,Reyner.Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine( Age.London:ArchitecturalPress,1962.pps.122,136.Theseideasaredirectly statedinthefuturistmanifestoalmostwordforword.banhamwritesthatthe ideasof1914 moreandmore becomethe inalienablecommongroundof mainstreamdevelopmentinmodernarchitecture. 56 ToshiyukiKita,(Movement(as(Concept.Tokyo:RikuyoTsha,1990.pps.142T Dormer,The(Meanings(of(Modern(Design:(Towards(the(TwentyEFirst(Century. pps.10t ChristopherAlexander,The(Nature(of(Order:(An(Essay(on(the(Art(of(Building(and( the(nature(of(the(universe,4vols.centerforenvironmentalstructureseries. NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.2001.p

37 ofexperience. 59 Heappearstobeattemptingtoreverseengineerasystemof morals. Kohleralsoplacesmoralsandvaluesintherealmofthemetaphysical,orone opento metaphysicalinterpretation. 60 HewrotehisworkThe(Place(of(Value(in(a( World(of(Factsin1938examiningthenatureofmoralsandvaluesfromhis positionasapsychologist.helaboredtobringtogetherscienceandthehuman condition.itwasaroundquestionsoverthefailureofsciencefollowingdecades thatabeliefinscientificrationalismcoulddeliverallanswers.sciencein Germanyinthe1930 swasexperiencingabacklashoverfailurestoaddressthe humancondition.inhindsightkohler sconcernwasvalidifwereflectonthe laterriseofnazism. WithintheJudeo/ChristiansystemthatRuskinarguesfrom,moralsare metaphysicalinoriginandtheyaretobemetaphysicallyworkedout. 61 Itiswith ironythenthatmanodwrites, ToMan,Ethicsandvaluesdonotbelong;he belongstothem suggestingtheirimmutability. 62 Ruskinexpressesafreedomin aloving,openrelationshipwithgodexpressedinhisaphorism1oftheseven( Lamps(of(Architecture, Wemayalwaysknowwhatisright; unlessaidedby Revelation notalwayswhatispossible. 63 Thisisaprofoundreadingofvalues andtheirapplicationbyruskin. Aaltodoesnotprovideuswithsuchadirect,systematicreadingofvalues.Yethis veryearlyarticle MotifsFromPastAges (1922)givesusanonTDarwinian readingwithhisclaimofthe authorityoftheancients, (Finnishforefathers)as theprinciplecriticofcontemporaryarchitecture. 64 GillianMawby sdescription of Aalto'sidiosyncratic,Finnishbrandofanarchicmorality,apotpourriof Goethe,Kropotkin,Nietzscheandindigenous'forestwisdom, reflectsthe difficultyandcomplexityinreadingaalto. 65 Itisnotaneasyclaimtodispute,just 59 WolfgangKohler,The(Place(of(Value(in(a(World(of(Facts.((N.Y.(Liveright.(1938.( The(William(James(Lectures(on(Philosophy(and(Psychology(No.(3(1934E35.(1938.p. vii. 60 Ibid.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture,(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p.6.See alsoch.2thelampoftruth. 62 Nobel,The(Place(of(Value(in(a(World(of(Facts:(Proceedings/Edited(by(Arne( Tiselius(and(Sam(Nilsson.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture;(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.pps.1T Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p.33.Arkkitehti,No.2, GillianMawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda 'ProperSense'ofFreedom.'LancasterUniversity.2001.p.5,SeeGoranSchildt, Alvar(Aalto,(The(Early(Years.NewYork:Rizzoli.1984.p

38 asitisaclaimwithoutproperjustification.aaltoisdeeperandmorecomplex thanmawbyallows;heisinadifficultplace,intellectually,givenhismilieu. ValuesforAaltoaretransThistoricalseenfromwithinhisownsociety,asociety thatisdescribedasculturallylutheran. 66 Factsandthemachine. BothRuskinandAaltorefusebothscientificmaterialismandaphilosophical machineanalogyfornatureandman.mawbywritesthataalto sbiographerand gatekeeper Schildtbelievedthat Aaltowasnotentirelybeguiledby... Darwinianideology. MawbydoesnotquoteSchildtwithherclaimrathershe appearstointerprethim. 67 MawbystumblesonSchildt sowndifficultyin readingaalto.thoughschildtattemptstopresentuswithunderstandingof Aalto,heformallyadmitstousthesomewhat alien and illusory natureofhis worldview. 68 SchildtsdifficultyisinpartexplainedbyhisattemptstofitAalto intohisownteleologyandheisnotaloneinthis. Inhisbook,The(Watch(on(the(Heath:(science(and(religion(before(Darwin(2005), Thomsongivesusacleardefinitionofamaterialism/machinephilosophyby quotingtheearlyscientistrobertboyle.indescribingamachinephilosophy, BoylewasdefendingDescartesinthe1680 sfromaccusationsofmaterialism, andultimatelyasthefatherofmodern,materialismphilosophy. 69 Boyleusesthe classicalideaofthreecauses,thefirstcause; God,thesecondcauseherefersto as Corporeal (natureanditsrelativeautonomy)andthethirdcause; Purpose. Withinclassicalphilosophythefirstandthirdcauses(whatBoylereferstoas ends )areinterdependenttothe Corporeal (nature). 70 Byremovingthe ends weareleftwiththe Corporeal,nature,themachine,themechanism,andhencea materialismphilosophy.boylelaystheoriginsofamachineormaterialism philosophywiththeepicureans(epicurus.samos,341bce Athens,270BCE) who banishedtheconsiderationoftheendsofthings;becausetheworldbeing, accordingtothem,madebychance,noendsofthingscanbesuppos'dtohave 66 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p.35.SeealsoRichardWeston.Alvar( Aalto.London:PhaidonPressLimited,1995.p Mawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda'Proper Sense'ofFreedom. p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.Seep.157forAalto sambiguousreading foracreator. 69 KeithStewartThomson,The(Watch(on(the(Heath:(Science(and(Religion(before( Darwin.London:HarperCollins.2005.p Ibid.,Boyle,Dissertation(about(the(Final(Causes(of(Natural(Things.London

39 beenintended. 71 Thomsonusestheterm Epicurean tohistoricallylocatea scientificmaterialismview. CommentatorsaredividedintheirunderstandingofDescartes,thatdivisioncan bepartlyunderstoodbythebinaryparadigmtheybringtotheirstudyofhim.we canusekaisers(1991)descriptionofthechristiancreationtraditiontoillustrate theparadigmheworkedwithin.usingtheanalogyofabodywithtwoarms,one armwasnatureanditsrelativeautonomyfromasupernaturalunderstanding. Theotherarmwasasupernaturalunderstanding;bothwereultimately connectedasabody. Therelative,thoughprofoundautonomyofnatureasonearmintheChristian creationtradition,embracedscience,agriculture,medicineandthearts,withthe purposeforthehealingandrestorationofthehumanraceasapublicministry. 72 DescarteshimselfwasencouragedbyCardinaldeBerulletoapplyhismethodto theproblemsofmedicineandmechanics theonewouldcontributetothe restorationandconservationofhealth,andotherdiminutionandreliefofthe laborsofmankind. 73 Thetwoarmsofthenaturalandsupernaturalwere formalizedinthe12 th Centurytoformthescholastictraditionof potentia(dei( ordinataandpotentia(dei(absoluta. (Kaiserdescribes Potentia(ordinata asthe powerofgodasexpressedintheordinarycourseofnatureandhistory. Potentia(absolutawasthefreedomwhichGodexercisedinestablishingthat courseandwhichheretainedtoalteritonoccasions(e.g.,inmiraclesorat eschaton). 74 Thetwoarmsofabodycreateanaturaltensionthathasalong, theologicalhistoryinthechurchanditisonthisgroundthatdescartes negotiates. TheprophetJeremiahisunequivocalinhisdescriptionastothenatureofGod andhisrelationshipwiththenaturalworld,jeremiah10:12(kjv): He(hath(made(the(earth(by(his(power,(he(hath(established(the(world(by(his( wisdom,(and(hath(stretched(out(the(heavens(by(his(discretion. ( ItisclearfromtheChristiancreationtraditionthatGodsintendedpurposefor manistoobserveandtakenoteofthenaturalworld,andtolooktogodfor understandingandarevelationoffactsasaministrytothesociety. 75 Itisa 71 Ibid.p.ix. 72 Kaiser,Creation(and(the(History(of(Science.ed.PaulAvis.Vol.3.TheHistoryof ChristianTheology.London:MarshallPickering Ibid.pps.165, Ibid.p The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.IsaiahCh28:23T29. 22

40 potentia(dei(ordinataexperiencethatruskinspeaksof,anexperienceirecognize formyself,andaliketexperienceforaalto. ThenecessarytensionbetweenthenaturalandthesupernaturalintheChristian traditionpresentsacontradiction,evendualistictobinaryideas.gregorywrites thatdescartes dualism;hisidentifyingmindandbodyasdifferentsubstances doesnotqualifyhimasamaterialist,andhisacceptanceofhisbodyexisting independentofmindexcludeshimasanidealist. 76 AssumingthatBoylewas correct,thenthemindandbodywouldbeinterdependentinthemannerin whichtheyworkedtogether,whichdescartesacknowledged.thegospels distinguishsoulandbodyinjesus words,inmark8:36 Forwhatshallitprofita man,ifheshallgainthewholeworld,andlosehisownsoul? 77 Thisindicates thatthesoullivesbeyondthelifeofthebody,butitisinterdependenttothe bodywherethereislife. 78 GiventhatJesusdistinguishedheart,mind,souland bodyinluke10:27(kjv),itbringsbothareadingofthemasinterdependent whilstmakingupthelifeofthewhole.inapresentreadingofquantumphysics, ideasofdualismandbinaryareseriouslychallengedbytherealworld. GivenDescartes placeinageneralreadingofhistory,naturewasexcisedfroma Christian,creationtraditionposthiswritings,toformthebinaryidea,dividing scienceandbelief.thisfacilitatestwoantitheticaljourneysandtwosupposedly antitheticalparadigms.thefirstvisualsignsofthesetwoparadigmsimpacting designoccursinruskin stime,comparingtheworkandthoughtofwilliam Morrisandhiscontemporary,ChristopherDresser(bothbornin1834). ItissimplistictodescribeDresserassubscribingtoscientificmaterialism,forhe likesomany,isinaplaceoftransition.itisclearheengagesitsideasbutwith manycontradictions.dresservariouslydrawsupontheworksofowenjones s Grammar(of(Ornament((1856),AugustW.N.Pugin,Goethe,andthewritingsof WilliamPaley. 79 AccordingtoWhiteway(2004)RuskincommentsonDresser s workandthe scientific stylization ofhisbotanicalillustrations,ashemoves fromnaturalismto antitnaturalism whichruskintermsthe SouthKensington method. 80 HewritesthatRuskinsatirizedDressersbotanicaldiagramsin 76 R.L.Gregory,Mind(in(Science:(A(History(of(Explanations(in(Psychology(and( Physics.London:WeidenfeldAnd.1981.p The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.Glasgow:WilliamCollinsSons& Co. 78 Ibid.Mark8: MichaelWhiteway,Shock(of(the(Old:(Christopher(Dresser's(Design(Revolution. NewYork/London:Smithsonian,CooperTHewitt,V&APublications.2004.pps. 52T Ibid.p.51.Ruskin,The(Two(Paths.1859.Thefirstoftheselecturesgivenon13 January1858atSouthKensington. 23

41 Modern(Painters(5(1860)asattributedto aclerkofworks.yetlengina convincingarticleruskin s(rewriting(of(darwin(2008)viewsthesatirical drawingsasclearlyaimedatdarwin. 81 LengalsoclaimsthatRuskinunderstood thatdarwin sorigin(of(species(1859)wasathreattohisownaestheticsand culturalauthority. 82 JerviswritesthatDresserhimselfconductedanantiTRuskin polemicinthe(art(of(decorative(design(1862). 83 TheopenlypluralisticnatureofDresser sworkwouldcertainlyarouseruskin s attention.whoevertheywereaimedat,ruskin s clerkofworks commenton Dresser sbotanicaldrawingscouldonlyrefertoamechanical,plumbing diagram.itwasdresser slinkingofscience,artandindustrialproductionthat differentiateshimfromwilliammorris,particularlyhisviewofscience. Forallhisquestioning,Descartesishuman,hisachievementsandfailuresare equallyconsiderable.thomsonsuggestsareassessmentofhiswiderworksto gainabetterunderstandingofhim. 84 Chappell(1992)writesthatitwasnotthe answersthatdescartesgavetohisownquestionsthatmakehimthefatherof modernphilosophybut thequestionsthemselveswhichareheavilystudied morethananyotherphilosopherofthemodernperiod. 85 Ruskinmayhavebeen readingtheoutcomes;thomsonnotesthatruskinwas disgusted with Descartes. 86 InMind(in(ScienceGregoryexploresmindasitweresomehowlinkedtothe spiritual,oratleastthroughperceptionandhowitchallengesourideasof matter.hewritesthatscienceinitsfocusonfacts aimsattruth andproduces statements butisliabletobeexposedas myth asnewunderstandingsare revealed. 87 ThoughGregorydefendsascientificrationalview,heisunderno illusionastoitslimitationsandthetruenatureof facts.whilstadmittingthe importanceofthemachineanalogytoscience,gregoryquestionswhethera betteranalogymightbefound,oralternatelytheremaybenoanalogiesthatare sufficientlyusefultoexplaineither MatterorMind AndrewLeng,'Ruskin'sRewritingofDarwin:ModernPainters5and'the OriginofWood.'Prose(Studies.(Routledge.2008.p Ibid.p Whiteway,Shock(of(the(Old:(Christopher(Dresser's(Design(Revolution.p Thomson,The(Watch(on(the(Heath:(Science(and(Religion(before(Darwin.p Chappell,ed.,René(Descartes/Edited(with(Introductions(by(Vere(Chappell.p.xi. 86 Thomson,The(Watch(on(the(Heath:(Science(and(Religion(before(Darwin.p Gregory,Mind(in(Science:(A(History(of(Explanations(in(Psychology(and(Physics.p Ibid.p

42 OfparticularinterestisRuskin ssilence(iamunawareofanycommentshe made)onwilliampaley s A(Natural(Theology(1802)andhisuseofamachine analogytoargueforacreator.paley sargumentisseductive,forwhilstitwas usedtoargueforacreator,itwasequallyandlegitimatelydrawnuponbyboth Darwin,forhisevolutionarymechanismforThe(Origin(of(Species,andthosewho subsequentlyexpoundedonhisideas.isruskin ssilenceonpaley sargumenta refusaltoengageinnaturaltheologyandamachineanalogy?lengclaimsthat bothruskinanddarwin wereimmersedinthetraditionofnaturaltheology. 89 RuskininReadings(in(Fores(Clavigera((letters(from(1871T1884)brieflyaddresses amachineviewanddistinguishesbetweenwhathecalls truescience and modernscience. 90 Inthisrathercryptictext,hecommentsonalectureatthe NaturalHistoryMuseumfullyawareofDarwinian,scientificmaterialistclaims onman.heconfessesitisofthe smallestconsequence, for Therealfactis,that, seenwithhumaneyes,thereisnothingelsebutman. Inaddressingthe materialismofmodernscience,heseestheironyandcontradictioninthe postulationofmanandnatureasmachine,whereman(machine)positions himselfasabovethoseofhisownkindas Regulatorofminormachinery,whilst havinga seriesofforces / majormachinery, regulating hisown.itappearsthat Ruskinbelievesmancannotescapehisownnatureandhisownviewingposition; pretendthathemay, seenwithhumaneyesthereisnothingelsebutman. The(lecturer(said,( the(object(of(his(lectures(would(be(entirely(accomplished(if( he(could(convince(his(hearers(that(there(was(no(such(thing(as(a(flower.( (( Now,(in(that(sentence(you(have(the(most(perfect(and(admirable(summary( given(you(of(the(general(temper(and(purposes(of(modern(science.(it(gives( lectures(on(botany,(of(which(the(object(is(to(show(that(there(is(no(such(thing( as(a(flower;(on(humanity,(to(show(that(there(is(no(such(thing(as(a(man;(and( on(theology,(to(show(there(is(no(such(thing(as(a(god.(no(such(thing(as(a(man,( but(only(a(mechanism;(no(such(thing(as(a(god,(but(only(a(series(of(forces. The( two(faiths(are(essentially(one:(if(you(feel(yourself(to(be(only(a(machine,( constructed(to(be(a(regulator(of(minor(machinery,(you(will(put(your(statue(of( such(science(on(your(holborn(viaduct,(and(necessarily(recognize(only(major( machinery(as(regulating(you. 91 ( Ruskinfinishestheletterdistinguishingthetwosciences: And(all(true(science( (which(my(savoyard(guide(rightly(scorned(me(when(he( thought(i(had(not,( (all(true(science(is( savoir(vivre. (But(all(your(modern( science(is(the(contrary(of(that.(it(is("savoir(mourir. ( ( 89 Leng,'Ruskin'sRewritingofDarwin:ModernPainters5and'theOriginof Wood.'p JohnRuskin,'FloresClavigera.'1871.pps.178T Ibid.p

43 ThetypeofscienceonepracticesforRuskin,fromaspiritualpointofview,isa choiceof life or death.inruskin screaturalview,hisbeliefandscience,his truescience bringsforth life, where modernscience hedenotesasa philosophicalconceptthatresignsmantospiritualdeath. Evenasananalogy,onemayunderstandRuskin sabhorrenceatnaturebeing describedasa machine inindustrial,victorianengland,hecallsit barbaric. 92 IdeasofNatureasdesign. Inresponsetorecentenvironmentalimperatives,theoristssuchasIngold(2008) haveadvocatedecologicalapproachestoperceptionthatmayofferdifferent outcomesandrelationshipswhenappliedtodesign. 93 Plantandanimal morphologies,geology,biospheresandlandscapes,eventheuniverse,havebyits sheercomplexitythepowertoinspire.wehaveextraordinarydiversity,beauty, vitality,inherentintelligences,andfunctions,bothonamicroandamacroscale usedtoinformculturesandsocieties.asanexampleofmetaphorical embodimentofnature,coyne(1999)writesoftheempiricist svistaas themind asamirrorofnature. 94 Whilstthisvistaprojectsthepotentiallywonderful natureofthehumanmind,itsuggestsanempirical,anintellectual,and paradoxicallyadismemberedviewleavingonefeelingquitecold.findingaplace forthebodyinnaturewithaviewmoreathomeisthepsychologist,gibson (1979)inattemptingtorescuenaturefroma powerover proposesan ecologicalviewoflandscapeas Thefurnitureoftheearth. 95 Whilstthismay appealtosubjectmatterinchapter4,gibson sviewincontemporaryculture couldeasilypresentasconsumeristwithuse,fashionanddisposal.ingoldoffers acontrastusingcharlesdarwin smetaphoricdescriptionofcompetitivenature andsurvivalas thefaceofnatureasasurfacerivenbyinnumerablewedges, packedclosetogetheranddriveninwardbyincessantblows. 96 Darwinhere 92 CatherineMcDermott,Design:(The(Key(Concepts.OxonUK:Routledge,2007.p TimIngold,'BindingsagainstBoundaries:EntanglementsofLifeinanOpen World,'Environment(and(planning.((A RichardCoyne,Technoromanticism.Cambridge,Mass:MIT,1999.p Ingold,'Bindings(against(Boundaries:(Entanglements(of(Life(in(an(Open(World. p.1085.j.j.gibson,the(ecological(approach(to(visual(perception.boston,ma: HoughtonMifflin.p Ingold,'Bindings(against(Boundaries:(Entanglements(of(Life(in(an(Open(World.' p.1087.charlesdarwin,on(the(origin(of(species(by(the(means(of(natural 26

44 employsasimplemachine,thewedgeforhisanalogyofnature,healsousesan apparelanalogy,acoveringoftwisteddisorder plantsandbushesclothingan entangledbank. 97 Ruskinalsousesanapparelanalogyfortheleavesoftheearth inhismodern(painters(5withhis EarthTVeil to Dressandtokeepit (theearth); thisisatender,relationalanalogyofabride,suggestingprotection,delicacy, intricacy,nurture,relationshipandbeauty. 98 Darwin sanalogiesfornatureare moreabouthisideasoffunctionratherthanrelationship. IngoldcomparesDarwin s wedges tohenribergson s(1911) eddy. 99 He writes,bergson arguedthateverylivingbeingiscastlikeaneddyinthecurrent oflife.yet,sowelldoesitfeignimmobilitythatwearereadilydeceivedinto treatingeach asathingratherthanasaprogress,forgettingthatitsvery permanenceofitsformisonlytheoutlineofamovement. 100 ForBergson, turbulence aslivingcomplexityisaninherentpartofnature.heappearstouse a turbulence analogytodisruptthesimplistic straightline ofrationalism.itis possiblethataaltoconnectswithbergson s eddy andtheoutlineofmovement; weknowhereadsbergson. 101 ItmaygosomewayinexplainingAalto s line exploredinchapter4,evenifitonlycorrespondstoaalto soriginalideas,ashe findsvariousreferencestoaffirmthem. 102 Ingoldobservesthatthelanguageof DarwinratherthanBergsonhasprevailed. 103 In1972Aaltoprovidesanassessmentofman sgeneralrelationshiptonature reflectingonhisownformativechildhood,livingandworkingwithintheforests ofruralfinland.ratherthanbeinginschildt swords acancerinalivingbody Aalto spersonalexperienceshapeshisideasshowingthatweshouldtreatour surroundings ina responsible, positive and tactful way fosteringlife. 104 Aalto sperspectiveisembodied;natureistobenurtured.hewrites Wecan insteadseekabalancewithourenvironmentandconcentrateonhealingthe scarswehavecaused. selection,(or,(the(preservation(of(favored(races(in(the(struggle(for(life.london: Watts.1950,Originallypublishedin1859.p Ibid.p.1087,CharlesDarwin,On(the(Origin(of(Species(by(the(Means(of(Natural selection,(or,(the(preservation(of(favoured(races(in(the(struggle(for(life.p JohnRuskin.'ModernPaintersVolume5(of5).'PlacePublished:Project Guttenberg.2013.p Ingold,'BindingsagainstBoundaries:EntanglementsofLifeinanOpenWorld.' p Ibid. 101 SarahMeninandFloraSamuel,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier. London:Routledge,2003.p GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life,trans.NicholasMayow,TimothyBinham. Jyväskylä:AlvarAaltoMuseum,2007.p Ingold,'BindingsagainstBoundaries:EntanglementsofLifeinanOpenWorld. p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

45 Fig.5.AlvarAaltoExperimentalHouse(1952T53) MuuratsaloFinland. Fortywrites, Thedistinctionbetweentheworldcreatedbyman, culture, and theworldinwhichmanexists, nature, hasbeenperhapsthesinglemost importantmentalcategoryeverconceived,andtherecanbefewdisciplinesin whoseformationithasnotbeenfundamental. 105 ForAaltoandRuskingiven theirindividualuseofanalogies,thetwohavepowerful,mutual correspondences.inrelationship,aaltousestheword synthesis asameansof engagementandoutcome. 106 Inacreaturalview,anonTbinaryview,cultureand natureareinterdependentanddeeplyrelational. Fortydescribesanumberofhistoricalviewsontherelationshipofarchitecture andnature.wefindcompetingandsubvertingrelationshipslikearchitectureas a rivalofnature, imitatednature, it improveduponnature, usesnature s 105 Forty,Words(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

46 laws, and replicatedtheskillfulnessofnature. Architectureisnature, architectureislikenature, and completingwhatimperfectnatureisnotableto do. Comparedwitharchitecture natureasfeebleandniggardly, natureis incapableofpleasingwithouttheassistanceofart. Typicallywefindhierarchical andexclusiveviewslike natureasfreedom and architecturehasnomodelin nature, arttonegatenature, technologythesubstitutefornature, and Goethe s,artassecondnature. 107 Ittakessomeworktountanglethecomplexityofideasonnaturethatpreceded modernismanddiscerntheirinfluenceonit.ideasonnaturearedeeplyrooted inhistorythatchangeovertime,oftencontrarytotheoriginal.oliver(2003) writesthattheancientgreeks: ʻ... regarded(the(world(of(nature(as(permeated(by(a(mind(and(they( conceived(this(mind(in(all(its(manifestations,(whether(regulating(the(human( world(or(the(universe.(the(world(of(nature(is(a(world(of(motion(and(is( therefore(alive,(but(it(is(also(a(world(of(controlled(motion;(thus,(it(is(a(world( that(has(not(only(a(soul(but(intelligence(as(well.(they(called(this(world(the( cosmos. 108 TheGreekscametolookonthecosmos(wellorderedwhole)asan organism. Oliver(2003)observesthattheideaoftheearth moving ledthegreeksto ascribeitwithanimatestatus. 109 Oliverhereislinkingtheideaofmotion,moving andmachine,andthesubsequentdevelopmentoftheanalogytfirstthe universe asaclock inthemiddleagesand Godasclockmaker,thensecond,evolving throughtheworkofdescartescoupledwiththeearlierepicureanideasto includeman/nature/universeasamachine.thusthereisacontrarymixof organic, inanimate, animate, machine and cosmos. TheideasoftheancientGreekscanbecomparedwiththeearlierbeliefsofthe ancienthebrews,thehebrewswritingofacreatorofaregularandmoving universe: AndGodsaid, Lettherebelightsinthefirmamentoftheheavento dividethedayfromthenight;andletthembeforsigns,andforseasons,andfor days,andyears. 110 TheHebraictextacknowledgestheheavensforwhatwe mightdescribeasa calendar or timechart. TheHebraictextspeaksofthe animateandinanimate,theearth,andthe living and movingcreatures, flora andfaunaaccordingtotype,allbeingcreatedbygod.fromthegreekswehave 107 Forty,Words(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture.p ElideOliver,'TheMachineoftheWorldandtheManTMachine:CosmoTVision andindividualconsciousnessintimesofcertaintyandtimesofdoubt.' Portuguese(Studies.(No p Ibid. 110 The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.Genesis,1:14. 29

47 theideathatallisanimateas everything moves(includingtheearth),butthe Hebraicaccountdoesnotattributetheanimatetothatwhichwenow understandasinanimate.the created isdescribedasanexpressionofthemind ofgod,notpermeatedbyamind(asanimate)ingreekthinking. 111 Thismaybe semanticasbothultimatelyexpressideasofdivineembodiment.aaltodoesnot attributeanimatetotheinanimate,sohedoesnotholdagreekviewas suggestedbyschildt. 112 Ruskin swelltknownloveforthemountainsisfortheir powerful,metaphoricrepresentationofthecharacterofgodasfaithfuland unchanging,asafortress,refugeanddefense. 113 Itisananalogythatiswell establishedinscriptureandnottobelostonruskin scircumstance. 114 Fig.6.Ruskin sviewfromhisstudyandfinalhome,brantwood,coniston. 111 Ibid.Job,38:1 41: JuhaniPallasmaaandTomoko.Sato,eds.Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of( Shigeru(Ban.London:BlackDog/BarbicanArtGallery.2007.p JohnRuskin,Praeterita.Everyman'sLibrary NewYork:AlfredA. Knopf.2005.pps.150,255,282,404,421,452.Piecedtogethertheseaccounts givesomeinsightintoruskin sloveofthemountains. 114 The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.Exodus.15:17,Psalm30:7, Psalm48:1,Isaiah2:2,Jeremiah50:6provideacontextforametaphoricreading. 30

48 Acreaturalepistemologyforartspractice. Adescriptionofanepistemologyofartisticpracticewithinacreaturalviewis foundintheancienthebraicwriting.byassertionthisparticulartextpredates writingsoftheancientgreeks.exoduschapters25and35arepertinent. ThereareanumberofwaysofknowingintheJudeo/Christiantradition,agood portionarerevelationalandspiritual,betheydreams,visions,pictures,hearing thevoiceofgodaudiblyorinthespirit,andseeingthingsinthespirit.sensingin onesheart,aninstructionorinsideknowledgeisamorecommonexperience,it canbelikenedtointuitionbutisspirituallydiscerned.ofcoursewehave intuitionitself,wherewesimply know butcannotidentifythesource.asa paradigm,acreaturalviewisoutsidesotcalledrationalexperience.iwritebriefly aboutmyownexperienceinchapter4,whatweknowofruskin sexperiencein Chapter2,andAalto sinchapter3.thereareoverlapsineachofour experiences.theexodusaccountdescribessomethingthateachofusencounters inanartisticactivityinsomewayoranother. ThebookofExodusrecordsthefirstaccountofGodplacingHisSpiritona personorpersons,andisdescribedasa filling togetherwithadescriptionasto thespecificnatureandthecharacteristicsofthe filling (asaliquidpouredintoa container,butitisspirit).thetextclearlyandimportantlyexpressessomething ofthenatureandpersonofgodascreatortcharacteristicsheshareswithman. An infilling isusuallythereserveforprophetsorseersbutthisaccount describesitforanartist.acontextualreadingofthescripturesseparatesa gifting froman infilling. TheoperationoftheSpiritofGodintheNew TestamenthascleardifferencestotheHebraictextsgiventhechangesinthe relationshipofferedinthenewtestament.referencingthekingjames translation,thesetextsinexodusofferanappreciationofacreatural epistemologyandit soutworkingforanartist,thoughthisepistemological readingdoesnotappeartobespecifictoartisticpractice. InExodus35:30T35KJVweread: See,(the(LORD(hath(called(by(name(Bezaleel(the(son(of(Uri,(the(son(of(Hur,(of( the(tribe(of(judah;(and(he(hath(filled(him(with(the(spirit(of(god,(in(wisdom,( in(understanding,(and(in(knowledge,(and(in(all(manner(of(workmanship;(( (And(to(devise(curious(works,(to(work(in(gold,(and(in(silver,(and(in(brass,(( And(in(the(cutting(of(stones,(to(set(them,(and(in(carving(of(wood,(to(make( any(manner(of(cunning(work.((and(he(hath(put(in(his(heart(that(he(may( 31

49 teach,(both(he,(and(aholiab,(the(son(of(ahisamach,(of(the(tribe(of(dan.((them( hath(he(filled(with(wisdom(of(heart,(to(work(all(manner(of(work,(of(the( engraver,(and(of(the(cunning(workman,(and(of(the(embroiderer,(in(blue,(and( in(purple,(in(scarlet,(and(in(fine(linen,(and(of(the(weaver,(even(of(them(that( do(any(work,(and(of(those(that(devise(cunning(work.( ( Asnotedearlier,thisdescriptiongivesussomethingofanideaofthenatureof Godhimselfthatheshareswithman,certainlythatwastheexperienceIhad readingthetextforthefirsttimefollowingaprofoundencounterwithhim.i founditdeeplyencouraging,meaningfulandpurposeful. Thetextalsoincludessomethingofthewidernatureofartisticpracticeina creaturalview,aswellasanepistemologyanditsinterfacewithcurrentsecular ideasofcognitionandartisticpractice.itcanbereadasacomplexmultitlevel exposition,notaltogetherasaspirituallyexclusiveone. 115 Giventheapostle Paul sdescriptionofthepervadingnatureofgodincol.1:15t17(kjv),itcanbe contrastedwithscripturesthatrecordman spowerfulidentityofseparateness. Thisseparatenesscoloursourowncomprehensionofwhatweexperienceand ideasoffreewill.individualgifts,whatwedowiththemandhowtheyareused, likethenatureofthehumanheart,areadeepmatter.anyrelationshipwehave withgodisapersonaljourneyandexperiencethatonecanreadindividuallyfor Ruskin,Aaltoandmyself. InhisIntroductorytotheSeven(Lamps,RuskinspeaksofaskingGodfora revelationoftheparticularstodowithhisownworkandlife,forwisdomand instruction,leavingnodoubtinthecontextthatheexpectsanansweraspartof hisrelationshipwithgod.lookingattheexodustextabove,strong s( ConcordancetranslatestheHebrew Workmanship as deputyship ministryor employmentuntogodas neverservile. 116 Ruskinunderstandsthis;itunderlies hisideasabouttheservilenatureofthecraftsmanunderclassicismandthe divisionoflaborintheindustrializedworkforcethatlaterdevelopintoideasof TaylorismandFordism.IntheExodustextwealsoseetheexpression Them hathhefilledwithwisdomofheart. Strong stranslatestheword heart fromthe Hebrewword leb,usedfigurativelyforthefeelings,thewill,eventheintellect; likewiseforthecenterofeverything RichardMouw,Abraham(Kuyper:(a(short(and(personal(introduction.Grand Rapids/Cambridge,UK:Eerdmans.2011.pps.64T72.Seeforanexpositionon gifts. 116 JamesStrong,The(Exhaustive(Concordance(of(the(Bible:(Showing(Every(Word(of( the(text(of(the(common(english(version(of(the(canonical(books,(and(every( Occurrence(of(Each(Word(in(Regular(Order.London:McDonald.Ref Ibid.Ref

50 Goldhageninherarticle(Ultraviolet:AlvarAalto sembodiedrationalism,(2008) essentiallylooksataalto sepistemology,differentiatingitfromwhatshe describesasthe multifariousrationalisms ofhiscontemporaries. 118 Sherefers torecentresearchintocognitionasboth rational, irrational and intert sensory. 119 WhilstmakingaclaimforAaltoasaprotoTphenomenologist, GoldhagenchoosestodisregardhisveryearlystatementpriortohissoTcalled rationalistperiod wherehewrites; Thefactisthatinevaluatingtheworldof formsaroundusfromthepointofviewofbeauty,thewelldevelopedheartisa farbetterinstrumentthantheeducatedmind. 120 Aaltogoesontolink beauty, religion andthe heart togetherasanintuitiveactivityof man saesthetic life. 121 Aalto sepistemology,expressedatthistimehascharacteristicsfoundina creaturalview. 118 Goldhagen,'Ultraviolet:AlvarAalto'sEmbodiedRationalism.'p Ibid.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p

51 Chapter2. Arnobius(of(Sicca((north(Africa)(..((argued(that(accusations(that(Christians(had( disrupted(the(world(were(unfounded.(natural(events(were(still(in(accord(with(the( laws(established(in(the(beginning (and(the( fabric(of(this(machine(and(mass([of(the( universe],(by(which(we(are(all(covered(and(which(we(are(held(enclosed (remained( intact(even(after(the(advent(of(christianity. ((Early300AD) ChristopherKaiser,Creation(and(the(History(of(Science, TheHistoryofChristiantheology.v.3.MarshallPickering: London1991.p.17. Fig.7.Murano,Venice,Italy. Ruskin. IfwetakeateleologicalviewtoRuskinwemissthesubtlecomplexitiestobe foundinlearningfromhim.whilstwemayrecognizeruskin sresponsesto IndustrializationandtheSpiritual,beingabletoappreciatehiscreatural worldviewandthechallengesheexperiences,bringsdeepermeaningsand understandings.ruskinbecameawareofhisownweaknessesinhisreadingof history hisownprotestantteleologyfailshimbuthelearnsfromthe experience.whatcanbefoundinanappreciationofruskin swritingonartand 34

52 architecturebylookingathisontologyandepistemologyarehissurprising attemptstobringaninclusive wholeoflife ora alloflifeview intothe Spiritual.Fuller(1988)beginstorecognizethis;healsoencouragesareT examinationofruskin swork,influenceanditsapplicationsforthepresent. 122 ThisChapterattemptstodothiswhilstkeepingAaltoandmyownpracticein view. Ruskin slegacyversestheruskiniantradition. AppreciatingRuskinisparamountinbeingabletoappraise,ratherthanseeking tomasteranunderstandingofhim.hislegacyforarchitectureanddesignisthat whichhepersonallydocumentedandcanbedistinguishedfromthetradition thetransmissionofevolvingideas/understandingsothershaveattributedto him.ruskin sworksonarchitecture,the(poetry(of(architecture((1837t38),(the( Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture((1849)(and(The(Stones(of(Venice((1851T1853)were writtenearlyinhiscareerandshowthedevelopmentofhisthinkingthatis inclusiveofarchitectureanddesign.discerningthetraditionandthelegacy providesameanswherewemightsituateaaltotoexploreanycorrespondences thatmaybefoundbetweenthem,forifaaltoknewruskinwell,howwillheread himgiventhevariousevencontradictoryreadingsofruskin?suchan examinationmayalsobegintoanswerthenaggingquestionofhowaconnection betweenruskinandaaltohaslargelybeenoverlookedinresearchtodate. Intheintroductiontohisbook Victorian(Taste (1950)Steegmanprovidesus withatypicalreadingofthe tradition ofruskininaddressinghisworkas doctrine : A(great(deal(of(that(doctrine(remains(valid,(and(very(precious,(now(that(we( can(see(it(in(perspective.(but(we(are(still(left(with(the(conviction(that(much(of( Ruskin's(preaching(was(both(confusing(and(dangerous(for(those(who(first( listened(to(it. 123 ( ( ( Steegman sreadingofruskinas doctrine and preaching hasthefeelofan observer spersonalworldview.steegmandoesnotexplainhis conviction,but weseethatruskin sworkholdsacomplexityandafreedom,forthosecoming outofclassicismwithitsrulesandregulationscouldbarelycopewith.hence 122 M.WheelerandN.Whiteley,eds.The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress,1992.p.170.Fuller Peter,Theoria:(Art,(and(the(Absence(of(Grace.London.1988.p JohnSteegman,Victorian(Taste.London:CenturyHutchinson.1987.p.8 35

53 Scott,indefendingclassicismwithits academic approachclaimsthatruskin enfranchisedthepublicwhohadno effectiveexperienceeitherinthecreationor inthepatronageofarchitecture. 124 Forartists,inthebroadestuseoftheterm,andcommentators,itisdifficultto begintounpackruskin,asjordaninvictorian(architecture(1966)perceptively writes: All(Ruskin(is(in(his(work.(One(must(take(him(whole(or(not(at(all.(And(that(is( precisely(what(neither(the(victorians(nor(we(have(ever(done.(the(nineteenth( century(devoured(his(glowing(and(purple(prose,(and(then( (in(his(name(e( committed(every(kind(of(architectural(vandalism.(the(twentieth(century(has( ignored(his(teaching(which( (with(its(vast(biblical(illusion( (it(would(not(have( understood(anyway,(has(attributed(to(him(opinions(he(never(held,(as(well(as( buildings(he(never(built( (for(he(was(not(an(architect. 125 Fig.8 JohnRuskin.CoastScenenearDumbar(1847). 124 GeofreyScott,The(Architecture(of(Humanism:(A(Study(in(the(History(of(Taste. NewYork,London:W.W.Norton&Company p RobertFurneauxJordan,Victorian(Architecture.Harmondsworth,Middlesex: PenguinBooks,1966.p

54 WritinginDays(of(Reading(MarcelProustgivesadelightfulreadingofRuskin s position,hewrites; Andbecausesomanycontrarythingshavebeensaidabout Ruskin,theconclusionisthathewascontradictory. 126 SimilarlySaintprovidesuswithacognizantsummaryoftheinspirationand purposesofruskin swritinginthe Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture:(...(whether(architectural(style(E(in(particular,(Gothic(architecture(could( not(act(as(a(tool(for(moral(and(spiritual(renewal(in(modern(society.(this(in( turn(raised(a(historical(issue.(what(was(it(about(the(gothic(style(which(gave( it(such(potency(in(medieval(times(and(so(enduring(an(effect(down(the( centuries?(without(a(full(response(to(the(second(question,(encompassing( psychology,(history,(architecture(and(theology,(it(scarcely(seemed(possible( to(answer(the(first.(...throughout(the(text,(ruskin(doubts(that(architecture,( Gothic(or(otherwise,(can(have(the(reforming(influence(which(the(1840's((and( architects(long(after(that(date)(hoped(from(it.(but(he(is(prepared(to(have(a( go. 127 ( ( ThereisaconsistencyandsimplicityintheunderlyingthemesinRuskin s writingonarchitecturethoughtheyappearbroadonfirstreading.janmorris (1981)quotesRuskinhimselfdefiningthe principalpurposes ofthe(stones(of( Veniceinhislaterlifeas:...(most(importantly,(the(book(showed('how(the(rise(and(fall(of(the(Venetian( builders(art(depended(on(the(moral(temper(of(the(state'.(secondly,(it( examined('(the(relation(of(the(life(of(the(workman(to(his(work(in(medieval( times,(and(necessary(relation(to(it(at(all(times'(thirdly,(it(traced('the( formation(of(the(venetian(gothic(from(the(earliest(romanesque(types(until(it( perished(in(the(revival(...(of(the(classical(principles(in(the(16th(century'.( Fourthly,(it(contained('an(analysis(of(the(best(structures(of(stone(and(brick( building,(on(a(simple(and(natural(scale. 128 ( ( ( ThedifficultyinreadingtextssuchasThe(Seven(Lamps(1849)andThe(Stones(of( Venice(1851T53)arethecomplexitytheypresenttothemodernreaderwithhis mind,bodyandspiritparadigms.sandwichedbetweenclassicismand Materialism,wefindRuskinexpoundingacreaturalview.BothThe(Seven(Lamps andthe(stones(of(venicearestronglydeontologicalinnature,providingboththe necessarystructuretoaddressbutalsofindmeaninggiventheprofoundshift thatistakingplaceinvictoriansociety. 126 MarcelProust,Days(of(Reading.Trans.JohnSturrock.London:PenguinBooks 2008.p JohnRuskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint, 1998.London:Century.p.xiii. 128 JohnRuskin,The(Stones(of(Venice.Edit.JanMorris.London:Faber,1981.p

55 Fig.9. JohnRuskin,detailsofCathedralofFerrara. Apolarizedlove/hateviewclearlymarksvariousattemptstohistorically understandandrepresentruskin.hilton(1985)describeshiswritingsas fecund and withoutexceptionpersonal. 129 Asaformofpolemicitincludesthe richuseofpoeticdevicessuchasliterarycontrastandjuxtaposition. 130 His languageisalsorichlymetaphoric,acharacteristicofthebiblicalliterature Ruskinwasdeeplyfamiliarwith,asJordanhasacknowledged.Indeed,Ruskin refersrepeatedlytotheprimacyofthescripturesinpraeterita,hisfinalwork,as thebasisofhisliteraryeducation. 131 Ruskinsimilarlyoffersthereaderadeeplypersonalexperienceofwhatheis alludingto,ashiltonpointsout;ruskinisalwaysonajourneyliterallyand metaphorically.heholdshismother saspirationforhersonasaclergymanand 129 TimothyHilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.NewHavenand London:YaleUniversityPress,1985.p.ix. 130 GillianMawby,'The(Lamp(of(Obedience:(John(Ruskin,(Alvar(Aalto,(and(a('Proper( Sense'(of(Freedom.'(LancasterUniversity.2001.p.10.Mawbywrites;Itwas criticizedforthetheologicalpolemicofthesevenlampsofarchitecture,andfor thelackofpolarizationinhisargument'. 131 JohnRuskin,Praeterita,Everyman'sLibrary.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf pps.13,15,39. 38

56 hisfather swishforapoet. 132 ItshouldnotbesurprisingthatRuskinwritesina personalletterof1858thathis businessconcernshumansouls. 133 Withinthese aspirationsruskin sgeniusexpressesitselfastravelerandexpounderthe frequentlystopstosetatable,toservethebeautyofparticularsbeforeusthathe mightlavishonusitsriches.proustwrites: The(delightful(game(he(played(with(his(inexhaustible(riches(was(forever(to(be( drawing(new(treasures(out(from(the(wonderful(jewelecases(of(his(memory:( one(day(the(precious(rose(window(at(amiens,(another(day(the(golden( lacework(of(the(porch(at(abbeville,(and(to(wed(these(to(the(dazzling(gems(of( Italy. 134 (( ( BroughtintothelightThe(Poetry(of(Architecture,(The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture( andthe(stones(of(venice(areanattempttoaddressthewholeneedsandpurposes ofmanandhisenvironmentembodiedwithinarchitectureanddesign.hisfinal wordsinthepoetryofarchitecturewrittenattheageofnineteenspeakofthe patternandspiritofruskin sthinkingthatsustainedhimthroughouthislife: Throughout,(we(have(endeavored(to(direct(attention(to(the(spirit,(rather(than( to(the(letter,(of(all(law,(and(to(exhibit(the(beauty(of(that(principle(which(is( embodied(in(the(line(with(which(we(have(headed(this(concluding(paper;(of( being(satisfied(with(national(and(natural(forms,(and(not(endeavoring(to( introduce(the(imaginations,(or(imitate(the(customs,(of(foreign(nations,(or(of( former(times.(all(imitation(has(its(origin(in(vanity,(and(is(the(bane(of( architecture. 135 ( WhilstthisstatementappearstobecontradictorygivenRuskin slater championingofgothic,heworkedbyhistoricalexampletoillustratehisideasfor architecture,asjordanhasnotedearlier,ruskinwas notanarchitect. The activityofarchitectureatthispointoftimewasimitationandforeignimitation wasthenorm.gothicandeveryotherexampleruskinstudiedandalludedto,is forareadingofitsvalues,itsspiritualityandtheology,itssociologicalnature,its workmanshipanddesign,notasastyle.asaforeignobserverhermann MuthesiusinhisinfluentialaccountofThe(English(House(1911T18) acknowledgesthis,givingpugin,ruskinandmorriscreditfortheiruseof 132 Ibid.p.165.WhilstRuskinspeaksspecificallyabouthisfatherhere,his mothersharedthehopeofhislifeservingtheprotestantfaith. 133 Hilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.p.270.JRTAnnaBlunden,20 th Oct.1858,Sublime(and(Instructive,pps.98T MarcelProvst,Days(of(Reading,trans.JohnSturrock,GreatIdeas.London: PenguinBooks2008.p JohnRuskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of( Europe(Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character. Bibliobazzaar,2007.p

57 medievalgothicasa powerfulvehicleforreform. 136 Yetimitationandpoor imitationwasoftentheresultofthosethatreadruskin swork.janmorris (1981)describesRuskin sresponsetothegothicpracticedinhisdayas meat thatsomeoneelsehaschewed. 137 Fig.10 JohnRuskin.LoggiaoftheDucalPalace.(1849T1850). 136 HermannMuthesius,The(English(House.(Editedwithanintroductionby DennisSharp,trans.byJanetSeligman.NewYork:Rizzoli,1979.p Ruskin,The(Stones(of(Venice.p

58 Returningto Steegman sclaimofruskin s confusedthinking, itraisesthe question,whoisconfused,ruskinorsteegmanhimself?lookingatruskin s pedagogicalapproachhiltonnotesfromruskin sfirstwritingshe was immediatelyrecognizedasasignificantdidacticwriter. 138 Ruskinhasallthe appearancesofbeingdogmatic,asifthatwerehisaim.butgivenhisaphorisms intheseven(lampsforexample,theycontaintruth swhilstheiscertaintofind exceptionswhichappearstofrustratemany,rememberingthatheischallenging thepreviousdominantparadigmofclassicismanditsidealism,itsclaimsto universals,itshighlystructured,academicapproach. Ruskin sliteraryapproach,thoughpoetic,hassimilaritieswiththatofthemoral andspiritualteachingofjesus,heusedparablestodescribeapersonaljourneyof revelationfortheindividual.thisapproachledjesustoexclaimofthetruthsthat Hepresented thatgodhashiddenthesethingsfromthewiseandprudentand revealedthemuntobabes (Matt.11:25,Luke10:21KJV).AuerbachinMimesis (1946)quotestheseverses,commentingonthemandthegeneralnatureofthe divinewritingsandearlychristianwritersas ethicottheological andnot aestheticotstylistic Tthisisacriticalobservation. 139 Hewrites, Itspeakshumili( sermonetothesimpleandpureinspirit.itsituatesthesublimeeventwithin theireverydaylives,sothatitisspontaneouslypresenttothem. 140 IfAuerbach s readingiscorrectthenitischaracteristicofa creaturalview,aprofound readingwithintheeverydaythatisalsofoundinruskin sapproach.itgivesus someunderstandingofhismannerofwritinganditscontent.itiscontraryto theaestheticotstylistic,anintellectualapproachthatmanylookedtohimfor,that individualssuchasscottdefend.whiteley(1998)inhisintroductiontofuller s essayonruskinexploresruskin sdifferentiationbetween aesthesis and theoria (originalitalics).forruskin(theoria) wastheoperationofthefaculty bywhichideasofbeautyweremorallyperceivedandappreciated. 141 Notonly doesithelpustounderstandruskin swriting,thecharacteristicnatureofitand hiswritingsaboutclassicismbutalso,asfulleracknowledges,asfundamentalto Ruskin s teachings forthepresent.ruskin sapproachislesstheconstructand morethesituationalandexperientialnegotiatedwithinatheologicaland ontologicalframework.inhisarticlethatreferencesruskin,aaltoalso challengestheintellectual,astylistic,forbothamoralandachildtlikeapproach tothediscerninghisbeautyinman s aestheticlife as amatteroftheheart Hilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.p.x. 139 ErichAuerbach,Mimesis:(The(Representation(of(Reality(in(Western(Literature, Princeton,N.J:PrincetonUniversityPress,2003.pps.153, Ibid.p WheelerandWhiteley,eds.The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.Trans.TimothyBinham.Helsinki: OtavaPublishing.1997.p.57.SeealsoAalto s religiousbeauty in TheHillTop Town articleofthepreviousyear.p

59 GeoffreyScott sthe(architecture(of(humanism(1914)waswrittenlargelyasa countertoruskin.heattacksruskinwithwhathecallshis ethicalfallacy, yetas Fullerwrites,thegreatestartofthe19 th centurywas enmeshedwithspiritual beliefsandvalues, witha claim of deeptendrilsinthelifeofacommunity. 143 It isunfortunatecriticsofruskinquotescott s moralfallacy intheirassessmentof Ruskin,butfailtoidentifytheobviousfallacyinScott sfallacies,madeplainby hisexclusionofclassicismanditsintellectualismfromsuchatitle.whatisof particularinterestfromscott sargumentishisbroaderandinclusive understandingofruskin sinfluenceintothe20 th centurythoughderidinghimas theauthorofa democraticarchitecture. Writingalmost100yearslaterin2007 thejapanesearchitectshigeruban,reiteratesscott sdescriptionofruskin s democraticarchitecture. InmakingadirectconnectionbetweenRuskinand Aalto,BanisbothaffirmingRuskin slegacyandaalto splaceinit. 144 Ruskin sapproach,drawingonhisspiritualroots,islessanappealtothe intellectwithruttedlinesofreasonanditsconstructs,butanappealtotheheart, itscapacitytodiscernagreaterdimensionofhumanexperienceanddivine wisdom. GivenRuskin searlywritingonartandarchitecture,heisunashamedto compoundscience,therational,emotionalandspirituallifeoftheindividual. 145 Thisischaracteristic,ifdeliberatelyambiguousinAalto searlywriting. 146 WhilstWhitelydoesnotaddressRuskin slegacy,merelythelegacyofthe traditionforwhatitsworth,hedoesidentifythetraditionofruskintothe presentasthatof moralism saying:.. its(strength(is(that(it(is(a(tradition(which(can(give(rise(to(architecture( which(critically(and(visually(relates(to(the(society(that(produces(it:( architecture(which(can(have(relevance,(authenticity(and,(therefore,(an( authority(which(is(more(than(bogus(or(nostalgic. 147 Whitelydoesnotexaminethesuccessandfailureofthe ʻtradition,successasit acknowledgestheprincipleofvaluesasappliedinasocietyandarchitecture,but failureinacknowledgingtheveryconfusednatureofvaluesandtheir 143 WheelerandWhiteley,eds.The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p Juhani.PallasmaaandTomoko.Sato,eds,Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of( Shigeru(Ban.London:BlackDogPublishinginassociationwithBarbicanArt Gallery.2007.p Ruskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of(Europe( Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.pps.49, WheelerandWhiteley,eds.,The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p

60 engagementprogressivelyfromruskin stimetothepresent. Itisherethat Fullersinsighthastraction. Inhisessay( Falsehood(in(a(Ciceronian(dialect?:(The(Ruskinian (tradition,( Modernism,(and(the(rise(of(the(classical(tradition(in(contemporary(architecture ( (1992)Whitely(speaksofaRuskiniantraditioninarchitecturethroughtheearly modern,modernandposttmodernperiods.hetracesalinethroughtheworksof LeCorbusieraskeyearlymodernistandthemostinfluentialfigureinmodern architectureitself.whilstlecorbusierhasbeenthepersonthathistoriansand theoristshavegenerallyidentifiedandfocusedupon,itisasgoldhagen reiterates,thatthewritersofmodernisthistorygideon,banhamandpevsner haveirrevocablypositionedhiminthedirectlinagebacktotheenglishfree Architecturemovement,theArtsandCrafts,Morris,andRuskin. 148 Itisthrough thislensthatmostanalysisiscarriedout.ruskinisnamedhere,butboth BanhamandPevsnerchosetoexcludeRuskin,stoppingatMorris. ItisnotdifficulttoseewhyLeCorbusierhasbeenidentifiedasakeyfigure linkedbacktoruskinasheleftampledocumentedevidencetoexplore.whiteley coversthatgroundwellinhisessay,butitisbasedonatrailofavailable evidenceandinturnbecomespartoftheruskiniantradition,thoughle Corbusier sowninterestinruskinis rid astimeprogresses. 149 Givenarereading,LeCorbusiercanbedescribedasakeyfigureinthetradition ofruskin,butdoesnotremaintruetoruskin slegacy.recentwritingbymawby, BanandGoldhagensupportthis,arguingforAaltoasthemoreappropriate figure.baninhisessay(2007)writesthat: Aalto's(philosophy(draws(upon(the(democratic(architecture(called(for(by( Ruskin(and(William(Morris(in(the(19th(century,(and(his(freedom(of(style(was( balanced(by(a(closer(examination(of(the(particular(operation(of(each( project.(i(hope(to(show(that,(contrary(to(giedion's(assessment,(his(work(was( the(most(appropriate(and(downetoeearth(of(his(contemporaries(and(has(a( true(claim(to(be(the(orthodoxy. 150 Ban srecognitionofruskinisrestrictedtoareadingofoutcomesandnotfor epistemologicalorontologicalpositions.stillhisrecognitionofalinkis important. 148 S.W.Goldhagen,'Ultraviolet:AlvarAalto'sEmbodiedRationalism.'Harvard( Design(Magazine.No.27.Fall2007/Winter2008.p WheelerandWhiteley,eds.,The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p PallasmaaandSato,eds.Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of(Shigeru(Ban.p

61 BaniswritingasacontemporaryarchitectidentifyingRuskin slegacy,(legacy becauseheistoagreaterextentreassessingruskinfromthegivenhistories)as theauthorofa freedomofstyle,a democraticarchitecture,andaconcernwith theparticularoperationofeachproject thatembodiestheideasoftheenglish picturesque.ban s freedomofstyle isvirtuallya freedomfromstyle ;itfits withinauerbach sassessmentasacharacteristicofacreaturalviewanda markedfeatureofruskin sunderstanding wedon tneedanotherstyle. Mawbyconcedesthedifficultyinmakingacasefor thedirectimpactofruskin onaalto sviews. 151 Neverthelessweshareapersonaldiscovery,bothwhilst concurrentlyreadingruskinandaalto.maybywrites: thereexistsbetween themacontinuityofthoughttraceablefromthepreceptofthe(nature(of( Gothic. 152 Mawbyidentifiesa continuum inruskinandaalto swork,thatthey sharedavisionforsocietyas pertinenttodayasitwasinthevictorianera. 153 GoldhageninherarticleUltraviolet:(Alvar(Aalto's(Embodied(Rationalism(2008) doesnotlinkruskinwithaaltobutchallengesthehistoriesonaaltoand providesanimportantreadingwithwhichtoreconsiderhiminrelationtohis peerstwhatsetshimapart.goldhagenarguesforaprototphenomenological positionforaaltothatiscontradictedbyaaltohimself. 154 Itisinthearticlehe mentionsruskin,describingitasamodeoflookingaftertthetfactaposthoc justification,thedisciplineofhistoriansand curators. Nevertheless,Goldhagen eloquentlyandperceptivelycreatesaspacewherethefundamentalideasof RuskincomfortablyfitandcanbeexploredinAalto spractice.scott(1914)in hisreadingofruskincreditshimforhis psychological(referencetoarchitecture andconverselydiscreditshimforarchitecture,justifiedbythewayitmakes men feel. 155 Scott sacknowledgementofruskin spsychologicalreadingisobservant bothforthetimeandhowwefindareadinginaalto srecognitionofmanasa psychological beingandhisrelationshipwithhisarchitecturalenvironment. 156 WecancontrastthiswiththeinfluentialFuturistsofthe1920 sand30 swho removedtheindividualfromtheir scientific architecture Mawby,'The(Lamp(of(Obedience:(John(Ruskin,(Alvar(Aalto,(and(a('Proper(Sense'( of(freedom. p Ibid.p Ibid.p Goldhagen,'Ultraviolet:AlvarAalto'sEmbodiedRationalism.'p Scott,The(Architecture(of(Humanism:(A(Study(in(the(History(of(Taste.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p ReynerBanham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age,London: ArchitecturalPress,1962.p

62 IfthelegacyofRuskinishisparryingofscientificmaterialism,theseearlyworks onarchitectureanddesignshowbothadeepdiscernmentofhismilieuandare prophetic;orarethey?inhisarticleof(2008),lengcontendsthatruskin s ModernPaintersVolume5(1860)andhisuseofthephrase theoriginofwood isa coded and polemic rewritingofdarwin sthe(origin(of(species((1859). 158 ThoughLengandothersdemonstratethemeansandextentofRuskin slater critiqueofdarwinismtheydonotbegintodrawouttheunderlying rationalist/materialistphilosophyanditsimplicationsthatruskinpreemptsin hisearlyworks.lengquotessmith(2006): The(contemporary(who(best(understood(and(most(strenuously(resisted(the( implications(of(darwin s(work(for(visual(culture(and(aesthetics(was(john( Ruskin. 159 FurtherLengwritesthatRuskin extensivelyengagedwiththeparadigmshift causedbydarwin stheoryofnaturalselection anditstangledmatrixofnatural theological,social,political,economic,aesthetic,andmorebroadlycultural implications. 160 Darwin stheoryofnaturalselectionanddarwinismdonotappeartocomeasa surprisetoruskin.the(seven(lampsandthe(stones(of(veniceexpoundhisown epistemologyandontologyasacontrasttotheparadigmthatgivesbirthto Darwinism.IndoingsoRuskinhasarmedhimself,fendingoffclassicism.Ordid hegenuinelyseewhatiscoming?ruskin,byhisexpositionofacreaturalview, hascoveredbothbases.whilelengacknowledgestheimmediacyofruskin s responsehedoesnotengageinthewideranddeepernatureofruskin s argument: Knowing(that(the(last(Modern(Painters(is(a(cryptic(rewriting(of(The(Origin( dramatically(enhances(ruskin s(reputation(for(possessing(an(uncannily( sagacious(awareness,(and(grasp,(of(the(magnitude(of(the(most(momentous( issues(in(contemporary(culture. 161 ThefourchaptersinModern(Painters(5(1860)thatLengdescribeswerewritten immediatelyafterthepublicationofthe(originof(species(1859).theimplication forruskinofthepublicationofthe(origin,arepainfullysignificantand challenging,yetheholdshisnerve.thesubtlyofhishonestyislostonleng, inaccuratelyreportingruskin ssocalled lossoffaith. 162 AreadingofPraeterita 158 AndrewLeng,'Ruskin'sRewritingofDarwin:ModernPainters5and'the OriginofWood.'Prose(Studies.(Routledge.2008.p Ibid.p.66.JonathanSmith, Charles(Darwin(and(Victorian(Visual(Culture. ( 2006.pps.2T Ibid.p Ibid.p Ibid.p

63 (1885T1889),Ruskin slastwork,contradictsit. 163 Itisclearfromhisreferenceto thelongestpsalminthebible,whichhememorizesasachild,the119 th (Psalm;( hasbecomeofallthemostprecioustome,initsoverflowingandglorious passionofloveforthelawofgod. AreadingofthePsalmisinstructive. Ruskin scontext. AreadingoftheimmediatecontextthatsituatesRuskinandhisideasmust includeaugustwelbypugin.theworkofrosemaryhillinherbook,god's( Architect:(Pugin(and(the(Building(of(Romantic(Britain((2009)providesnew scholarshipthatsituatesruskinmoreaccuratelyinrelationshiptopugin.mawby quotespevsner,writingthatruskin owesadebt topuginthatruskindoesnot fullyacknowledge. 164 PevsnergivesPugincreditfortheinfluenceandhencethe lineagetomorris,thiscanbeseeninthecomparisonofpugin smariegrange house(1839t41)andmorrisandwebb sredhouse(1859t60).theparallelsare moreofapracticalnaturethanphilosophicalandthecorrespondencesbetween theparticularsfoundineachofthebuildingsisworthacarefulstudytoshow thatmorrisdrewasmuchuponpuginashedidruskin.itwaspuginwhosought torevivetheskillsofmediaevalcraftstorecreatehisgothicarchitecture.itis moreaccuratetosaythatruskindevelopedpugin sideas,whereasmorriswas influencedbythepracticalnatureofthem(whilstbeingastudentofruskin). ThetwosignificantstreamsofideasthatconvergeinPuginandRuskin smilieu havesimilaridentities,theenglishdevelopmentofthepicturesqueandwithit Romanticism.Theseideasarenaturallyjoinedwiththegrowinginterestin historicgothicandenglishvernaculararchitectureasaresultofeveryman s grandourofthebritishisles.theromanticistmovementoriginatedingermany andarrivedinenglandthroughanumberofavenues,firstinliterature,thenin thevisualarts.forthevisualartsitwastheinfluenceofthegermanschoolof thenazarenesandtheirappreciationofthe primitive medievalpainters.all streamsareresponsestothedominanceofclassicismovertheprevioustwo centuries;allupholdparticularcharacteristicsofacreaturalviewasdiscussedin chapter1.thenazarenepaintersintheirsearchfortheirchristianheritage, focusedonarttpretraphaelandcoupleditwithadesireforchristianspiritual renewalbasedonapretrenaissancemodeloffaith.thegermannazarene paintersbecome wildlypopularinengland, stirredonbythepatronageof 163 Ruskin,Praeterita.p Mawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda'Proper Sense'ofFreedom.''p

64 PrinceAlbert. 165 Itiseasytooverlookthesignificanceandultimatelytheimpactofthestudyof thepretrenaissancepaintersatthistime,theirartwaspreviouslyconsideredof inferiorvalue,evencrude.asanalternativetothedominanceofclassicism,the artbecomeshighlyinfluential,itispartofaalto sreferencematerialfromthe 1920 s. 166 Allthreestreams,firstPugin,thenRuskin,Morrisandhis contemporariesthroughtotheenglishfreearchitecturemovementeventually combineinsomeformtoflowbackintoeuropeparticularlythroughthewiener Werkstaette,theDeutcherWerkbundandtheBauhaus. 167 Itisfromthese institutionsthatmuchthemodernmovementspringsinthebeginningof20 th centurytoinfluencethewesternworld. BothPuginandRuskinwerefirstlyfamiliarwiththepicturesquebeforetaking aninterestingothicarchitecture,andgiventhecorrespondencesbetweenthe ideastheyareabletocoalescethemwhilstmaintainingtheirdiscreteidentities. TheideasofthepicturesquewerefirstappliedtotheEnglishgarden,asScott writesinhislamentationonthefalloftheneoclassicalgarden: Eighteenth(century(philosophers,(seated(in(porticoes(still(impeccably(Greek,( were(enabled(comfortably(to(venerate(nature(e(or,(if(not(nature,(at(least(her( symbol(e(as(they(watched(their(ancestral(but(unromantic(gardens(give(place( to(a('prospect'(of(little(holes(and(hills. 168 ( ( ( RomanticismTitsinfluence. JordaninVictorian(Architecture((1966)providesuswithasoberingattemptto documentandunderstandthecomplexfabricthatwasvictorianarchitecture andruskin scontext.morethananythinghepresentsuswithasenseofthe complex,thecontraryandunsettlednatureofit.inhischapterontheromantic Movementhetracesfirstitsoriginsandthenitsimpactinto almostevery sphere ofsociety.hewrites: In(the(nineteenth(century(the(romantic(movement(although(still,(as(always,(a( rebel(against(aristocracy(and(academic(traditions,(was,(far(more,(a(rebel( 165 RosemaryHill,God's(Architect:(Pugin(and(the(Building(of(Romantic(Britain.( NewHavenCT:YaleUniversityPress.2009.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p GabrieleFahrTBecker,Wiener(Werkstaette.Edit.AngelikaTaschen.Köln: Taschen.2003.p.14.Banham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.p Scott,The(Architecture(of(Humanism:(A(Study(in(the(History(of(Taste.p

65 against(cruelty,(squalor(and(ugliness(of(the(whole(urban(and(industrial( system. 169 JordancallstheRomanticMovementthe divinediscontentoftheartist and quotesheinedefiningromanticismas areawakeningofthemiddleages a passionflowerbloomingfromthebloodofchrist. 170 The divinediscontent clearlyalludestoasenseofareawakingoftheartistto faith,butashistoryshowsfaithwithouttruthisadangerouspursuit.jordan describesitasatimewheretheartisthadachoice,tofleetohisdreamsorto protestagainst THESYSTEM. Intheeventhedidboth. Thatdivinediscontent oftheartistisescapetothestrangeanddistant. Fig.11LeCorbusier.ChapelleNotreTDameduHaut(1953T1955).Exterior. 169 Jordan,Victorian(Architecture.p Ibid.p

66 JordantracestheinfluenceofRomanticismonarchitecturefrom Beckford s shamabbeyatfonthill(1796t1818)tolecorbusier spilgrimchurchat RonchampinFrance (1953T55). 171 AaltoisreadasaRomanticmoresoforhis commitmenttothebodyofideasthatseparatehimfromhisrationalist contemporaries.hisworkcanalsobereadasasociologicalprotest,aprotest manyofhiscontemporariesalsoengage,butwithdifferingifnotcontradictory values. AsitislargelyassociatedwiththeJudeo/Christianmessage,whethertheJudoT ChristianmessageisRomanticlargelydependsondefinitionandpractice.The Romanticismweseeinthe19 th centuryandearlierappearsbytandtlargea corruptedviewofarelationshipwithgodandthepersonofgodhimself.writing in1947c.s.lewisdistinguishesbetweenajudeo/christianandapantheistic viewofgodandthecorruptionwhenthetwoaremixed,howeversubtle. FormalreligiousexercisesappealtoPugin,theyappearpartofhisattractionand conversiontocatholicism.heattemptstoretcreatethespirituallifeofthe MiddleAgesandresurrectwhatwasinreality,personalliveslivingin relationshipwithgodandwithoneanother.areadingofvasari(1550)andhis variousaccountsofthepersonallivesoftheartistsofthemiddleagesillustrate this,particularlyhisstudyoffraangelico. 172 Withouttheintimacyof relationshipwithgodandtherichrevelatorylifeitbrings,aspirituallifecanbe nothingmorethanreligiousintellectualism,dogmaandtheatre. 173 Relatingmy ownexperience,theturningpointformetoarelationshipwithgodwasan acknowledgementofisaiah55:8(kjv). Formythoughtsarenotyourthoughts, neitherareyourwaysmyways,saiththelord. Itisatextthatcontinually questionsmyrelationshipandintimacywithgod.intimacywithgodhasa profoundeffectonallthatithinkanddo,alsothequalityofspirituallifei experience. RuskincomplainsofthecorruptiontotheChristianmessage,fromGoethetohis experienceofhisowncontemporaries,the Maurician freetthinking andthe Belgravestreetsecthevisits,whoforbiddingthinkingatall. 174 Ruskinwasforced torenegotiatethesectarianchristianteachingimpartedtohimbyhismotherin theprotestanttradition,andhiswritingonthisthroughoutallhisworkiscritical 171 Ibid.pps.43T GiorgeoVasari,Lives(of(the(Painters,(Sculptors(and(Architects.Trans.Gastonde Vere,vol.1.London:DavidCampbellPublishers.1996.pps.403T C.S.Lewis,Miracles:(A(Preliminary(Study.p Ruskin,Praeterita.pps.434T

67 inunderstandinghisissueswithfaith. HiltonwritesonRuskin srelationallife(itislargelyprivate)withprayersof resolution,prayersof adoration andprayersof petition. 175 HequotesRuskin fromnotesin1852: It(seems(to(me(that(from(a(God(of(Light(and(Truth,(His(creatures(have(a(right( to(expect(plain(and(clear(revelation(touching(all(that(concerns(their(immortal( interests.(and(this(is(the(great(question(with(me( (whether(indeed(the( Revelation(beclear,(and(men(are(blind( (or(whether(there(be(not(some( strange(darkness(in(the(nature(of(revelation(itself.( 176 ( ( BesidesthetextbeinganexpressionofhisrelationshipwithGod,itisalsooneof hisepistemology.ruskinmayhavebeenthinkingofthewritingsoftheapostle Paulin1Cor.13:12; Fornowweseethroughaglass,darkly;butthenfaceto face:nowiknowinpart;butthenshalliknowevenasalsoiamknown. 177 In ModernPainters5,Ruskinmaybeconfusinga glass,darkly with Amirrordark, distorted,broken,yetheacknowledgesthat...foronlytoanaturecapableof truth,desirousofit,distinguishingit,feedinguponit,revelationispossible. 178 Inmyownexperiencerevelationisanessentialpartoftherelationship,butas Ruskinfinds,itisoftenmysteriousasitisattimesclear.Commonlythereisa subtlesubstitutioninthedesireforrevelationovergod sfirstdesirefor intimacy;itiscorruptleadingtoblindness. Equallythefreedomtoimagine,to senseandtopostulate,allwithinatheologicalandrelationalframework,unless itissubjecttogodandscriptureisfraughtwithdeceptionashistoryshows.god isultimatelygraciousandhisgiftstomen,romans11:29declaresare irrevocable. 179 Thereisaprofoundfreedom,yetaccountability. InhisThesis,Education,(Creativity(and(the(Economy(of(Passions:(New(Forms(of( Educational(Capitalism((2009)Peterswritesthat'creativity'isaconceptthat comesdowntousinonedominantformandisromantictothecore. 180 HedescribesRomanticismasashiftfromthe objectivetothesubjective and underwritersfromrousseau,kantandgoetheingermanytocoleridgeand 175 Hilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.p Ibid.p The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.Glasgow:WilliamCollinsSons& Co. 178 JohnRuskin.'Moden(Painters(Volume(5((of(5).'PlacePublished:Project Guttenberg,2013.pps.74T The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version. 180 Peters,Michael. Education,CreativityandtheEconomyofPassions:New FormsofEducationalCapitalism. SagePublications 50

68 WordsworthinBritain,imaginationiselevatedassupremefacultysubordinating Enlightenment'ssupremacyofReason.Hedescribesimaginationforthe Romanticsasthe sourceoftheultimatecreativepowerthatemulatesnature andgod andhelpsusto createrealityandto'read'it,unitingfeelingand reason. 181 GivenPeter sdefinition,ruskinwasnoromantic.ifheistruetohisstatementin hisintroductorytothe(seven(lamps,ruskinadvocatesarelationalanda revelatoryapproachtogodintheeveryday. Nothingistoosmall toaskofgod; hisreasonandimaginationaresubjecttohiscreator. 182 Thisisnotthe imagination thatpetersdescribes.stillthegospelsthemselvesandgeneral characteristicsfoundinacreaturalvieware,aswehaveseeninauerbach s analysisinchapter1,expressingrealismwhilstcombiningaprofoundview withintheeveryday. Ruskin,RomanticismandthePicturesque. FortyinWords(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture((2000)looks attheoriginsoftheideathatworksofarchitecture couldberead,asifthey wereworksofliterature,ahistoricalnarrative,oranequivalenttoliterature. 183 It isapracticethatweseeruskinengage,particularlywiththe(stones(of(venice. TheideaoriginatedaccordingtoFortywithQuartremèredeQuincyin FortyquotesdeQuincy: In(the(most(literal(sense,(the(public(records(of(the(people;(this(function(of(being( historians,(which(religion(and(government(imposed(upon(them,(this(educational( faculty(with(which(they(were(invested,(without(doubt(made(it(a(sacred(obligation(to( render(eternal(these(monuments(which(were,(not(in(a(metaphorical(sense,(the( 181 Ibid.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p.6. SeeRuskin s askingforguidance in smallthings. 183 AdrianForty,Words(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture.(New York,NY:Thames&Hudson.2000.p AdrianForty,Words(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture.(New York,NY:Thames&Hudson,2000.p.72.QuartremèredeQuincy,Del ArchitectureEgyptienne.p

69 depositories(of(the(customs,(beliefs,(exploits,(glory(and(ultimately(of(the( philosophical(and(political(history(and(the(nation. 185 (( ( FortycannottraceadirectinfluencefromdeQuincytoVictorHugo,who followingin1831putforwardtheideathatuntiltheprintedbook Gothic architecturehadbeenthemostcompleteandpermanentrecordofhuman thoughtandhistory. 186 FortygoesontoquoteHugoconcerningtheperioduptoandincludingGothic whoeverthenwasbornapoetbecameanarchitect. Hearguesthatcoupledwith thisidea,thenatureofthelanguageitselfwasdeterminedtobevernacular,that itwas comprehensibletothosethatencounteredthem. Theseideasaccording tofortyunderlinedhugo sdescriptionofnotredameandboth Ruskinand Morriselaboratedonit. 187 AaltoalsoreadsHugoandraisesthehopethatgiven thestateofliteratureofhistime,architecturehasthepossibilityofreclaiming thatrole. 188 ItisathemeinAalto swritingthatgoesbackto1921inhispainters( and(mason sarticle,expressingthatpeopleneededbeautifulbuildings as symbolsoftheirspiritualaspirationsandtofulfilltheirlongingforbeauty... Paintingandsculpturewerefusedinarchitecture;evenmusicforAaltowas like partofthearchedvaultsofagothiccathedral. 189 ItwastheGermanRomanticsofvonHerder,Fichte,Goethewhoaccordingto Forty,believedthat languageconstitutedthepurestandmostvitalexpressionof thecollectivebeingofapeople. 190 Fortywritesthatin1770Herderarguesfor languageasa divinegift coupledwiththe humancapacityforreflection. Itwas theintelligenceofthesoulitself,anintelligencenecessarytomanasman. 191 It wasthisideaaccordingtofortythatlanguagebecamea mediumthat communicatestheentirecollectivebeingofallthosetowhomthatlanguage belongs,and Itwasthismodeloflanguagethatwastohavesuchalasting impactuponarchitecture. IfweapplythistoRuskinthe poet andasawriteron architecture,hisfirstbookthe(poetry(of(architectureandthesubsequentprose textsthatfollow,ultimatelyprovideshimwithanalltembracingmodel.however forruskinitislessanattempttolegitimatizeanarchitecturalvernacular,thanto makeplainitsinherentrelationshipswithplace,environmentandmeaning. 192 ( 185 Ibid.p Ibid.p Ibid.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p Forty,Words(and(Buildings:(A(Vocabulary(of(Modern(Architecture.p Ibid.p.76,J.G.vonHerder,A(Treatise(upon(the(Origin s(of(language.(1770.( Part(II(p.( Ibid.p

70 TheEnglisharchitecturalpicturesque,initspursuitofrelationshipsbetween place,environmentandeverydaylifewasengagedbypuginandruskin.italso becamecentraltoaalto sideasonarchitectureanditsrelationshipwithnature andlandscape,asfinnisharchitectstravellingabroadreturnedwithastrong identificationwiththeenglishversionofthepicturesque,thehistoryofwhichis examinedinchapter3.incontrast,finlandkeepsfaithwiththeenglishversion ofthepicturesqueforarchitectureintheearly20 th century,whereweseeaflip ineuropewiththeretintegrationofclassicalideasofthepicturesque. Banham(1962)describesthearchitecturalpicturesqueinclassicaltheoryasa verydifferentbutparallelidea: And(picturesque(is(to(be(understood(in(its(strict(sense,(not(the(eroded(pictureE postcard(sense.(it(is(to(be(understood(from(a(succession(of(pictures((tableaux)(seen( by(the(visitor(approaching(the(parthenon,(and(as(a(deliberate,(not(an(accidental,( mode(of(procedure. 193 (( ( TheformthatRuskinandPuginengagedwasatheoryoflandscapeinitiatedin thelate18 th centurybytherev.williamgilpin,anartistandwriter. 194 AsHill notesofgilpin,richardknightanduvedalepricewhobecamethetheorists: The(picturesque(developed(in(their(hands(into(the(aesthetic(branch(of( Romanticism.(It(was(a(theory(of(art(that(put(the(personal(and(the(particular( above(the(powerful(and(the(public. 195 ForarchitectureitwasdevelopedinpartnershipwithJohnNashandPricefrom about1790withthecastlehouseinaberystwyth,wales.nashinproposinga typicalclassicalvillaforprice: Price(objected(that(he(wanted(a(building(that(reflected(his(own(ideas.(It(was( to(face(in(several(directions,(its(plan(not(dictated(by(symmetry(but(by(the( various(views,('the(rooms(turned(to(particular(points.((he(also(wanted(the( house(close(to(the(sea,(showing(nash('the(effect(of(the(broken(foreground( and(its(varied(line,(and(how(by(that(means(the(foreground(was(connected( with(the(rocks(in(the(second(ground. 196 ( ( AsaconsequenceofthewarinEuropeafter1782aContinentaltourwas deemedunsafe.hillwritesthatthewealthy,thecultivatedandthelesswealthy 193 Banham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.p Hilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.p Hill,God's(Architect:(Pugin(and(the(Building(of(Romantic(Britain.p Ibid.p.17.Sugget,Nash.p

71 butenterprising,begantoturntheireyesandsketchbookstowardslocalscenery andsights. 197 Anappreciationofthepicturesquewaspartofthe tour ofthe historicalmonumentsandlandscapeofengland.forruskinandhisparentsa tourwasanalmostannualeventatleastfrom1824.neverfarfromarural landscaperuskinwasfiveatthetimethathisfamilymovedfromlondonto semitruralhernehill.intheirfirstyearathernehilltheytraveledtothelake District,oneoftheearliestmemoriesthatRuskincouldrecall,makinghis formativeperiodbarelyanurbanone.theruskinfamilylaterextendedtheir tourstothecontinentwhenitbecamesafetodoso. In1833attheageof14,theRuskinsplannedatriptotheContinentbasedonthe routetakenbytheenglishpaintersamuelprout. 198 Proutisacknowledgedasa masterofwatercolourstudiesofarchitectureanditwashewhomostinfluenced Ruskin spaintingstyleandultimatelyhisengagementwitharchitectureandits theory. TheParadoxofRuskin. ThereisaparadoxinRuskin swritingonarchitecture,ibelieveduetohis positionasatheoristandnotasanarchitect,whilstalsoconsideringthatheisan outstandingthinker,draughtsmanandpainter.haslamquotespeterfulleras believingthat Ruskinathisbestwasoneofthefinestdraughtsmanofhisage, perhapsanyage. 199 Fuller scommentsaresurprising.itisdifficulttofullycomprehendthescopeand valueofruskin sworkapartfromaspecializedinterest,whichinturnseverely blinkersthegreatercomprehension.inrelationtohisstudiesonarchitecture Ruskinhadnovisionforhowhisowninsight;thatwhichheobserved,mightbe whollyrepresentedbyapractitioner.thatisthegiftofpractitioners. Ruskin sappreciationofarchitectureisbroad,alwaysfindingexemplarsinthe particularsashisfirstworkonarchitecturethe(poetry(of(architecture demonstrates.itisnotruskin spurposetoproposeastyle,evenaccuratetosay thathehasavisionforaninventive,contemporaryenglishchristian 197 Hill,God's(Architect:(Pugin(and(the(Building(of(Romantic(Britain.p Hilton,John(Ruskin:(The(Early(Years(1819E1859.p.24T WheelerandWhiteley,Eds.The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p.163.PeterFuller,Images(of(God:(The(consolations(of(Lost(Illusions( London:ChattoandWindus.1985.p

72 architecture.hecanonlydrawfromthepasttoshowoutstandingexamplesin theircontext,builtbypreviousgenerations.ruskindidhaveaprofoundlonging toseesomethingforthefutureashealludesto,buttheexpectationsplacedon himareoutofkeepingwithhispurposeashesawit.inessenceruskinlaiddown afoundationthatwascomplex,itclearlycreatedopportunitiesfornewworksin buildingbythosethatfollowedhim.ifweuseananalogy,theveryfoundationof abuildingisthemostdespisedbutthemostnecessary,andremarkablythat foundationisstillrelevant. Fig.12.JohnRuskin,In(the(Pass(of(Killiecrankie(1857). 55

73 Ruskinandhis alloflife viewasachristian. OneofthemostinterestingandobscuredaspectsofRuskin sworldviewishis all oflife viewasabeliever.bythisoneunderstandsthathischristian,sacred worldviewisinclusiveofallareasoflife;theyarenotseparate.ifwegroupthe administrativeandculturalfunctionsofasocietywecouldlooselyplacethem intosevendominionssuchasgovernment,health,education,media/arts,church, business,science/technology.theyareinterdependentinacreatural worldview. 200 Theideaofadistinctionbetweenchurchandstateisnotrelevant; thereisarelationshipnotonaninstitutionallevelbutonanindividualone.that isruskin spointofentryandperspective,howheengagedhissociety. 201 In PraeteritaRuskindescribesasymbolicpicturehehasofanalloflifeview.He writesofavisitin1835totherouencathedralmadememorablebythe perfect harmonyofart(ofalocalkind),religionandpresent,humanlife. 202 The faithful oldtowngathereditself,andnestledundertheirbuttresseslikeabroodbeneath themotherswings.remarkablyincritiquinganddefining culture, Aaltowrites: the deepestculturespecificallybelongstoeverydaylife.healsousesthe medievalcathedral,closelysurroundedbyaclusterof insignificanthouses as a symboloftheunfathomableunityoflife. Helamentstheremovalofthose housesfromthesurroundingcathedralsasa lossofpower. 203 ForAalto Culture isinterdependentinasocietyashealsoholdsan alloflife view.alfred Roth,aSwisscontemporaryofAaltospeakswithinsightwherehedescribesthe uniquenessofaalto sarchitectureasnot detachedfromnormallife.aalto s building smanifestedall(of(lifeandmadehimamaster (italicsmine) RichardJ.Mouw,Abraham(Kuyper:(A(Short(and(Personal(Introduction.Grand Rapids/Cambridge:Eerdmans,2011.Kuyperisaslightlylatercontemporaryof Ruskinwithasystematic,theologicalexpositionofacreaturalworldview. 201 VishalMangalwadi,The(Book(That(Made(Your(World.Nashville:Thomas Nelson.2011.SeethedescriptionofLuther sindividual/staterelationship.p Ruskin,Praeterita.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p LounaLahti,Ex(Intimo,trans.RogerConnah&TomiSnellman.Helsinki: BuildingInformationLtd.2001.p

74 Fig.13.JohnRuskin.Abbeville(1868). LookingatRuskin s alloflife view,itisworthrelatingmyownexperienceto compareandhighlighthisontology.atconversionin1985,ipersonallyhelda secularizedviewofbeliefthatseparatedthechurchfromsocietyandculture.as suchiincorrectlybelievedthatthegiftsihadasanartistwerepurelysecular. TheChurchatthattimehadbyTandTlargegivenintosecularviewswithan independentviewofitselfandsocietyandreductionistgospel.imustconfessthe partitioningwasnotaltogetheranideaheldbythespiritualteachersasthey soughttocorrectthisperspective.thispartitioningwasclearlynotgod sidea 57

75 madeplainbyaprofoundencountersoonaftermyconversionidescribein Chapter4.Followingthisencounter,Ibegantoseean, alloflife God discoveringhisdeepinterestinallareasofmylife.thearts,idiscoveredasa creativeactivity,holdsauniquepositiongivengod sowncreativeabilities. 205 Theideathattheartswerehistoricallysubservienttotheinstitutionalchurch, duetoitswealth,canbecontrastedwithindividualartistsinhistorythatserved GodandtheChurchwiththeirgifts.Vasari s(1550)variousaccountsofartists highlightthisforthemedievalandearlyrenaissanceperiod.hisdescriptionof FraAngelicoisrelevant,VasarifindsadilemmainFraAngelicopracticingasa monkandanartist.notwithstanding,vasariwrites althoughitispossibleto servegodinallwalksoflife,nonethelessitappearstosomementhattheycan gainsalvationinmonasteriesbetterthantheworld. 206 GivenhistimeandupbringingRuskinsearchedtofindafaithdemonstratingthe nontpartitionedlifehesoughtforhimself,makingithisworktodiscoverthose forwhomithadbeenmostprofoundlyso.thisisthebasisforhischapter The GrandChartreuse in(praeterita((1885t1889).ruskinisclearindescribingthe rootsofhisfaithinapuritanandprotestantupbringing, receivingreligion from BunyanandAmbroseofwhichhesaysthat Ihadagainandagainproofenough ofitstruth. Inspiteofthathewrites; Butmyordainedbusiness,andmental giftswereoutsideofthoselimits. 207 Itisa limit ofapartitionedand institutionalizedliferuskincouldnotreconcilehimself,asheconfesseshis ordainedbusiness. BullenquotesVictorHugowriting everywherethepriestandnevertheman as indicativeofthe ecclesiasticalelitism ofromanesquestylethatprecededgothic. IfwereverseHugo stermswecoulddescribegothicaseverywherethemanand neverthepriest. 208 BothRuskinandHugo heldsimilarviewsongothicandthe interdependentnature ofgothicsociety. 209 Wemaythenaskthequestion, wouldruskin s ordainedbusinessandmentalgifts fitwithinthe limits of GothicChristianity?Gothic interdependent Christianityhasmuchincommon withtheearly,newtestamentchurch.contemporarytheologicalstudyand practiceareseekingtoreclaimthenatureoftheearlychurch,largelyaroundthe NewTestamentteachingof thepriesthoodofallbelievers. 210 Onecanonly 205 SeetheaccountofExodusCh.35:30 36toCh Vasari,Lives(of(the(Painters,(Sculptors(and(Architects.p Ibid.p WheelerandWhiteley,eds.,The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p.63.J.B.Bullen,The(tradition(of(Renaissance(historiography.pps. 54T Ibid.p Note:ForafullreadingonthisNewTestamentconceptandpracticesee: FrankViola,Reimagining(Church.ColoradoSprings.DavidC.Cook

76 imaginethatsuchachurchwouldembraceruskin s ordainedbusiness, asiam hopefulintimethatitwillembracemyown. ThisparticularaspectofRuskin ssearchingmustchangethewayweviewhim, whathehastosaytoustoday,andhowthechurchmightembraceappropriate reform.ruskin sengagementoftheartswiththe alloflife viewchallenges attemptstoalternatelypartitionhisbeliefs,personallifeandwork.any understandingofhisworkprovidesafullerreadingofhisownspirituallife, fracturedanddifficultasitmaybe. HiltonacknowledgesRuskin sobservationoffaithandlifeintheswiss mountains,hedescribesitas Ruskin svisionofanidealfutureengland. 211 Ruskinwrites: But(on(me,(the(deeper(impression(was(of(a(continuous(and(serene(hold(of(their( happy(faith(on(the(life(alike(of(sunday(and(monday,(and(through(every(hour( and(circumstance(of(youth(and(age;(which(yet(abides(in(all(the(mountain( Catholic(districts(of(Savoy,(the(Waldstetten,(and(the(Tyrol,(to(their(perpetual( honour(and(peace;(and(this(without(controversy,(or(malice(towards(the( holders(of(other(beliefs. 212 Significantlyitisalsotheplacethathewrites ThefirstsightoftheAlpshadbeen tomeasadirectrevelationofthebenevolentwillincreation. Itisalsotheplace Ruskinplannedtomakehishome,ratherthaninEngland. 213 Ruskin sfaith becomesnontsectarian;anomanslandtotheinstitutional.itisherethathe appearstobecomedetachedfromthechurch theinstitutionalone.hehas contactwiththeoxfordmovementandtheirattemptstocrossdenominational linestobringthechurchtogether,butisnotdrawnintoit. 214 WherePugin converts fromevangelicalandcharismaticchristianitytothecatholicchurchto findwhatheislookingfor,heappearstobebeholdentotheideathateven Ruskinstruggleswith.ForRuskin,Luther sreformationhadbeena terrible blow totheartsthat adornandsoftenlife. 215 Ruskin sshiftfromasectariantoa nontsectarianpositionisaplacewhereipersonallyfindmyself.ruskinis searchingforthetrueinheritanceinhisfaithversesthetraditionsofmen.he writesinhislastwork: Bearing(with(me(from(that(last(sight(in(Rome(many(thoughts(that(ripened( 211 Ruskin,Praeterita.p.xv. 212 Ibid.p Ibid.p.255.Ibid.p.xv. 214 RosemaryHill,God's(Architect:(Pugin(and(the(Building(of(Romantic(Britain London:PenguinBooks,2008.pps.123T Ibid.p.123,GillespieGrahamtoJohnStewart,GrantullyPapersSRO/GD 121/Box101/Vol.XX,

77 slowly(afterwards,(chiefly(convincing(me(how(guilty(and(meanly(dead(the( Protestant(mind(was(to(the(whole(meaning(and(end(of(medieval(Church( splendour;(and(how(meanly(and(guiltily(dead(the(existing(catholic(mind(was,( to(the(course(by(which(to(reach(the(italian(soul,(instead(of(it's(eyes. 216 FinleyinhisbookNatures(Covenant(1992)givesasensitivetreatmentof Ruskin sfaith,theprejudicial,earlysectarian,thoughchangingnatureofitand itsrelationshiptothecontentofruskin searlywriting.hepointsoutthatthe religiousprejudice toneofhisworkcanbeseparatedoutfromhismaterial concerns. 217 Finleyarguesforthevalueofthespiritual,materialandmoral,they arenotdependentonruskin sownearlysectariandivisions,indicatingthat thereisadeeplypractical,exegeticalstudyandapplicationinruskin swork. Thisisbornoutinhisinfluenceonmanyearly,leadingmodernistarchitects,a studyofwhichisnotaltogetherfoundinapurelymodern,secularacademic studyofhiswriting. RuskinandAalto. LookingatbothRuskin sandaalto sworkweseevariouscorrespondences, correspondencesthatmaybringlighttoruskin sideas.provingadirectlink betweenthetwoisnotnecessary,thecorrespondencesareenoughthatimay learnfromthem,whatbothmenhadtosaynotonlyinwordsanddeedbutmore importantlyinhowtheyknewandwhythatwasimportantinunderstanding theirwork.continuitywasattheheartofbothmen saspirationssignifying somethingmuchdeeper,asroth sremarkonaalto, thecharacterofbeauty. 218 IfwefindAaltomeetingRuskininVenicetherearenumerousclaims,suchas thatbymuschamp,rayandschildt,thataalto sjyvaskylaworkersclub (1924/25)referencestheDogesPalaceinVenice. 219 Nooneasksthequestionas towhyaaltoappearstobereferencingthedogespalace.aaltoiscompletingthe JyvaskylaWorkersClubasheprepareshimselftotraveltoItalyandVenicefor 216 Ruskin,Praeterita.p StephenFinley,Natures(Covernant:(Figures(of(Landscape(in(Ruskin. Pennsylvania:ThePennsylvaniaStatePress,1992.p Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p HerbertMuschamp,'ArchitectureReview;AlvarAalto,aModernistAheadof HisTime.'TheNewYorkTimes.1998.NicholasRay,Alvar(Aalto.(NewHaven: YaleUniversityPress,2005.p.18.GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life,trans. NicholasMayow,TimothyBinhamJyväskylä:AlvarAaltoMuseum,2007.p

78 thefirsttime.onehastoworkhardtofindalikenessbetweenthetwobuildings. StillAaltoappearstousethetopandbottomsectionsofthePalace.Thereisno referencetothegothicinaalto swindows;thepilastersonthebalconyand squareframedwindowsaremoreclassicaltpalladianasraypointsout.thereis alackofsymmetryinaalto sdesignforaneotclassicalwork;alsothereisa questionastothecolouring.ifitistheoriginalcolourastherecentrestoration mightsuggestthenthecombinationofwhitestoneandrosetcolouredmarbleof thepalacebringsahueofpinkthatisrepeatedinaalto suse.themassofthetop façade,roundmedallionsplacedbelowthewindowsinplaceoftheround windowsabovethegothicarches,areseenintheducalpalace.therearethe smallsquarewindowstobefoundontherightofthefrontfaçadeoftheducal palacethatarealsosimilarinrelationshiptothemassthatisfoundinaalto s righthandsideelevationtohisjyvaskylaworkersclub.westonquotesaalto fromanarticleof1923admiringragnaröstberg s Venetianmagnificence,his StockholmCityHall,suggestinganothersourceofinfluencefortheWorkers Club. 220 Fig.14.JohnRuskin,detailexterioroftheDogesPalace,Venice(1852). 220 RichardWeston,Alvar(Aalto.London:PhaidonPressLimited,1995.p

79 Fig.15. AlvarAalto,JyvaskylaWorkersClub(1924T25). Fig.16. DogesPalace,Venice. 62

80 Relatingmyownexperience,travellingfromtheaestheticallyimpoverishedbuilt environmentinperth,westernaustraliainthemid1970 sandlandingin Europe,Venicewasoverwhelminglyandpowerfullybeautiful.Leaningoverthe bridgethepontedegliscalzi,adjacenttothestation,ifoundmyselfintearswith asenseofalonenessforthebeautyifoundthere,compoundedbyadeeplossfor thepresent.followinghisfirstvisittoitalyaaltospeaksofpaininhishill(top( Townarticle, Beautyalwayscausespain.Ifyouhavebutoncebeenpermittedto enjoyit,youwillsufferforeverfromtheuglinessthatsurroundsuseveryday. 221 Thetripformewasthebeginningofajourney,firstlywithundergraduate studies,thenposttgraduatestudiesinlondonin1984.followinggraduationin London1986,areturntoItalycamewithaninvitationfromthereputed company,cassinaofmeda/milantospendtimeattheirresearchcentre. BothRuskinandAaltoaspartoftheirownprofound,aestheticencounterswere forcedtoreconciletheirexperienceofbeautyandmakeaplaceforitintheir owncircumstanceandtime.thatinvolvedapersonal makingofaway,a reclaimingofwhatwaslost.thelossistheprofoundcapacityofmantodesign andbuildworksofbeautythatappearstohavelittledependencyoneconomics, technology,educationorprivilege. The makingofaway isapersonaljourneyasbothruskinandaaltoexpressin verydifferentwaystomyown.whereruskinandaaltodifferisintheirgiftas seers.thoughtheybothhaveafeelingforthepast,presentandforthefuture, Aaltoistheonetocarryitforward.Ruskincanonlydescribetheverynatureofit, thehumancapacitytoengageinthenatureofbeauty,andthehumancondition thatenableshimtodoso,thusmakingruskin sfaçade1879t80atbrantwood poignant.ruskinandaaltomademanyreturnjourneystovenice,andwhile AaltoseekstolearnfromhisItalianexperienceforhisownwork,Schildt s derideshimforhis utopianillusions ofafinnishrenaissance.schildtfailsto graspaalto spremiseandpurpose,aalto sreferencetothepastislargely ontologicalnotideological.itisthestateof being thataaltoexperiencesinthe workofthe ancients inducingan infection. Schildtdoesconditionhisremarks onaaltowith ayoungman sneedsofanethicalgoaltofightfor. 222 Schildt s ethicalgoal foraaltoplaceshimalongsideruskin.schildtrecallsthatinaalto s lastdaysashelayinhishospitalbed,thereisasuggestionthathegotothe incomparablevenicetorecuperate Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p.9.Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.pps.224, GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto,(the(Mature(Years.Trans.TimothyBinham.New York:RizzoliInternationalPublications.1991.p

81 Fig.17.JohnRuskin,Façade1879T80.Brantwood,Ruskin sfinalhomeatconniston, England. 64

82 Chapter3. We(today((E(who(have(hymned(and(exulted(the(suggestive(powers(of(the(machine(as( inspiration(and(fixed(our(sensations(and(plastic(emotions(in(pioneer(plastic(works( (we(see( the(first(outlines(of(the(new(machine(aesthetic(stretched(out(on(the(glowing(horizon...the( first(plastic(expressions(vouchsafe(by(a(mechanical(cosmogony. (( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( EnricoPrampolin( (ReynerBanham.Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine( Age.London:ArchitecturalPress,1962.p.188.Quoted fromdestijl.) Fig.18.AlvarAalto,VillaMairea,frontentrance. Aalto. Intracingacreaturalviewintoearlymodernistarchitectureanddesign,one findscharacteristicsofit,ontologicallyandepistemologically,inthearchitectural writingandworksofalvaraalto.theimmediateandimportantquestionit 65

83 raises,dowefindacontradiction?giventhatteleologicalreadingsofaalto s workhavealwaysbeenproblematic,acarefullookataalto sworldview facilitatesamoresensitivereadingofhisideasandwork. 224 In1925,justfouryearsaftergraduatinginarchitecture,AlvarAaltodelivereda lectureatthegalaeveningofthejyväskylästudentunion.histitleforthelecture wasabbé(coignard's(sermon(anditiswiththislecturethathemakeshissingular referencetoruskinasadotpoint, architecture thenaturalart(ruskin), confirmingthathehasanexposuretoruskinearlyinhiscareer. 225 IfSchildtiscorrectinwritingthat AaltodidknowRuskinwell,hisbiglovefor VenicewasinpartinspiredbyRuskin thenaaltomakesaretconnectionto Ruskin,howeversmall,withregularholidaysinVenice. 226 TheAbbé(Coignard's( Sermon(lecturewasgivenwithinmonthsoftheAalto sreturningfromasixtweek honeymoonthatincludedhisfirstvisittovenice(schildthimselfholidayswith AaltoinVeniceonatleastoneoccasion). 227 Therearemanyideasinthelecture thatrelatetoruskinwithrichnarrativesmakingthetextparticularlyvaluableto thethesis. ForthelectureAaltoclearlyexploresadifferingviewtoscientificmaterialism andheisapologeticindoingso.heiscontenttojoin DonQuixote ifhistory weretoprovehimwrong.diggingdeeperthelectureprovidesaninsightinto Aalto sformativeideasthatwerenottofullyemergeinhisarchitecturefor another10years.inhisintroductiontothetext,schildtpointsoutthatthe incompletenotesthataaltomadeforthelectureare:..one(of(his(most(interesting(and(controversial(texts,(as(it(clearly(expresses( a(very(fundamental(and(personal(aspect(of(his(outlook(on(life. 228 Schildtdoesnotexplainwhyheconsidersit controversial wearelefttothresh andwinnowthetextforourselves. 229 ItisrarethatSchildtisatalossin attemptingtoexplainaalto,whereaalto,characteristicallyasweshallsee,feeds usbothhuskandseed.itisinalllikelihoodthatschildtdoesnotperceiveor 224 Note:ThoughAlvarAaltosharedhisearlypracticewithhisfirstwife,Aino MarsioTAalto,thethesisreliesheavilyonthepersonalwritingsofAlvaraslittle personalwrittenmaterialattributedtoainocanbefound. 225 GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words,trans.TimothyBinham.Helsinki: OtavaPublishing.1997.p GillianMawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda 'ProperSense'ofFreedom.'LancasterUniversity.2001.Appendix. 227 ArneHästesko,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.Helsinki:AlvarAalto Foundation.2014.p.13.Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p Ibid.p

84 shareaalto sepistemologyorontology.giventheauthorityaccordedtoschildt as gatekeeper hiswritingsonaaltoarenoteasilychallengedandrequirecareful diligencetonegotiate. 230 ThefactthatAaltosubtlypresentsadifferingviewtoscientificmaterialismno oneappearstoseriouslyengage,partlyduetothenatureoftheparadoxinvolved ashistorianslikeschildtattempttoassertaalto sleadingmoderniststatus. Aalto sdifferingsignalsarenotfullyunderstoodresultinginconfusion.heisleft withthestigmaof irrational, expressionist and idiosyncratic. 231 Thisisa positionwithconsequencesthataaltodefendsinhisowninimitableway. 232 WhilstRuskindespairedatthedegradationbroughtaboutbytheliteralmachine andindustrializationforarchitectureanddesign,aaltosoughttomediateor mitigate it. 233 NeitherAaltoorRuskinidentifiedtheirfoeasaparticular philosophicalidentity;bothidentifyitasanontologicalandepistemologicalone. Epistemologicalasbothofferdifferingwaysofknowingandontologicalasboth expressdifferingexperiencesofbeingtoapurelyrationalistontology.ifruskin isparryingscientificmaterialismthenaaltoispartytothecause. TheAbbéCoignardaddressismostsignificantasitexpressesAalto sformative viewsandselftawareness.thetextandthereferencesarefarricherthanfirst appearandibelievethatschildt,thoughhenotesthediscordthetextcreates amonghistoriansandtheorists,failstofullyreaditssignificancehimself.schildt, asaalto sbiographer,doesnotdrawattentiontoareadingofruskininhis commentaryofthetextandhislateradmissiontomawbythat Aaltoknew Ruskinwell,failstodiscloseanyintimateknowledge,ifhepossessedit.What knowledgehedidhave,diedwithhim;mawbyneverfolloweditup.harry Charrington,inapersonalconversation,believesthatSchildt sunderstandingof Aalto sengagementofruskinappears abstract. 234 Thistextandthearticle The HilltopTown publishedayearearlierin1924,areibelievecentraltextsthat identifyaalto scorephilosophicalpositionhedevelopsinarich,layeringby variousassociationsthroughouthiscareer NinaStritzlerTLevine,TimoRiekkoeds.Artek(and(the(Aalto's:(Creating(a( Modern(World.NewYork:BardGraduateCentre,YaleUniversityPress pps.18t39.stritzlertlevinebeginstochallengeaspectsofschildt swriting. 231 PeterReed,ed.,Alvar(Aalto.NewYork:MuseumofModernArt,1998.p TomokoSato,JuhaniPallasmaa,ed.Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of(Shigeru( Ban.London:BlackDogPublishing,BarbicanArtGallery.2007.p.14.SeeAlso GöranSchildt,The(Decisive(Years.Trans.TimothyBingham.NewYork:Rizzoli SchildtwritesofAaltoas wily indisclosinghisideasinrelationtothe acceptednorms.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p HarryCharrington.2010, Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

85 Aaltoasexampleandexemplar. ThechoiceofAaltoasartist,architect,writeranddesignerpursuingacreatural view,orthecharacteristicsofitintomodernism,hasmadeforarichdialectic engagementbetweenhim,ruskinandmyself.asitismypurposetoexamine howacreaturalview(otherthanmyown)mightlookgoingintomodernism(if therewassuchacase),findingonewouldprovidegroundstoassessandexplore myownpositionandcontemporarycontext.theexampleofaaltoofwhose writingsandarchitectureiwasnotfamiliar,couldnothavebeenmore exemplary.asiexaminedaaltoiencounterednumeroushistoriansandtheorists thatcharacteristicallytooktheirobservationswithateleologicalview,puzzled astothecontradictionstheymet.thecontradictionisstark;asanearly modernistaaltodoesnotfitthemouldofamachineviewinamodernistcontext. Thisbegstheimprobableandquestionformanyastowhytheshoedoesand doesnotfit? Whilstthereareanumberofadmissionsorclaims,suchasthosebyShigeruBan connectingaaltototheenglisharchitecturalversionofthepicturesqueand EnglishFreeArchitecturemovementwithRuskinandMorris,onehastoaskthe questionwhytheseclaimshavenotbeenexplored?asidefromthequestionof Ruskin sinfluenceonaalto,thecorrespondencesintheirworkareattimesquite beautiful,eveniffoundtobejustcorrespondences. Whetheritisimportanttoclaimorshowinfluenceversusconnectionis potentiallyatendentiouspoint.thesuggestionthatruskinandaaltoswamin theirownpoolswithsimilarideascutofffromoneanotherislesshelpful,even fanciful,ifonecanshowformativeconnections.inthesamewaywhat connectionsdoipersonallyhaveorsharewithruskinthatinformmyown practice?beforereadingruskin,myknowledgeofthehistoryandtheworkof thepractitionersoftheenglishartsandcraftsmovementinparticularwould makethisconnectionvalid.butonreadingruskin,ipersonallyfindhiswritings aroundwhatidefineasa creaturalview tobeacutelyrelevant.ibeginto understandboththeprecedentandthesourceinthejudeo/christiantradition anditsepistemologyandontology;itissomethingweclearlyshareoutsideof timeandculture.whethertheepistemologyandontologyissomethingruskin andifullysharewithaaltoisamoredifficultquestion.neitherruskinoraalto ormyselfaredisposedtoaphilosophicalmachineviewofnatureorman,evenif wemaynotfullyagreeonthephilosophical/theologicalreasons.foraaltoto resist,eventoconsistentlydefyaphilosophicalmachineviewinrelationtohis 68

86 peersgivesveryspecificmeaningtohisthoughtandworkandmakeshimamost intriguingandcourtlyprophet. IfonecanshowthatAaltogenuinelyexhibitsthecharacteristicsofacreatural viewthenhebecomesthemeansoftracingacreaturalviewofnatureandman intothe ModernMovement inarchitecture,whichraisesthequestiondoeshe naturallysitwithinitinthe adaptive mannerruskindescribesascharacteristic ofthecreaturaltradition,ordoesherepresentsomething other thanthe ModernMovementitself?Thathehasgenerallybeenexcludedintheearly historiesandrecentattemptsatretdescribinghimwithtermslikeprotot phenomenologistandphenomenologistwouldsuggesttheformer.inban s almostthrowawaylinethat Aaltohasatrueclaimtobetheorthodoxy of the democraticarchitecturecalledforbyruskinandmorris,thenweseeaalto s workhasamoreprofoundmeaningifweacceptthephilosophicalrootsofit. 236 UltimatelyAalto slinkwithruskinisasaforerunnerandseer,whichdoesnot makeruskinablindprophet,onethatsimplyhasabatontopasson.whilsti developedsympathieswithantoniogaudi(1852t1926)inmymaster swork,for hetooexhibitsacreaturalviewthatissublime,aaltoismorepragmaticashe trulyworkswithinamodernistcontext. 237 AppreciatingAalto. InseekingtoappreciateAaltoandthecomplexitiesofhisideasthemost reassuringcharacteristicsofthem,likehisarchitecture,isthattheyareaccretive andadaptive,rarelyredundantandbuiltonafoundation.hisideas,though diverseandappearingcontradictoryaremalleabletoaalto scause.heredefines, reshapes,craftsandpersonalizesthemgivenhisepistemologyandhisontology. LikeRuskin sdescriptionofthechristianbuildersin TheNatureofGothic, Aalto sworkandideasare vital andnot formal, vitalinthesenseofthembeing dynamic. 238 IfwetakeaformalapproachwecanneitherappreciateAaltoorhis work,thismeanscontinuallyasking whatdoeshemean giventhecontextofhis writingsandworkratherthanbringingaformalmeaningtothem. 239 Aalto suse 236 JuhaniPallasmaa,TomokoSato,eds.Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of(Shigeru( Ban.London:BlackDogPublishing,BarbicanArtGallery.2007.p GuyAllenby,'DivineInspiration.'Interior(Architecture(and(Design1989. pps.84t JohnRuskin,The(Stones(of(Venice,ed.JanMorris.London:Faber.1981.p LounaLahti,Ex(Intimo.Trans.RogerConnah,TomiSnellman.Helsinki: BuildingInformationLtd.RakennustietoOy.2001.pps.14T16.Aninteresting 69

87 oflaterterms functionalism, rationalism, humanism and materialism are examples;theyarestumblingstonestoaformalapproach.tellinglyquantril (1983)describesAaltoas oneofthemostcomplexfiguresevertoworkinthe sphereofthecreativearts. 240 Aalto shubrisandhis comedyandtragedy. Aalto shubrisandhisdeliberatecovertexpositionsheightenthedifficultyin readinghim;itisparalyzinguntiladeeperandcarefulcontextualreadingofhis words,workandlifeisundertaken.onacloserstudy,hishubrisappearsasafoil forsomethingdeeperandtendertohim.thoughheispreparedtoidentifyissues oftheheart,heincreasinglyembedstheminacoverofthetheatrical,the mythical,his comedyandtragedy, thehumorandthesuffering,the shallowness andunexpecteddepth, thefunnyandseriousthesideofaaltoas actor/performer,manandarchitect. 241 Aaltoasarchitectwasnojestersowecan appreciatethisactor/performerandraconteurasacountertothedeeply sensitivenatureofaaltoasartistandarchitect. 242 Thisfoil/coverappearstobe fundamentaltohissuccess,intheneedforboththeartisticandsocialdemands ofsuchaprivate/publicpractice. 243 Schildtwritesthat thisgreatactordidnot wishtorevealhimself. 244 HealsodescribesAaltoas wily ashe characteristicallyheldbackfromdisclosinghisposition,particularlyinrelation toacceptedarchitecturaltheory. 245 IttakestimetowinnowthehuskfromtheseedinAalto swriting,thehusk playingtheroleinprotectingtheseed.lounalahti sinterviewwithaalto sson Hamilkarin1992isespeciallyrevealing.Hamilkarlaterworkedwithhisfather asastructuralengineersohehasaninsighttotheprofessionalsideofhisfather aswell.itisworthquotinglahti squestionandhamilkaraalto sresponseinfull: interviewwithaalto sson,hamilkar,whointurnworkedwithhisfather,gives anelegantdescriptionofhisfathersapproach. 240 MalcolmQuanrill,Alvar(Aalto;(a(Critical(Study.NewYork:NewAmsterdam Books.1983.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p Note:AstudyofbothAaltoandhisearliercolleagueEricBryggmanshow similarartisticsensitivitiesthatbringthemtogether,butverydifferent personalitygiftingthatultimatelyaffecttheoutcomesoftheirpractices. 244 GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life,Trans.NicholasMayow,TimothyBinham. Jyväskylä:AlvarAaltoMuseum.2007.p GöranSchildt,The(Decisive(Years.Trans.TimothyBingham.NewYork:Rizzoli p

88 (Lahti)(I(felt(that(he(had(a(very(sophisticated,(somewhat(absurd,(sense(of( humor.( Hamilkar(A:(Yes,(he(had(his(own(way(of(putting(things(and(certain(people( never(quite(understood(that.(he(always(implied(more,(and(very(few(people( grasped(that.(many(felt(insulted,(those(critical(mandarins(failed(to( understand.(there(was(both(comedy(and(tragedy(in(him.(it(always(made(up( the(whole. 246 ( ( Arelationandemployee,UllaTLeenaisquotedassaying; EverythingaboutAlvar wasinstructive.heneverinvolvedhimselfinthingsthathadnosignificance. Althoughhespokesometimesinjestitwasalwayssignificant. 247 Amonghis contemporariesaaltowasspokenofasbeingcallous,whereastheleading FinnishcomposerJoonasKokkonenfoundhim verysensitive whentheir friendshipmatured. 248 SchildtquestionswhetherAalto s hubrisarousedanangrynemesis given scathingattacksonaaltoandhisworktowardtheendofhislife. 249 Thereis ironyinaalto shubristicuseofbiblicalthemes;hechosetonamehisboatnemo( propheta(in(patria,('nomanisaprophetinhisownland. 250 Aalto sbeliefs. Aalto shubrisaroundhischristianheritageandhispersonalbeliefshasdrawn tepidengagementfromwritersandhistorians.aalto sbeliefsareonlyimportant ifwehaveaneedtoappreciatehisworldview,andgivecontexttohisideas. MeninandSamuelsdochallengeSchildt sstrongopiniononaalto sbeliefswith hisemphasisona'voltarianrationalismandagoethianinclinationthat pervadedhisparentshome. 251 Voltairedefendedtherighttobelievewhilst havingissueswiththedysfunction,abuseofpowerandcorruptionwithinthe church.thisdoesnotmakehimimmunetohypocrisy.goethe,whilsthehada reverenceforthegospels,waspreparedtotakelicensewithhisthoughtand 246 Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p Ibid.p Ibid.pps.65, Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p Hästesko,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.p.67.Luke4:24 noprophetis acceptedinhisowncountry. KJV. 251 FloraSamuel.SarahMenin,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier.London: Routledge,2003.p.103,AlvarAalto,The(Early(Years.NewYork:Rizzoli,1984.p

89 workthatdidnotpassruskin sattention. 252 BothGoetheandVoltairewereto varyingdegreesalawuntothemselves,butnoneofthesemenincluding Rousseauappeartobeatheists.Whatmakesthisscenarioallthemoreironicis howwellitwouldfitwithinfrance sabbécoignard ssermonandhis descriptionofthehumannatureofpeopleinthatcity.itbegsthequestion,what wouldaaltothinkofit,thecomedyandtragedy? SchildtwritesonAalto sbeliefsinhisepiloguetoin(his(own(words: His(approach(was(rooted(in(a(Western(humanism(that(was(introduced(by( Homer,(carried(on(by(Plato(received(key(impulses(from(Christine(doctrine(and( reached(full(fruition(in(the(works(of(dante,(shakespeare(and(goethe.(aalto( saw(the(individual(as(the(measure(of(everything,(and(the(cosmos,(which(we( nowadays(tend(to(call(nature,(as(the(universal(order(in(which(we(must(find( our(place. 253 (( ( Schildtattemptstobeinclusivehereandfailstorepresenttheparticularfound inaalto s ownwords. MeninandSamuelshavereasontoquestionSchildtastheygenuinelytrypiecing thepuzzle.togethertheywritethatschildtfailstomaketheappropriate distinctionbetween conservativechristiandogmas andone themorespiritual experiencesthatareattheheartofreligion,inherentinthelatinwordreligio, meaning'reliance'or'connection. 254 TheirobservationisvalidatedbyAalto s ownwordsfoundin Our(Old(and(New(Churches and Finnish(Church(Art,articles of1921and1925respectively. 255 Aaltogivesusadescriptionin1921asaregularchurchattendeeinthesatirical magazinekerberos. 256 Inithewritesofhisexperienceofbeauty,bothofEngels domeinthechurchheattendsandinthedynamicarrangementofthewomens colouredgownsastheygatheratthealtar.aaltointercedesinprayerforan orderinthecompositionwithananswertohisprayer.thiswholeexperiencefor 252 StephenWildman,13TAprilT ProfessorWildmanprovidedthe followingreferenceongoethe,of'wilhelmmeister'and'faust'hesaysthat theyhad anevilinfluenceineuropeanliterature. (FrondesAgrestes, 1875). 253 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p SarahMenin,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.pps.35T38.Iitalehti,December14, 1921,Käsiteollisuus,No.3, Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p

90 himisoneof seeingthebeautifulineverything. 257 Westonasoneofthemore sensitiveresearchersonaaltowrites; thepassagesaysasmuchaboutaalto s attitudetoarchitectureasanythingheeverwrote. 258 Aaltousesnumerousbiblicalreferencesandanalogiesinhiswritings,evengiven hishubristicuseofthem;the miracleofturningwaterintowine; TheSermon onthemount and Noprophetishonoredinhisowncountry. Wereadofhis Architectureas salvation andtheoriginsofthatinabbécoignardssermon. Aaltousesa trinity analogyandwefindreferencestofraangelico spaintingof theannunciationwiththesubsequentnamingofhisdaughterafterthepainting. Wehavealsohisearlyreferencesandacknowledgementofthebeautyof Christianart. 259 Aalto sarticleof1925onchurcharchitecturesuggestsastyleof worshipandspiritualfocus. 260 Lahti(2001)appearsparticularlyfascinatedwiththequestionaroundAalto s beliefsasthoughitwerenotresolvedforherintheliteraturetodate.sheplied three,separateinterviewee swithquestionsoveraalto sbeliefs,including Aalto ssonhamilkar. 261 Hisreply, Hewasn treligiousbuthewasn tentirely unreligiouseither.heknewquitealotandunderstoodpeopletowhomreligion wasimportant. 262 AninsightintoAalto sdispositionforspiritualrevelationisfoundinthe interviewsofaalto scolleaguesconductedbylahti.itappearsthathelvi PetterssonexperienceddreamswithpropheticinsightintodetailsofAalto s architecturalproblems. 263 Helvi shusband,larspetterssontaprofessorofart history,notesthattheinsight madeadeepimpression onaalto,hewouldring Helvi quiteoften foranopinion.thereisnoindicationastothesourceofhelvi s revelationbutaaltoclearlylookstoherandcouldbeaslarsrecalls very persistent. RuskinandAaltosharetherepresentationofbeautyinChristianart.Aswehave seenproustelucidatesonruskin s religionofbeauty,wecanplaceitalongside 257 SarahMenin,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier.p.37T38,Schildt,Early( Years,p.102, ʻKerberos article. 258 RichardWeston,Alvar(Aalto.London:PhaidonPressLimited,1995.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.pps.37,38.Käsiteollisuus,No.3, Lahti,Ex(Intimo.pps.16,42, Ibid.p Ibid.pps.61T62. 73

91 Aalto s religiousbeautyinlife verses brutalmechanicalness. 264 Frommyown experience,bothofgodandarevelationofthecreationitisoneofprofound beauty,affirmingasharedepistemology. AaltoandLindgren. IfAaltoknowsRuskinwellasSchildtclaimsintheprivatelettertoMawby,there islittledirectevidenceinaalto swritingstosubstantiateitapartfromthesingle reference.charringtonsuggestedtomethataaltocomestoknowruskin throughhisuniversityprofessorarmaslindgren.thisissupportedbyaalto s earlyreferencetoruskinsoonaftergraduating. 265 Inhismemorialaddresson Lindgren sdeathin1929,aaltopaysaclearrespectandaffectionforhim, describingitasaprivileged, enlighteningandpositive time,addinglindgren wasa teacherofhumanity. 266 InherbookArmas(Lindgren(1874E1929(1988) RiittaNikulaoffersashortbut lucidinsightintolindgrenandameanstomakeconnectionsbetweenlindgren andaalto,andinturnbacktoruskin.nikulafollowslindgren sownstudytrip onhisgraduationin1897as uncustomary, ashechoosestopursuean architectureclearlyopposedtotheclassicaltraditionfora moremodernly studywithaparticularinterestinenglandandscotland.thiswasunusual. Finnisharchitectstravellingabroadwerenotgenerallygiventovisitingthe UnitedKingdom;thismaybeinpartexplainedbytheirlackofEnglishlanguage skills.hencenikulawritesoftheir Germanorientation. 267 Lindgrenwithhis earlyandexcellentgradesinhisstudyofenglishenableshim;asnikulanotes,to subscribeandreadenglisharchitecturaljournalsalongwithhouse(and( Garden MarcelProust,Days(of(Reading.Trans.JohnSturrock.London:PenguinBooks pps.4T7.Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Charrington.MeetinglateOctober.2010.UniversityofBath,UK. 266 RiittaNikula,Armas(Lindgren(1874E1929.Helsinki:MuseumofFinnish Architecture.1988.p.188,Arkkitehti,vol.IX,1929,enc.p Ibid.p Ibid.p

92 NikulaleavesusinnodoubtthatLindgrenwasafollowerofRuskinandMorris, writing: The(philosophy(of(art(postulated(by(Ruskin(and(Morris(had(created(the(basis( for(lindgren's(work(at(an(early(stage,(and(this(never(changed(throughout( his(life.(each(architectonic(task,(whether(it(be(volume(or(space,(surface( sculpting(or(colouration,(aimed(at(a(complete(work(of(art.(there(were(no( difference(in(merit(between(tasks.(their(social(and(topographical(difference,( were(but(a(challenge(to(the(architect(to(find(the(right('key. 269 (( ( Nikula srepeatedemphasisonlindgren sthe completeworkofart echoesin Aalto sownwordsof1921ashefinisheshisstudies.hewrites, Itseemstome thatatthemomentwearestrivingtowardsawhole,thefocusbecomingan exemplarinaalto spractice. 270 Inanarticleof1922Aalto swritingshowsa remarkableconsistencywithlindgren: ( When(we(visit(a(medieval(church,(look(at(an(old(manorEhouse,(or( contemplate(a(hundred(year(old(vernacular(building,(we(find(that(there(is( something(that(reaches(out(to(us,(a(mood.(it(may(be(caused(partly(by(hande crafted(surfaces,(by(the(artistic(purity(of(the(building(materials,(by(the( simple(lines(that(harmonise(with(the(landscape;(partly(it(is(created(by(the( fine,(worn(surface(and(the(hundred(year(old(patina(of(the(materials.( 269 Ibid.p Hästesko,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.Maalarit(ja(muurarit((Paintersand Masons),inJousimies,

93 Fig.19.Lindgren sstudyofturkucathedralinterior,inthemannerofruskin. NikulaobservesthatLindgren loveditalymostforthemilieuithaddeveloped overitslonghistory.itsgreatmonumentswerenotsoimportanttohim,even lesssothetheoreticalaspectsofitsarchitecturalhistory.lindgrensought nothingorthodoxintheold,onthecontrary,hiswasaloveofpatinaand mystery. 271 WefindthatbothLingrenandAaltoarenotabsorbedby architecturaltheory.theyshareinsteadalovefortheparticularandthewhole, Ruskinapossiblesourceofit. 272 Nikulaobservesthat thegermanideasboreno 271 Nikula,Armas(Lindgren(1874E1929.p Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p.54.SchildtexplainsthatAaltowhilsthavingahistorical knowledgewasnotinterestedormotivatedbytheory,anobservationwell supportedbythosethatworkedwithhim.see:schildt,mature(years,(p.120. ( 76

94 attraction tolindgren, notevenlateron continuinginfaithfulnesstotheideas ofruskinandmorris. 273 Lindgren sownteachingmethods,thosegreatlyappreciatedbyaaltoappearto havesympathywiththeenglishsystem,lindgrentravelledtoenglandwhen appointeddirectoroftheschoolofappliedartsin Nikulawritesofhis experienceoftheenglishsystem admiringit'sfreedomfromunnecessary coursesandcurricula.trustwasplacedintheindependenceofstudentsand emphasisondrawingasthefoundationofallartisticwork. 275 LindgrenhadawiderinterestinRuskinthatincludedapersonalfascinationfor TheMiddleAgesandacommitmenttothepreservationandconservationof buildingsofantiquity. 276 Ruskin slegacyaslindgrenexperienceditfirsthandin Englandwas: There(gathered(around(Ruskin(a(group(of(artists,(the(PreERaphaelites,(and( soon(the(movement(spread(to(even(wider(circles.(largely(because(it(was(not( restricted(to(the(three(main(fields(of(art,(architecture,(painting(and( sculpture,(but(embraced(with(burning(passion(and(enthusiasm(the('applied( arts',(crafts,(home(arts.(the(most(commonplace(of(things,(the(simplest(of( household(articles,(were(through(their(form(and(decoration(to(express(the( search(for(truth,(simplicity(and(stability,(the(watch(word(for(the(movement(( E(all(false(splendor(and(easy(elegance(were(to(be(avoided.(Art(gives(even(the( most(ordinary(craftwork(a(new(interest,(prevents(spiritual(degeneration( and(makes(life(worth(living. 277 ( ( NikulawritesofthemiddleagesanditsimpactonLindgrenwas itswhole atmosphereandthemanydetailsaffectingit,itssynthesisofarchitectureand art,eachbuilding sindividualityandtheimportanceofthesocietythatbuiltit producedintheendforhimadeeplyunderstood,anallembracingworkof art. 278 SchildtwritesonlythatLindgren sinfluenceonaaltowasthroughlectureson theitalianrenaissancewithan admirationforbrunelleschi,alberti,palladioand Venetianarchitecture and contactwiththeorganicwayofthinkingofart 273 Nikula,Armas(Lindgren(1874E1929.p Nikula,Armas(Lindgren(1874E1929.p Ibid.p.148,Tecknikern287/December1902.p Ibid.p Ibid.p.148.Tecknikern287/December1902.p Ibid.p

95 NouveauarchitectsandthebesttraditionsofNationalRomanticism. 279 What makesschildttheperceivedauthorityonaaltowashisuniquepositionasfriend, hisdisciplineasahistorian,andafteraalto sdeaththefirsttohaveunfettered accesstoaalto sarchives.healsowasabletoaccessaalto speers,stillalive. Weston(1995)inhiscarefullyresearchedbookonAaltofinds littletobeknown aboutaalto seducationclaimingthatatitsfoundationwasa rigorousbeaux(arts influencedcurriculum. 280 Whatisfrustratingarethetermsgothic,classicism andtherenaissancearoundthedescriptionofaalto seducationandhis references,theyappeartoberolledintoone.whilstneitherlindgrenoraalto appearinterestedintheoryandtheirknowledgeofhistoricarchitectureis practical,itgoessomewaytoexplaintheirengagementandreferenceto historicalworksthatareadaptivetotheirownvaluesandideas.nikula s researchonlindgrenwaspublishedafterschildt sworkonaalto steachers.in personalcorrespondence,nikulanotesthedifficultysheexperiencesin researchingherbookonlindgren.personalrecordsoflindgren swere destroyedinahousefireof1926anduniversityrecordsinthebombingofthe universitylibraryin WegetaglimpseofRuskinfromanotherofAalto steachers,uskonyström. CharringtonandNava(2011)quoteNyström sreferencetoruskin s perfection ofimperfection ; Ifperfectionwerethegoalofourwork,thenthemachine wouldoftenperformbetterandfaster[but]thankstothesimpleturnofthe potterswheelthetraceofthehandshowsasinfinite,horizontalwaves.ahand thrownvaseisaliving,individualbeingwheretheideaandwillofthemaker becomesvisible. 282 CharringtonandNavaTitletheirbookAlvar(Aalto:( the(mark( of(the(hand (todescribetheindividualandpersonalnatureofaalto swork,whilst italsobringsaconnectioninthetexttheyquote:...thehandshowsasinfinite, horizontalwaves. Theconnectionbeingthat Aalto,inFinnish,means wave. 279 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.pps.123T Weston,Alvar(Aalto.p RiitaNikula,29T11T2016.Personalcorrespondence. 282 HarryCharrington,VezioNava,eds.Alvar(Aalto(the(Mark(of(the(Hand. Helsinki:Rakennustieto.2011.p.87.UskoNyström1911,citingRuskin'stheory ofimperfectionin'meitelmiäkauniista'inkotitaidevii,quotedinpeterreed, Aalto:BetweenHumanismandMaterialism,p

96 Goethe,RuskinandAalto. AuthorssuchasSamuelsandMeninrefertoGoetheasasourceofAalto sideas onarchitecture,yetlikeruskinthereislittledirectreferencetosupportthis fromaalto swriting. 283 CertainlyareadingofGoethe swritingsonarchitecture andartbringsrichcorrespondenceswithaalto,manyremainsurprisingly unexploredwhilstraisingquestionsastowhatruskinhimselfreadofgoethe andhisknowledgeofhiswritingsonarchitecture. RuskinsharesGoethe sinterestsonliterature,artandarchitecture,gothic architecture,geology,aloveofthemountains,studiesinclouds,poetryand literature.goethe spoeticinterpretationsofhisgermangothicbringrichnature, treeandmountainanalogiesthatweseeinruskinespecially,butalsoinaalto. 284 Ruskin,GoetheandAaltoshareastrongdisinclinationtoamachineanalogyand scientificmaterialism,theywerekeenintheirengagementofscience.miller writesinhisprefacetoareissueofgoethe smetamorphosis(of(plants(1790)that Goethebrings togetherscientificandpoeticsensibilities suggestinga combinationofthe romanticandscientific. 285 WeknowthatRuskindoesread Goethe smetamorphosis(of(plantsashecommentsonhis allisleaf idea,whilst healsoreads'wilhelm(meister'and'faust'ofwhichheiscritical,sayingthatthey had anevilinfluenceineuropeanliterature. 286 WhatMillerdoespointoutisGoethe s distinctiveempiricism,echoing Spinosa'sholisticvisionofrealityinhisconvictionthat spiritandmatter,soul andbody,thoughtandextension...arethenecessarytwiningredientsofthe universe,andwillforeverbe. 287 MillernotesthatGoethe wasalsoaninsightful studentofthehistoryofphilosophyofscienceandwrotemanyshortessayson whathesawthepitfallsandpromiseofmodernscientificpractice. 288 Ruskinand AaltoshareGoethe sideathat Everyartdemandsthewholeman,andthe 283 SarahMenin,FloraSamuel,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier.London: Routledge,2003.pps.32, JohnGage,ed.Goethe(on(Art.BerkeleyandLosAngeles:Universityof CaliforniaPress,1980.pps.113T JohannWolfgangvonGoethe,The(Metamorphosis(of(Plants.(Introduction(and( Photography(by(Gordon(L.(Miller.Cambridge,MA:MITPress,2009.preface. 286 Wildman.ProfessorWildmanprovidedthereferencetoRuskinonGoethe. (FrondesAgrestes,1875.) 287 Goethe,The(Metamorphosis(of(Plants.(Introduction(and(Photography(by(Gordon( L.(Miller.pps.xviiTxviii,GoethetoKarlLudwigvonKnebel(8August1812), quotedinludwiglewisohn,goethe:the(story(of(a(man,(vol.(2.(newyork:farrar, StraussandCo.1949.p Ibid.p.xvi. 79

97 higheststageofartcompletehumanity. 289 OriginsoftheEnglishPicturesqueinFinland. ThecoTcohabitantoftheEnglishfreearchitecturemovementwas,ashasbeen discussed,theenglisharchitecturalversionofthepicturesque.though numerouswritersidentifytheenglishpicturesqueinaalto spracticetheydonot exploreitssourceoroperationandoverlookakeyunderstanding. Landscape,environment,locus,isanessentialmemberofthe whole. Itiseasyto neglectthisinterdependencyinaalto sarchitecturethroughtohisfurnitureand lighting,yetfundamentaltothecomprehensionofhiswork.fromthebeginning, urbanplanningandarchitectureareintegralasdemonstratedinhisformative writingsparticularlyfollowinghisfirsttriptoitalyin Schildtinhis introductiontothearticle Painters(and(Masons writesthat theideaofabuilding asagesamtkunstwerk,atotalworkofartinwhicheverydetailissubordinateto theoverallarchitecture...wasadream,inheritedfromhisartnouveau predecessors. 291 Aalto s whole isinclusiveoftheenglishideasofthepicturesque.ithasahistory infinlandmuchearlierthanartnouveauthatmayexplainaalto sdeep connectiontoit.theenglishgardenitselfhasalonghistoryinfinland.a contemporaryexampleforaaltowashvitträsk,theimportantbuildingsand groundsoftheearliergenerationofarchitectsandmentorstoaalto,gisellius, LindgrenandSaarinen. 289 Gage,ed.,Goethe(on(Art.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.Seearticles; Architectureinthe landscapeofcentralfinland. 1925,p.21. UrbanCulture.1924.p.19. Temple BathsonJyväskyläRidge.1925.p Ibid.p

98 Fig.20.Hvitträsk,byGisellius,LindgrenandSaarinen(1902)intheEnglishArtsand Craftstraditionwithgarden. TimoTuomi sessayinmatkallaten(route(1999)providesuswithahistoryof theearliersourcesofthepicturesqueanditsrelationshiptourbanplanningand architecturefromthemiddleofthe19 th century.fromtuomi sresearch, GermanyandcentralEuropeareanearlyandindirectsourcefortheEnglish Picturesque,boththeoreticallyandpracticallywithcontemporaryandmedieval examplestostudy. 292 TherearedetailedaccountsoftwoFinnishtravelling architectsin1783/84,hisingerandråberghdescribingtheinfluenceofthe EnglishgardeninEuropeandtheirowninterestinit. 293 BothreturntoFinlandto buildgardens,hisingerworkedabeautifulandfamousgardenatfagervikinthe basicelementsoftheenglishpark.by1900gustafnyströmoversawthe introductionofplanningaspartofthearchitecturalcourse.awareofitsultimate 292 Timoetal.Tuomi,ed.,Matkalia(Soumalaiset(Arkkitehdit(Opintiellä,(Finnish( Architects'(Studies(Abroad,(En(RouteHelsinki:MuseumofFinnishArchitecture p Ibid.p.42T49. 81

99 significanceforawhole,tuomidescribesnyström sintroductionofthecourseof study UrbanPlansinrelationtoart as prophetic. 294 AaltoandtheEnglishPicturesque. WeseeashiftinAalto sworkonviipurilibrary(1927t35)theperiodofthis pivotalworkcompletelyoverlapsthepaimiotuberculosissanatorium(1928t 32).ApartfromtheprizeTwinningdesignforthelibraryafurtherthreesetsof drawingsaremade. 295 Fig.21.AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary(1927T35). 294 Ibid.p.80.PolytekniskaskolansiFinlandprogramförläseåret1900T1901, Hästesko,ed.Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.p

100 Withinthisredrawingprocess,whichincludesthereTsittingofthelibrarybythe cityauthorities,thereisaprofoundmaturationinaalto spractice.weseenot onlyhismovetotheengagement,asotcalledrationalistidiomdevelopedbyle CorbusierandhisEuropeancounterparts,butalsohisuseofnature/landscape metaphors. Fig.22.ViipuriLibrary,approachfromwithinthepark. Aaltoconceiveshisrooflights,usingnaturallighttoilluminatethereadinghall withhis manysuns,andamountainmetaphorforthevisualizingthe form/structureofthebuilding. 296 Nature,andlandscapeasametaphorfor architecture,bothwithrichsocialandculturalmeaningsmovefromearlier thinkingandwritingintoareality.weseetheideasinhiswritinginhis formativeperiodbuthispracticeadheredprimarytoneotclassicalformas Schildtpointsouttill Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p.108.The(Trout(and(the(Stream. Domus/Arkkitehti,1948.pps.7T Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p

101 Fig s.23,24. ViipuriLibrary s manysuns. Theskylightsappearmuchlargerinreality withabeautiful,shiftinglucentpresence. 84

102 Fig.25. Canopyceilingofthelecturehallwithcanopyoffoliage,outsideTinside outside. Aalto suseofthearticulatedceiling,thoughoriginal,hascontemporary originsasshowninacomparativeexampleofnil seriksson sgöteborg Konserthus(1935)ofthesameperiod.ItisalsoevidentinAalto searlier timbercladbandstandof1922andinterestinglyitisalsofoundina restaurantinteriorof1934,wronglyattributedtoaaltobyschild. 298 With thelibraryaaltohassimplyextendedthearticulatedrearwalltocover theceilingtoperformthesamefunction.gideonwasnotalonein deemingtheceiling irrational. Itistherichrelationshipsbetweeninside andoutsidethataaltocreateswithrootsinfunctionthatmaketheceiling inthiscasesomethingofbeauty. 298 Hästesko,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.pps.29,30.Seealso;GöranSchildt, The(Decisive(Years,trans.TimothyBingham.NewYork:Rizzoli.1986.p.218. StritzlerTLevine,Riekko,eds.Artek(and(the(Aalto's:(Creating(a(Modern(World.p

103 Fig.26. AlvarAalto,drawingforacousticceilingViipuriLibrary. Fig.27.RearwalltoNil seriksson sgöteborgkonserthus(1935). 86

104 Fig.28.RearwalltoAalto sviipurilibrarylecturehall(1935). Fig.29. ViipurilibrarymaindoorswiththefeelofRussianconstructivistalso relatestoencirclingtreesandbranches. 87

105 ThenameOttoTIMeurmansurfaceswhenreadingonthedevelopmentofthe ViipuriLibrarydesign.Hisnameappearsinafootnotewhereheisdescribedas afriendofalvaraalto, andinanothertextasa defender. 299 Meurmanwasthe towntplanningarchitectinviipurifrom1918t1937coveringthelibrary sgenesis toitscompletion. 300 FromtheessayEnnobling(BeautybyPekkaSuhonen(1980) wefindanarchitect/planneralsosteepedintheideasofthepicturesque graduatingadecadeearlierthanaalto. 301 WediscoverthatMeurmanandAalto sharealoveofthepicturesque, arrangementofbuildings, buildingsboundto thesoil therelationshipof buildingstreesandvistas andvillagesrootedinthe soil. 302 Fig.30.AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibraryfrontentranceaftercompletion VezioNava,HarryCharrington,ed.Alvar(Aalto(the(Mark(of(the(Hand.Helsinki: Rakennustieto.2011.p.181.Seealso,Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p KirmoMikkola,ed.,Genius(Loci:(OttoEI.(Meurman(90EVuotisjuhlarkirja(=(in( Commemoration(of(the(90th(Birthday(of(OttoEI(Muerman:( Jyväskylä: RakennuskirjaOy.1980.p Ibid.p Ibid.Rakennustaito, Country(Yards(and(the(Arrangement(of(Buildings.1916.p

106 AccordingtoJaakkoSuihkonen,AaltohadtoldhimitwasMörri's(Meurman s) decisiontoallowthelibrarytobebuiltinthepark. 303 Aaltofinallypositionsthe libraryamongstandupagainsttheexistingparktrees,asseeninphotographsat thetime. Fig.31. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary(1936)aerialviewatthetimeof completion. Thelibrarybuildinghasnumerousrailings/trellisesbuiltintothefaçadefor climbingplants,anideathathasbeenidentifiedbyquantrilaswasusedby Aalto smentorslindgren,geselliusandsaarinenintheirnationalmuseumof MeurmanworkedforSaarinenasanassistantatHvitträskfrom1914T 1915.PhotographsofHvitträskinthe1910 sshowmostofitslowerfacadesare coveredwithcreepers,ittakesusbacktotheformandideasofmorris s influentialredhouseof1859t ThereisnothingtosuggestMeurman s influenceonaalto,stillmeurman ssynergyonthepositioningofthebuilding,its site,isagifttoaalto sdevelopment. Aalto spositioningoftheviipuribuildingwithinanexistingcanopyoftreeswas notisolated;theuntbuiltjyvaskylauniversitylibraryproposalof1968would 303 HarryCharrington,ed.Alvar(Aalto(the(Mark(of(the(Hand.p Quanrill,Alvar(Aalto;(a(Critical(Study.p.17.Seealso; 305 JouniMarjamäki,HvitträskHelsinki:NationalBoardofAntiquities,2013.pps. 63T70.Seealso;Quanrill,Alvar(Aalto;(a(Critical(Study.p

107 havebeen barelyvisible. 306 Sadly,intherecentrestorationoftheViipuri Library,asshowninFig.32thetreesclosesttothebuildinghavebeenremoved andnowlackstherelationshipaaltogaveittosite,thoughthelibrarystill maintainsabeautifulgroundedquality. Fig.32. AlvarAalto,ViipuriLibrary.Currentphotographafterrestoration. WhyhaveconnectionsbetweenAaltoandRuskinbeen overlooked? Giventhereadingbykeyhistoriansarewithteleological,Darwinianviewsof history,oneobviousansweristhatnooneislookingforanepistemologicalfitto 306 HarryCharrington,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(the(Mark(of(the(Hand.p

108 Ruskin,insteadconsumedwiththeproblemofgenuinelylocatingAaltoina rationalist/materialistparadigm.whythenthelackofinvestigationastothe anomalywhenthesemenarekeyfiguresinmodernisthistorywithsignslinking AaltotoRuskin?IfwebelievePorphyrious(1982),uptothattimeAaltowasnot onlyananomalybutalsothesubjectofaclosedunderstanding.hewrites; ReceivedopinionhasitthatAaltowassohumanelysimpleandstraightforward, soantitintellectualandsopracticalamanthattoembarkonananalysisofhis workwouldbemisguidedacademicpedantryofahairtsplittingmiser. 307 This givesriseinporphyrious sviewthat nolinkhaseverbeenfelteithertobe missingortoneedexplication. 308 Ofthekeytextscoveringthehistoryofmodernistarchitecture,Pevsner(1936), Giedeon(1941)andBanham(1962),bothBanhamandPevsnerdonotmention Aalto.Banham stheory(and(design(in(the(first(machine(age;giventhathe pursuesaphilosophicalmachineviewasnormative,istruetohiscausein excludingaalto. GiedeonmetAaltoasearlyas1929andwouldhavebeenfamiliarwithhiswork butexcludeshiminhisinitialstrictrationalistpublicationoftime,(space(and( Architecture((1941). 309 Inareversaleightyearslater,Giedeontakesupmanyof Aalto sideaschampioninghiminthesecondeditionofthebookin1949.pevsner providesuswithwhatcouldonlybedescribedasadarwinian,teleological readingofaphilosophicalmachineview,fromgropiusingermanybackto Morris.HeunhitchesRuskininhisteleologyandgivesPuginmuchofthecredit, normallyattributedtoruskin.pevsnerwriteshishistoryofmodernismfromhis newlyadoptedhomeinenglandandseesnodisconnectionfromthebauhaus, GropiusandbacktoMorris.Aaltohimselfsignalsaphilosophicaldisconnection withgropiusatthebauhausinhisdeferencetovandevelde. 310 VandeVelde precededgropiusattheweimarartschool,lateramalgamatedandrenamed Bauhaus.Pevsnerisnotaloneinmakinghis GropiustoMorris completecircle, ithasbecomethegenerallyacceptedhistory. 311 Hewrites; Morrislaidthe foundationofthemodernstyle;withgropiusits characterwasultimately determined. 312 IfHeskittandBanhamarecorrect,Gropiustransitstoa philosophicalmachineviewmixingitwithplatonicidealism DemetriPorphyrious,The(Sources(of(Modern(EclecticismLondon:Academy editions.1982.p.vii. 308 Ibid. 309 Hästesko,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(What(and(When.p Pevsner,Pioneers(of(Modern(Design.p.37.VandeVeldeheredefendsafree architectureasopposedtoacanonicalone. 311 Ibid.p Ibid.p JohnHeskett,Industrial(Design.(London:ThamesandHudson.1980.pps.101T

109 OtherreasonsgivenforAalto sexclusionincludeearlyhistoricalreadingsof ModernismasgeographicallyspecificandAalto slocationinfinlandasoutside it.neitheraaltonorhisnordiccontemporariesorforebearsfigureintheeurot centeredmix.still,aaltoisprominentinhisattendanceatciammeetingsand exhibitionsofhisworkoutsidefinland.moreoveritispossiblethataaltowas notseenasaprogenitorofthemodernistmovementinarchitecture,perse,but ratherofferedbothacritiqueandarevaluationofit. 314 MakingaconnectionbetweenAaltoandRuskinisnotculturallypopular; CharringtontoldmethatFinnsdistancedthemselvesfromanassociationwith England.ThisissupportedbySuominenTKokkonenwhonotesthattheFinns wereparticularlydrivenbyaspirationstothesophisticationofeurope. 315 The chosentravelroutesbyfinnisharchitectsupuntilaalto stimeupholdsthis observation.armaslindgren,wivilönnandafewotherswereexceptions includingaalto sfriendandmentorgustafstrengelwhoworkedbrieflyinthe officeofcharlesharrisontownsendinlondon. 316 Aaltohimselfgivesusatellinginsightinhisarticleof1926 FromDoorstepTo LivingRoom (where(hewrites TheBritishpsycheisforeigntousanddoesnot readilytakerootinoursoil. 317 NeverthelessAaltogivestheBritishcreditforthe outside inside,arelationshipbetweennatureandbuilding,interiorand exterior.whataaltoisreferringtoisanelementoftheenglishversionofthe Picturesque.IthasanearlyhistoryinFinlandasdiscussedpreviously,some aspectsofitarenaturalisedbyaalto stime.giventhatitbecamefundamentalto Aalto sfuturework,heiskeentolimitorqualifyanyassociationshere. IndrawinganyconnectionsinAalto sworkwithruskinwearefacedwith Aalto sownattitudeinacknowledginginfluencesinhiswork,hencethedifficulty infindinganyrecordofthem.asschildtdiscoverswhenquestioningaaltoabout detailsofhispractice,hisresponsewasasschildtwrites, helikedtoquote Nietzsche: Onlymenofthepastlookback Hewasmanifestlyirritatedifanyone triedtosoundhimondetailsofhispastlifeorrootuptheoriginsofhis buildings. Itsenoughthattheyexist washisopinion. 318 Schildtdidtryto recordconversationswithaaltofollowinganinvitationtowritea spiritual 314 Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p.43.SeeNilsTEricWickberg sdescriptionofaalto scontext. 315 Charrington.Seealso:Tuomi,ed.,Matkalia(Soumalaiset(Arkkitehdit(Opintiellä,( Finnish(Architects'(Studies(Abroad,(En(Routep Ibid.p.111.Seealso:Sarje,Kimmo. Gustaf(Stringell(and(Nordic(Modernism. (2008), 317 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.pps.17T20. 92

110 legacy. SchildtconfessesthatAaltoliterallyplayswithhim. 319 Itisnaturalto thinkthattheraw,visualandideationalreferencesaaltousesareindivisible,but inaalto sbeliefandusetheyareclearlyopentosynthesis.his authorityofthe ancients demonstrateshisdeferencetothepastforitswisdomandmeaning,he inturnengagesthatauthoritywithsynthesisandinventiontospeakintothe present. BeautyforAaltoisatthecoreofhisaspirationforarchitecture,itisphenomena hewritesoffalling outsidethelightofscience, thoughdeeplyappreciable. 320 Aaltoisspeakingaboutthedifferencebetweenreadinganddoing;it sthedoing heisinterestedinasa matteroftheheart.foraaltothestudyofthe phenomenainarchitecturecanonlyhaveanindirectfunction,thesubjectof scientists withahistorian'soraregistrar'sambition.thusweseehis frustrationtowardarchitecturaljournalism,viewingitasposthocjustification. ForAaltoitdidnotdealwiththeactualfecundprocessofsynthesis,the complexitythattakesplaceintheheartoftheartistatthetime. 321 Aaltotreats architecturaljournalismandattemptsdescribehisworkaslargelyspeculative activity,evenmeaningless.acknowledgementoftheexistenceofhismilieuwas enough, foraalto,theworkitselfwastobereadforwhatitwas,theartisticand inventivenatureofitwhetheritwas goodarchitectureornot. 322 SchildtiscarefultopointouttheperceivedparadoxofAalto swork,andits relationtodarwinianmodernism,that Aaltowastothehighestdegreeawareof traditionandhistoricallyorientated,butwhatinterestedhiminhistorywasthe possibilityoftransformingitintosomethingnew. 323 Theperceivedparadox existsasaresultoftheteleologicalreadingsofhistoryinsituatingaalto,making itallthemoreimportantthatanhonest,nontprejudicialreadingofthemilieuof RuskinandAaltobeexploredtobetterunderstandAalto. NarrativespresentinAalto searlywritings. Aalto sreferenceforhisabbé(coignard s(sermonisanatolefrance snovelof 1893,firstpublishedinEnglishin1910underthetitleThe(Queen(Pedauque.(The 319 Ibid Schildt,AlvarAaltoinhisownwords.p Ibid. 322 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p Ibid.p

111 centralcharacterinthenoveltowhomaaltowasclearlyendearedisabbé Coignard.AnatoleFranceuseshisAbbécharacterasameansofexploringhis ownoutlookonlife.schildtwritesthatthebooksthatweredeartoaalto,he foundhimselfpersonallyidentifyingwiththecharacters: 324 Aalto(had(a(very(personal(relationship(with(the(writers(he(took(an(interest( in;(their(books(might(lie(on(the(table(for(years,(some(of(them(read(until(they( literally(fell(apart(and(to(all(of(them(he(took(a(critical,(discursive(attitude. 325 Aaltohimselfwrites; Youlivedwithandtookastandforthecharacterofthe books,thisgivesusaninsighttothetheatrical,evencomicalnatureofaaltoas elementsofhischaractersspilloverinhissocialconductandexpressionwitha layeringthatiscomplex. 326 WecomebacktothehuskandtheseedofAalto s thinkingandbehavior,hisefforttoclotheandprotecthisinner,sensitivenature, evenhisown littleman, asthereismuchtosuggestthatthe littleman starts withhisownself. 327 Whilstanentertainingnovel,fullofirony,AnatoleFrance stextisdeeply theological,partmoral,partsociological,partpolity,partaesthetic,parthistory. IfAaltofollowsanyofthetheologicaldiscoursesinthetexttheywouldprovide himwithasubstantialbackgroundthatmaypartiallyexplainhisbiblical borrowings.franceraisessomeverypertinentissuessurroundingideasand practicesinthechurchinrelationtothescriptures,forwhichheappearstohave adeepandgenuineinterest. FromAalto stwoearlytexts,thehill(town(1924)and(abbé(coignard s(sermon( (1925),wehavetheideasof play,the risingtown, the cityofhills the cityon thehill,the elevatedcity,andthebuiltenvironmentinrelationtolandscape. 328 TheycometogetherlaterinAalto spracticewithhismetaphorofthe imaginary mountain asastartingpointforthedevelopmentofhisbuildings. 329 Notonlyis the cityonthehill abiblicalanalogy,aalto sdevelopmentoftheideahasdirect 324 Lahti,Ex(Intimo.p.16T17.Hamilkarisquotedassayingthathisfatherlikedto readbooksaboutpeoplethatwerealittlelikehimself. 325 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p Ibid.p Ibid.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version.Glasgow:WilliamCollinsSons& Co.Matt.5:14Yearethelightoftheworld.Acitythatissetonahillcannotbe hid.markhewitt,'theimaginarymountain:thesignificanceofcontourinalvar Aalto'sSketches.'Perspecta Hewitt sarticlefailstodrawanassociation withruskin sdirective gotothehills. 94

112 correspondencewithruskin shill/mountainanalogy/metaphorforarchitecture coveredinchapter4. Aalto sabbé(coignard s(sermonlecturefloatsbetween,ashequotesa Rousseauian ideaofachildlike, natural approachto beauty,withoutculture, and spontaneouswork,versesa calculatedwork. FromthetextAaltoalso drawsahobbesianideaofculture/architectureas salvation / atoning grace,an architectureofmoralauthority.aaltoquotesfrance: What(makes(us(joyful(in(seeing(the(town(must(be(something(other(than(its( quarrelsome(and(ungracious(inhabitants.(my(son,(here(is(something(that(has( come(down(from(above,(which(atones(for(the(imperfections(of(the( inhabitants.(god(has(laid(down(something(which(people(do(not(have(the( intelligence(to(seek. 330 (( ( The Sermon lecturehascomplex,mixedthemesnoteasilygrasped,butas Schildtwrites thatitclearlyexpressesaveryfundamentalandpersonalaspect ofhisoutlook. 331 IntheThe(Queen(PedauquetextthatAaltoreferences,Franceclearlyplacesmoral authorityinthescripturesdescribingitascontrarytothenatureofman, inhuman andtherefore divine. France s cityasadivineinstitution isboththe inhabitant sacceptanceofdivinemoralorderandthesubsequentreflectionofit inthebuiltenvironment.wehaveareadingofruskin,hisstones(of(venice. TheotherthemesofAalto s1924and1925textsarebeautyas joy,the joyof creation andthe joyofwork. WehaveaconnectionherewithRuskin s beauty; A(Joy(Forever(wherehewrites: (.(my(whole(professorship(would(be(accomplished, and(far(more(than( that, if(only(the(english(nation(could(be(made(to(understand(that(the(beauty( which(is(indeed(to(be(a(joy(for(ever,(must(be(a(joy(for(all. 332 ( Abbé(Coignard s(sermon(isbothparaphrasedandembroideredbyaalto,the natureoftheembroideryismostinteresting;whataaltosaysthattheabbédoes 330 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p JohnRuskin,Joy(Forever.EditededitionbyE.T.CookandAlexander Wedderburn.London:GeorgeAllen,1905;reprint,LibraryEditionVolumeXVI. p.xxiii. 95

113 notsaynorimply.theunderlyingthemeoffrance stextisacommentonthe notedfrenchcatholictheologianofthelate1600 s,m.bossuet,whosethesisthe divinerightofkingstoruleandthedivinenatureofgovernmentarewellknown. Francedrawsuponthethesistosuggesthisown:theCette(villeElà (est(une( institution(divine, The(city(as(a(divine(institution.ThoughAaltodoesnotdirectly makeaclaimforarchitectureandthebuiltenvironmentasa divineinstitution, he,byallappearancestreatsitasone.itispartofacreaturalview.aalto s interestinanatolefrance stextmayhavebeenencouragedbyhisfriendship withgustafstrengelandhisbookkaupunki(taideluomana,the(city(as(a(work(of( Art((1923). 333 Aalto sbeliefsandhowdoesheavoidaphilosophical machineview? Aaltoraisesthequestionofacreationversesanevolutionaryviewofnature. 334 HoweverasSchildtremarks,Aaltodoesnotanswerhisownquestionbutshiftsit tothepracticeofarchitecture,anevolutionaryversesacreationview.aalto affirmsthatarchitecture(asamanmadeextensionofnature)isacreative process,nota biological orevolutionaryone.asdiscussedearlieraaltodoesnot holdtoadarwinianviewsonarchitecture,norvaluesinanysense,contraryto thefuturistsandtheirmanifestos,whoseideasaccordingtobanhamhavebeen pursuedinmodernarchitecturetothepresent. 335 WhilstSchildtdescribes Aalto sphilosophyasanarchisticheclearlyinfersthataaltoheldtheviewthat inventioninarchitectureisdivinelyinspired. 336 ThisisaffirmedintheAbbé( Coignard s(sermonlecture. 337 Schildtsanarchisticcommentappearsconfusing, forwhilstaaltoiscomplexanddeliberatelyevasive,hisarchitectureis beguilinglysensitive,simpleandcomplex,aboveallcohesive.schildthastrouble incontainingaalto,bothtounderstandhimwithinhisownpersonalworldview, andtofirmlyplaceaaltoasamodernist. Aalto slutheranbackgroundisparticulartohisnationandculture;italso reflectsacertaininterfacewiththeancientfinnishtraditions.theancient traditionsdonotnecessarilycorruptthechristiantraditionrathertheymay cultivateanemphasisinthetradition.thisisseeninthe adaptive natureofthe ChristiantraditionobservedbothbyRuskinandAuerbach.Bradley(2003) 333 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.pps.157T158.SAFAarchives ReynerBanham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.London: ArchitecturalPress,1962.pps.99T Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.pps.56T57. 96

114 writesonthecelticinfluenceonearlyandlaterenglishchristianity,especially hownaturewasviewed,anditssubsequentspreadintoeurope.bradleynotes thisinfluencepassesthroughtotheliteraryandpoeticworkofgeorgeherbert 1593T HerbertweknowisaspiritualfathertoRuskin,indeedhe describesherbert swritingsamongstotherthingsas astandardofthepurest unsectarianchristianity. Ruskin schoiceofherbertprovidesuswithdeep insighttohisbeliefsandthedevelopmentofthem,hispositiontheologicallyand hisattitudetonature. 339 InAalto scasethefinnishepicandliterarywork,the KareliaandtheFinnoTUgrictraditionsoftheFinnishpeoplebringaunique emphasistoorthodoxandlutheran,christiantraditionsonhownatureis viewed. 340 IhavebrieflynotedtheseearlierintheChapterwithAalto s comparisonbetweenhomer silliadandthefinnishliteraryepicthekarelia. WithboththeEnglishandFinnishtraditionsweseeadeepfeelingfornature beingexpressedintheirchristiantraditions,facilitatingdeepermeaningand appreciationtotheworkofgodinhiscreation. Aalto s complete relationship,his totalwork. Thereisa complete relationshipbetweenaalto sinterestsinplanning,hisideas onnatureanditsrelationshipwitharchitecturethatincludesthematerial, technical,social,culturalandspiritual.inaalto s complete work,theidentities inaworkareliving/vitalinrelationship,inacomplexitythatisconscious.notas staticparts,cogsinamechanisticrelational,functionalsystemgiventhe paradigmofscientificrationalismasareductive,empirical,binaryand determinativeapproach.lookingattheproblemfromadifferingperspective CharringtonandNavaputitsuccinctlyfromanobserversview: Concentrating(on(received(images(rather(than(enquiring(into(the(wisdom( displayed(in(the(realization(of(the(architectural(work,(the(spectator(is(left( with(one(of(the(enduring(contradictions(of(modern(architectural(history;(a( failure(to(learn(from(what(we(admire. 341 (( ( 338 IanBradley,The(Celtic(Way.London:Darton,LongmanandTodd.2003.p Ruskin,Praeterita.pps.304, Quanrill,Alvar(Aalto;(a(Critical(Study.p HarryCharrington,ed.,Alvar(Aalto(the(Mark(of(the(Hand.p.12 97

115 CharringtonandNava sobservationgoesbacktotheheartofaalto searlier expositionofbeautythatcanbesimplyexpressedas;lookathowi mlooking, thenlookattheresultsofmylooking.lookingathowaaltoislookingbrings together howwithwhat. Charrington s wisdom speaksofanembodied experience,inacreaturalviewitis wisdomofheart, awholeexperienceofthe humancondition. InAalto suseofa biologicalcells analogy,thecellsarein relationship, they speaktooneanother,theyare consciousofthewhole. Thereisadispositionina creaturalviewtoappreciateandvalueratherthancontrolandmaster. AronofskyTWeltman(2007)quotesSawyer(1985)onRuskin; Hedefinesscience asanexerciseinwonderatnatureratherthancontrolovernature.ruskin rejectedthoseaspectsofvictorianscienceandtechnologythatweretiedto aggression,toimperialism,tocontrol,tomasteryovernature,togreedthat wouldresultinbadstewardship InattemptingtoreTaddressthewhole,theinfluentialtheoristandarchitect RobertVenturidescribeshimselfinbinarytermsasa both/and architect;he says Iprefer, ratherthan either/or. 343 ByimplicationhealsodescribesAaltoas a both/and architect,asthisishowquantrilinhisreadingofventuridescribes Aalto. 344 Onthefaceofit,Venturi sargumentinattemptingtoreaddressthe whole isconvincing,yetinreadinghisbookcomplexity(and(contradiction(in( Architecture(1966)itdoesnottally. Venturiusesamodified,binaryview,a both/and combination.itispluralism,a simplecombinationofstylesratheridentifyinghisproblemastheneedfora wholeparadigmshift.heappearstohavenoconceptionofaalto s whole atall. Thoughbotharticulateandinfluentialinhiscritiqueofmodernarchitecture,his ownarchitecturetogetherwithhisargumentappearslargelypastiche.itbrings usbacktocolquhounandhisdescriptionofthecurrent,circularparadigmas inescapablymodern SharonAronofskyTWeltman,Performing(the(Victorian:(John(Ruskin(and( Identity(in(Theatre,(Science(and(Education.(Columbus:IhioStateUniversityPress, 2007.p.43.PaulL.Sawyer,Ruskin's(poetic(argument:(the(design(of(the(major( works.cornelluniversitypress,1985.p RobertVenturi,Complexity(and(Contradiction(in(Architecture.NewYork: MuseumofModernArt.1966,1977.p Quanrill,Alvar(Aalto;(a(Critical(Study.p AlanColquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.CambridgeM.A:The MITPress,1989.p.ix. 98

116 AaltoandvandeVelde. Aaltohadmanyassociationswithhisinternationalcolleagues,particularlyasa resultofhisattendancesattheinternationalarchitectureconferencesofthe CIAM.OnerelationshipofinterestiswiththeinfluentialBelgiumarchitect, designerandeducatorhenrivandevelde.vandeveldeisknownasanart NouveauorJugendstil(Modernornewstyle)architectdrawingfromthe teachingsofruskin,morrisandtheenglishfreearchitecturemovement. 346 Asa keyearlymodernist,bothasapractitionerandeducator,vandeveldeargues amonghisgermancolleaguesforthearchitectasartistinthetraditionofruskin andmorris,versesthegrowingideaofarchitectureasasciencewithideasof standardizationforamachineart. 347 ThoughAaltodoesnotengageuswiththe ideaofarchitectasartist,hisapproachisinclusive.heengageswith standardizationanddoessowiththepossibilityofnontstandard,original outcomesusingnatureashismodel. 348 VandeVeld sworksharesmuchwiththe FinnishJugendstilarchitectsofAalto sformergenerationthatinspiredhim.van develdeandothercontinentalarchitectsofthejugenstilperiod,respondingto Ruskin saversiontothestraightline,usethe wave orwaveformstoexpress artisticvolitionandmovement inawork. 349 Teyssot(2013)quotesthepoet RilkecommentingonvandeVelde sfurniture,usingthewaveasametaphorto describeit.wellenstil(wavestyle)wasatermalsousedtodescribethenew movement. 350 Mawbydrawsalinkbetweenthename Aalto asmentioned earlierinfinnishmeans wave andaalto suseofline,hiswaveline. 351 This MawbycoupleswiththenameRuskingavetohisboat JumpingJenny (bywhich RuskinmeansGenevieve, whitewave )thoughthereisadeeperconnectionto bemade. 346 Pevsner,Pioneers(of(Modern(Design.p.27,VandeVelde,Henri.(Die( Renaissance(in(Modernen(Kunstgewerbe,Berlin,1901,p Ibid.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p.165.Aaltousestheanalogyof cell and organism toarguefora richcombinatorialpotential. 349 GeorgesTeyssot,A(Typology(of(Everyday(Constellations.CambridgeMA:MIT Press,2013.p Ibid.p Mawby,'TheLampofObedience:JohnRuskin,AlvarAalto,anda'Proper Sense'ofFreedom. pps.61,62. 99

117 Fig.33.Ruskin sboatatconiston, JumpingJenny (whitewave.) LengarguesthatRuskin stext,the OriginofWood writtenshortlyafterthe publicationofdarwin sorigin(of(speciesisacovertattackonit.inhis preparationtowriteonthe OriginofWood Ruskinnotes:...(two(questions(occurred(in(the(outset,(one(in(the(section(on(vegetation,( respecting(the(origin(of(wood;(the(other(in(the(section(on(sea,(respecting( curves(of(waves;(to(neither(of(which,(from(botanist(or(mathematicians,(any( sufficient(answer(seemed(obtainable. 352 ( ThecurvedlineforbothRuskinandAaltobecomesbothadefenseagainst scientificmaterialism,andempiricismandasymbolofnatureandthedivine.as complexsystems,wavesandturbulencestilleluderuskin s mathematicians,any sufficientanswer hencethemorerecentdevelopmentinscienceofchaos Theory.BothRuskinandAaltofeelsafeintherefugeofcomplexityandthe profoundasaaltowrites: 352 JohnRuskin.Moden(Painters(Volume(5((of(5).PlacePublished:Project Guttenberg,2013.Prefacep

118 In(recent(decades,(architecture(is(characterized(by(an(exaggerated(worship( of(theory,(an(attitude(that(reflects(the(human(predicament(and(insecurity. We(think(that(in(it(we(can(find(salvation(from(the(threat(of(chaos. 353 GivenAalto sline unknowntomathematicians andhiswordstogropiusin 1930concerninghismissionto'makebuildingsforpeopleintowhoseheadsthe organicline willnotfitforanother100years'iscannygiventheabove context. 354 Mikkolaisnotaloneincomparingthecertaintyofdogmain describingaalto sworkasrelatingtothe originaltraditionofanarchy,as representedbythespiritualfathersofmodernarchitectureandcraftstruskin andmorris GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto,(the(Mature(Years.Trans.TimothyBinham.New York:RizzoliInternationalPublications.1991.p MeninandSamuel,Nature(and(Space:(Aalto(and(Le(Corbusier.p.55,Schildt, Decisive(years,p.6.Citedletter,AaltotoGropius.Autumn Mikkola,ed.,Genius(Loci:(OttoEI.(Meurman(90EVuotisjuhlarkirja(=(in( Commemoration(of(the(90th(Birthday(of(OttoEI(Muerman:( p

119 Chapter4. In(matters(of(taste(my(father(was(influential,(his(penchant(for(Epicure(cheese( became(my(own,(though(at(the(time(neither(of(us(were(epicurean.( Fig.34.LakeCowan.Leaf/Cutleryincupronickelandstainlesssteel. Studioworks. 102

120 Theobjectiveofthestudiocomponentoftheresearchistodesignanddevelopa seriesofinventivepiecesoffurnitureandtableware,proposalsforuseina contemporaryaustraliandomesticinterior.theproductsaretobesensitiveto nature,placeandenvironment,suitableforhightend,lowtvolumeindustrial productionthatconsidersorengagesphilosophicallya creatural oracreated viewofnatureandman,exploringwhatthatmightlooklikeinacontemporary context.thisincontrasttocurrentmachineandmaterialismbasedphilosophical approachestonature,designandproduction. 356 Fig.35. Surroundingvegetation,LakeCowan,Norseman. 356 StuartWalker,Design(for(Life:(Creating(Meaning(in(a(Distracted(World. London:Routledge.2017.Anumberoftheideascoveredinthisthesiswere presentedinalecturebywalkerattheaustraliannationaluniversityschoolof ArtandDesign13/10/2016andarethesubjectofhisforthcomingbook.Muchof hisworkappearssuppositional,andsomeoftheideasappearruskinianand deliberatelyunreferencedbutnonetthetlessinterestingasitrelatestothethesis. 103

121 MystudioresearchengagestheideasandworksofimportantprogenitorsJohn RuskinandAlvarAaltointroducedinthepreviouschaptersinatriangulated, dialectalapproach,adiscourse,aconversationandsynthesisinthedevelopment ofthesestudioworks.thechoiceofbothruskinandaaltoisfortheiradvocacy oruseofachristiancreaturalanalogyfordesignasopposedtoamachine analogy. 357 Motivationfortheresearchisbothtounderstandmypositionand practicewithinthecurrentparadigm,inwhatisachallengingcontemporary context.fordifferentreasons,thoughfortuitous,alancolquhouninhisexcellent critiqueofposttmodernarchitectureanddesignquietlyasksthequestionasto whetherachristianconceptionofdesignorvisualsystem,mightbeworthyof study. 358 Colquhoun sinterestisinlightofcontemporaryproblemsheraisesin philosophicalapproaches,of multipleparadoxes and rampantpluralism.inhis musingshementionsinparticulartheworkofthephilologisterichauerbach andhisanalysisofearlychristianliteratureasworthyofinterestfora comparisonintheoutworkingofphilosophicalapproaches.colquhounnotesa Christianvisualsystemforitslackoftheuseofstyle,itsrealism,itsabilityto adapt,itsfocusonnatureanditsengagementwithlocaltraditions. 359 Thischaptercoversthephilosophical,conceptual,aestheticandtechnical developmentofthese conversational worksascontemporaryproposals addressingtheoutcomesoftheresearch. Context. Currentapproachestodesignandproductiontypicallyinvolveaphilosophical viewthatismachinebasedorisgroundedinamachineanalogyasdiscussed.i arguethatalthoughcontemporaryculture,looselyidentifiedasposttmodern, evenlatermodern,is,asauthorssuchascolquhounandfullerargue,essentially onebasedonamachine/materialistanalogy. 360 Attemptstocreatea philosophicalspaceapartfromamachineanalogybycontemporary phenomenologyforexampleoranengagementofpaststylisticmodelsappearto fail;ascolquhounnotestheyarestill unmistakably and inescapably 357 Note:WhilstRuskinisclearinhisexpositionofaChristiancreaturalview, Aalto screaturalviewisnotclearlydefined.whilstitispartofhislutheran upbringingandcultureitisundertension,itispossiblytiedupinaconglomerate ofseparateideasthatmayultimatelybecalledpantheistic.whatisclearisthat Aaltorejectsaphilosophicalmachineormaterialistview. 358 AlanColquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.CambridgeM.A:The MITPress Ibid.p M.WheelerandN.Whiteley,eds.The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.1992.p

122 modern. 361 TheimplicationsofColquhoun sobservationsarethatcurrent philosophicalapproachesproducelargelycircularizedoutcomesfor practitionerswithoutthemfullyunderstandingwhyitisso. IfwebegintoreadAaltoashavingacreaturalview,oratleastexhibitingthe characteristicsofone,thenwehaveacontinuityofideasandamanifestationof themfromruskinintothemodernperiodroughlycovering1830t1960.one wouldexpectthatifaaltoexhibitssignificantcharacteristicsfoundinacreatural view,incontrasttohispeerswhopursuedamachineanalogy,wewouldexpect toseecleardifferencesintheirworkandwriting.themostrepresentativeof Aalto speerswouldbelecorbusier,botharchitectshaveleftalegacyofan ideologicaldivide,moreimportantly,isthenatureoftheideologicaldivide understood? 362 ByengagingtheworksandideasofRuskinandAaltointhestudioresearchI proposetoexplorethepathofreconcilingtheuseoftheliteralmachinetoa creaturalview,believingthatasaaltoshowed,acreaturalviewcaneffectthe employmentoftheliteralmachine.ifcolquhoun sanalysisofachristianvisual systemiscorrect,thenitsflexibility,itsrealism,itsfocusonnatureand engagementwithlocaltraditions,wouldnotprecludeitfromengagingtheliteral machine. 363 Onthecontrary,onewouldexpectittohaveamoremeasuredand sensitiveuseoftheliteralmachine,incontrasttothemakingthemachineanend initself.ifwetakeruskin sviewthattheuseofhandworkisameanstoexplore ourverynature,aswellasthenaturalworldaroundus,bycouplingwehavethe potentialtoengageaspacethatisuntmachinetlikewiththeliteraluseofthe machine.asignificantpartofruskin sbattlewiththeliteralmachineashesawit inthe19 th centurywasitscouplingwithaphilosophicalmachineview,andits enslavementofmaninallitsforms,socially,aesthetically,physicallyand ultimatelyphilosophically.thequestionishowdoweengagetheliteralmachine withasofttouchofhandandheart?whatspurnedruskinwasthathecould foreseethedaythateverythingwouldbemadebymachineorthatitsprocesses, itsanalogiesandvalueswoulddominateitsoutcomes.heconcludesina footnote, Again(too(much(fuss(and(metaphysics(about(a(perfectly(simple(matter;( inconclusive(besides,(for(the(dishonesty(of(machine(work(would(cease,(as( 361 Colquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.p.ix. 362 TomokoSato,JuhaniPallasmaa,ed.,Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of(Shigeru( Ban.London:BlackDogPublishing/BarbicanArtGallery.2007.pps.14,66.Ban beginstoexploretheideologicaldivideandexplainshisownrecognitionofit. WhilstbanacknowledgesRuskin,MorrisandtheEnglishFreeArchitecture movementasthetruehistoricalrootsofmodernismandaalto ssource,hedoes notrecognizethechristianphilosophicalheritagethatunderpinsand distinguishesit. 363 Colquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.p

123 soon(as(it(became(universally(practiced,(of(which(universality(there(seems( every(likelihood(in(these(days. 364 InwhatappearstobeacontradictiontowhatweunderstandthatRuskinsawas handwork,contemporaryhandworkhasbecometoagreaterextent mechanized whereobjectsareconceivedandhandmadewhilstholdinga philosophicalmachineview.yetruskinhimselfobservedthis,whilsthedoesnot identifyitspecificallyasanontology,hewrites: ʻItindeed,possible,andeven usual,formentosinkintomachinesthemselves,sothatevenhandtworkhasall thecharacteristicsofamechanism;ofthedifferencebetweenlivinganddead handtwork. 365 Theoldargumentsofhandworkthenappearonthefaceofitto nolongerholdtrue,rathertherealargumentisphilosophical,boundupina worldtview. 366 Ironicallyadvanceddigitalmachiningand3Dprintingnow provideopportunitiesforacomplexitythathaslargelyoutgrownoldparadigms ofmachinework.yetgiventhepresentmachineontologycanwefruitfully engageit?handworkasruskinsawitwasanoutworkingofachristian epistemologyandontology,acreaturalviewofmanvaluedasawholebeing, createdintheimageofgod.thisrelationshipmadehimcapableofengagingthe worldaroundhiminahighlydeveloped sensibility withgod,ortouseaquote fromgiorgiovasariwritinginthemid1500 s likegodhimself. 367 InresponsethedevelopmentofthestudioproposalsIhaveidentifiedand returnedtoaspecificaustralianlandscapeatnorseman,westernaustraliaasa referenceformostoftheparticularsoftheworks.thisisnotanewfocus,it startedwithmyundergraduatestudies,thoughnowfindingruskinandaalto giftedandcriticalalliestofurtherexploreitspotentialinanacademicprocess. GivenanumberofoptionsincludingthefactInolongerlivethere,Ihavechosen theplaceforitsprofoundformativeconnectionandrelationship,itsfamiliarity; itistheplaceofmychildhood,anditscontrasts.thelandscapeexhibitssimilar contrastsfoundinaalto'sfinland thatofforestandlake.saitoinhisbookon Aalto,Ten(Selected(Houses(2008)acknowledgesthesignificanceandimpactof thisforaalto(andothers)ascreating worksthatrevealthetracesoftheprimal landscapesandformativeexperiencesoftheirlives. 368 Itbecomesameansof outworkingaprofoundrelationalexperience. 364 JohnRuskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint, 1998.London:Century.p Ibid.p ChristopherAlexander,Notes(on(the(Synthesis(of(Form.Cambridge,Mass: HarvardUniversityPress.1964.p GiorgioVasariandGeorgeBull,The(Lives(of(the(Artists:(A(Selection,Penguin Classics.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks,1965.p YutakaSaito,ĀRuto(No(JūTaku(/(Saito(Yutaka(=(Aalto:(10(Selected(Houses. Ārutonojūtaku,Shohaned.Tokyo:TOTOShuppan,2008.p

124 Fig.36. LakeCowan,Norseman. ForAaltoitwasvirtuallysubarcticFinland,whereasmineisthelargest temperatewoodlandintheworldwiththenormallydrytbedsaltlakenorseman, WesternAustralia.Intheoutworkingofacreaturalviewofnaturefordesign bothruskinandaaltoengagelandscapeasaformativerelationalexperienceas wellasanational/regional/specificlociapproachtodesign. 107

125 Fig.37. Aalto sproperty,islandofmuuratsalo,lakepäijänefinland. 108

126 Fig.38. LakeCowan,Norseman. Ruskin sintroductory. Inhisshort Introductory totheseven(lamps(of(architecture,ruskinestablishes animportantpreconditiontoit sunderstanding.hewritesthatthenatureof architectureisa politicalart, thesubjectoflawsandassuchitisa moral one. 369 Hissecondpreconditiontoanunderstandingofthetext,(whichincludes thefirst)iampersonallycommittedtoalso.thefrailtiesofmyownsoul,makes myworkasalsoruskin s,thelesser,or smaller dependingontheconditionour heartsbeforegod.ruskin saphorism1states Wemayalwaysknowwhatis rightbutnotalwayswhatispossible.heclarifiesthiswiththestatement: while(a(man s(sense(and(conscience,(aided(by(revelation,(are(always(enough,( if(earnestly(directed,(to(enable(to(discover(what(is(right,(neither(his(sense,( nor(conscience,(nor(feeling,(is(ever(enough,(because(they(are(not(intended,(to( determine(for(him(what(is(possible Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p Ibid. 109

127 Ruskinisclarifyingthedifferencebetweenlegalityandwithitlegalismandthe freedomofrevelationgiveswithinitthepossibilitiesoflegality.hisuseofthe term Revelation isonesignifyingthatitisgodbyrevelationwhoprovidesforus whatisrightinfreedomandgrace,itisnotsomethingthatwecandiscerninour ownnature.ruskinunderstandsthechiefaimorpurposeofman swork isto pleasegod andthisisaffirmedbycolossians3: AccordingtoRuskinthere are twoseparatelinesofargument:onebasedontheexpediencyorinherent valueofthework,whichisoftensmallandalwaysdisputable;theotherbasedon proofsofitsrelationstothehigherordersofhumanvirtue,andofits acceptableness,sofarasitgoes,tohimwhoistheoriginofvirtue. He concludes: We(treat(God(with(Irreverence(by(banishing(Him(from(our(thoughts,(not(by( referring(to(his(will(on(slight(occasions.(his(is(not(the(finite(authority(or( intelligence(that(which(cannot(be(troubled(with(small(things.(there(is( nothing(so(small(but(that(we(may(honor(god(by(asking(of(his(guidance(of(it,( or(insult(him(by(taking(it(into(our(own(hands;(and(what(is(true(of(the(deity( is(true(of(his(revelation. 372 (( ( RuskinaffirmsthatrevelationisavailableinarelationshipwiththeCreatorin reciprocatingcommunicationthecreatorisinterestedinthesmallestofour tasks. IpersonallyhavenumerousexperiencestosupportRuskin sthesis,onewhilst completingamaster sdegreein1985attheroyalcollegeofartinlondon.it wasthereiexperiencedtheprofoundandintimatehand,thetouchofgod physicallyonthebackofmyownhandwhilstworkingonachair.theexperience formewasalifetchangingdemonstrationofgod sinterestintheverydetailsand practiceofmywork.suchsupernaturalexperienceschallengesournatural desire,asruskingoesontosay totakethingsintoourownhands, ratheritisan encouragementtotrustandlooktogodinallthings.onewouldexpectthatthe Seven(LampsitselfisanoutcomeofRuskin sownconfessionandexperience,his ownpersonalweaknessesincluded. TheSeven(LampsisaconceptestablishedintheancientHebraictextofZechariah 4:2andtheanalogyofthesevenlampsastheseveneyesofGodwatchingonin therebuildingofthetempleinjerusaleminthelatehalfof500bc.verse4:6 encouragesarelianceongod,hisspiritandhisprovisionofgracetocompleteit; Notbymight,norbypower,butbymySpirit,saiththeLORDofhosts. This reaffirmsruskin s Introductory andhisintentforthosewhowouldreaditand engageitscontent. 371 Ibid.p Ibid.p

128 Studioproposals smalltables. Thefirststudioproposalisaseriesofsmall,lowtablesexploringanumberof coreideas.thesharedpointofreferenceforeachofthetablesiseucalypt umbels,withfruit,chosenfortheirrichnessinbiologicalvariationandvisual languagetoaddresstheaimsoftheresearch. 373 Thereareover700speciesofeucalyptsfoundinAustraliaandtheyarenotedfor theirveryspecificecologies,relationshipsandintercoursesinthelandscape, wherethey pattern theirplace,touseabiblicalreferenceinwhatwemightcall anaccretiveadoration. 374 Eucalyptumbelsarenotablefortheparticularsoftheir forms,ofdiverseandoftencontrarynatures.theyshareaunityasfruitas metaphorswiththeirinherentseedsforreproduction.thechosenreferencesite forthestudioresearch,ofnorseman,hasitsownuniquefruitingmembers. 375 BothRuskinandAaltounderstoodthepotentialofametaphoricalengagement withnature.marctreilbquotestheitalianarchitectcurziomalapartewritingin the1940 sandhisobservationsofaaltoas, everythingthathedescribedborean aurabeyondthephysical;itwasalandofsimilesandmetaphors JuhaniPallasmaaandTomokoSatoeds.,Alvar(Aalto:(Through(the(Eyes(of( Shigeru(Ban.London:BlackDogPublishinginassociationwithBarbicanArt Gallery.2007.p.44.SeeAalto sbiologicalvariation. 374 The(Holy(Bible(Authorized(King(James(Version,Glasgow:WilliamCollinsSons &Co.Psalm98:8andIsaiah55:12speakmetaphoricallyofthetreesofthefield clappingtheirhands andthe mountainsandthehillssingingforjoy. 375 Ibid.Romans1:20Literally speaks oftheevidenceofthenatureofgodas clearlyseeninthecreation. 376 PekkaKorvenmaa,KennethFrampton,JuhaniPallasmaa,Alvar(Aalto.Ed. PeterReed.NewYork:MuseumofModernArt.1998.p

129 Fig.39.E.((Diptera.Norseman. AfocusonfruitanditslanguageintheAustraliannaturallandscapeprovidesa contraryvieworreadingofourenvironment,toonevariouslyportrayedamong otherthingsasbeingunfruitfulwithoutinterventionandsubjugation.inhis beautifulbookeucalyptus((1998),thenovelistmurraybailexploresthe landscapeasvariousintimatememberswithinawholeratherthanparts;he doesthisthroughthecomplexitiesandvibrancyofhumanrelationshipta courtship. 377 InintroducinghisnovelBailfeelscompelledtodescribethe prevailingnotionoflandscapeanditsfigurationinaustralianliteratureas dun coloured andsetsaboutdevelopingtheanalogyofcourtshipasameansof knowing,experiencingandrememberingitspresence. 378 WhilstIshareBail s perspective,ourdisciplinesdifferfromliteraturetovisualarts.myowninterest inthisparticularanalogycomesfromareadingofthebeautifulandancient 377 MurrayBail,Eucalyptus.Melbourne:TextPublishing, Ibid.p

130 HebraictextofThe(Song(of(Songs,apatternthatIhadusedasamodelbefore identifyingtheparallelinbail suseineucalyptus. 379 The(Song(of(Songstext,alternatelyknownastheSongofSolomonbringswithita historyofallegoricalreadinginboththehebraicandchristianliterature.itisa descriptionofintimacywithgod,exploredbyauthorssuchasthesotcalled mystics,medievalwriterbernardofclairvaux(1090t1103),brotherlawrence (1605T1691),MadameJeanneGuyon(1648T1717)tonameafew.The(Song(of( Songstext,likemuchofbiblicallanguagemakesextensiveuseofnature metaphorsinitsexposition,anintenselypoeticlanguage.ruskintentatively explores sensuality and voluptuousness ofline,heiscautiousofhisuseofthe word sensuality prefacingitsusewith thisisastartlingword. 380 Nevertheless hedefinesitinlandscapeas floating,andwavyinitsform;deep,rich,and exquisitelysoftinitscolour;drowsyinitseffect. 381 WecanuseRuskin s descriptionofasensuallinetodescribeaalto suseoflineforitisalso floating andwavy and drowsyinitseffect. Itisasensualandarelaxinglinemorelike thelineoffoldsinfabricthanananatomicone. AquotefromthepainterMarcChagallin1973fromaspeechhegaveatthe openingofamuseumdedicatedtohisworks.hewrites: Ever(since(my(earliest(youth,(I(have(been(captivated(by(the(Bible.(I(have( always(thought(and(still(think(that(it(is(the(greatest(source(of(poetry(of(all( time.(ever(since(then(i(have(looked(for(its(reflection(in(life(and(art.(the(bible( is(a(resonance(of(nature(and(that(is(the(secret(i(have(tried(to(pass(on. 382 ( (( Chagallgoesontosaythat; Forme,perfectioninArtandlifecomesfromthis biblicalsource.withoutthisspirit,themechanismoflogicandconstructionin Artandinlifewillnotbearfruit. 383 ChagallalsodrawsupontheSongofSong s textwithfivepaintingsonthesubject. Teyssot(2013)quotesthephilosopherandculturalcriticWalterBenjamin (1892T1940)andhisfeelfortheprecariousnessinthephilosophicalshiftasit 379 Note:IpersonallywrotetoBailin1998notingtheSongofSongsanalogyand receivedanapparentlyrare,appreciative,handtwrittenletterinreply. 380 JohnRuskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of( Europe(Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character. CharlestonSC:Bibliobazzaar.2007.p Ibid.p KarineBaroued.MuséE(National(Marc(Chigall,(Nice,(Visitors(Guide.Paris: ÉditionsArtlys.2011.p Ibid.p

131 washappening.jugendstilasaprecursortomodernismbenjamincritically appraisedfirstlyasa repression oftechnology, concealing an alibi...innatural history. 384 Benjaminlaterbelieved, thebourgeoisewouldstart tocometo termswiththeconditions...ofitsdominionovernature byintegratingtechnical formsinarchitecture. 385 ForbothRuskinandAaltotheir dominion withintheir ontologydiffersfromamaterialistoneastheyholdtoacreaturalposition. ThoughAaltoappearstorepresstechnologywithhisuseofnaturehe appreciatesthefreedomtechnologybringswhilstbeingitsmaster. Fig.40.Eucalyptumbel,modelforstructure. 384 GeorgesTeyssot,A(Typology(of(Everyday(Constellations.CambridgeMA:MIT Press,2013).p.129.WalterBenjamin,The(Arcades(Project.((1927E1940)Trans. HowardEilandandKevinMclaughlin.(Cambridge,MA:BelknapPressofHarvard UniversityPress.(1999.(pps.226, Ibid.p.129.[p.559] 114

132 InnotingtheparticularqualitiesofthebotanicalsampleIhavechosenforthe referenceforthefirstprototype,initsfreshgreenstatecouldbedescribedas playful,joyful,fruiting,petite,fragile,butflexiblewithaparticularaesthetic sensitivity.toduplicatetheflexibilityinthesampleihavechosenthemodulusof elasticityfoundinspringstainlesssteel,deployingthematerialtoreproducethe elegantandflexiblestructureofthelivingbotanicalsample. Asignificantnumberoflivingplants,likethechosensampleusedeflectionunder load;theabilitytoflex,tospring,toaccommodatestressindynamicwind loadingorimpact,recoveringtheirshapeundernormalconditions.itallowsthe useofmuchfinerdimensionsinstructures.e.(sepulcralis(weepingmallee)isan example. 386 Thechoiceoftheeucalyptbudasthereferencebringsinadditionamodelforthe understructureofthetables,itprovidesinformationaboutlocus whereit wouldnormallybefound,form,relationshipofmembers,materiality,behavior withinstructureandmodelsforconnectionsofmembersandproportions.we haveanopportunitytoinitiateaconversationwithacreatedobjectinits situationalenvironment,asrealismandnotasafracture,abstractorchance,but asarelationalengagement,onenotphilosophicallyorintellectuallyopposedor disconnected. Materials. InchoosingtheuseofstainlesssteelfortheunderstructureofthesmalltablesI amfacedwithadilemmainthechoiceofmaterialidentifiedforitscold,clinical andindustrialfeel.itraisesthequestionofhowidealwiththatandit suseina domesticinterior? Both,RuskinandAaltowrestledwiththeappropriateuseofmaterials,their engagementsarericherthanwhatisgenerallyunderstoodbytheoftentquoted truthtomaterials forwhichruskiniswellknown;ofbeingtruthfultothe materialinthewayitisworkedandconsidered.aaltodescribessteel, particularlychromedsteelas psychologicallycold foruseinfurnitureandhe movesfromsteeltowoodfromwhatcouldonlybedescribedasamoralposition, 386 M.I.H.BrookerandD.A.Kleinig,Field(Guide(to(Eucalypts.(Volume(2.(SouthE Western(and(Southern(Australia.2ndedition.Vol.2.Melbourne:Bloomings Books,2001.p

133 deliberatelyresistingthecontemporarystatusofsteelinallitsmodernity. 387 Aalto sassessmentwouldindicatethatmaterialsofferedasetofsensorial relationshipsthatwereeitherpsychologicallyfriendlyandengagingor unfriendlyanddistanttevenalienating.thoughaaltostartedwithexperiments insteelin1930inlinewithworkofhisinternationalpeers,itwasshortlived, quicklyshiftinghisexperimentationtowood. 388 Fig.41. InteriorofAalto shomeinturku,late1920 swithmarcelbreuersteel tubechairs. 387 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p GöranSchildt,The(Decisive(Years,trans.TimothyBingham.NewYork:Rizzoli InternationalPublications.,1986.p

134 Fig.42. AlvarAalto,VillaMairea(1938T39),interioroflivingroom. AnexampleofAalto sresponsetotheuseofsteelinhisarchitectureistoemploy workcaneasmetaphoricbark,carefullywrappingthesteelcolumnsatkey heightsintheinteriorofhisvillamairea. 389 Healsousesverticalsectionsof woodandrawsaplingsoverlaidonthesteelcolumnsattheentrancetothevilla Mairea(seeFigs.42,44).Thewoodoverlayisrepeatedonthecolumnsatthe entranceofthemaisoncarré. 390 InThe(Seven(Lamps(of(ArchitectureRuskin describesthegreekuseofflutingontheircolumnsasanalogoustobark. 391 Aalto photographsgreekflutedcolumnsthreeyearsbeforestartingworkonthevilla MaireaasseeninFig.43.Aalto suseoftimbercladding,particularlytheexample ofthevillamaireacouldalsobedescribedas bark ofthebuildingreflectingthe characterofthebarkoftheadjacentpinetreesalongwiththeuseofmattblack ceramictilesaroundthebaseoftheexteriorwalls Saito,ĀRuto(No(JūTaku(/(Aalto(:(10(Selected(Houses.pps.342T Ibid.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p Note:WhilstvisitingtheVillaMaireatheguideclaimedthatAaltohad,at someexpense,usedoregonanimportedamericanpine,ontheexteriorcladding 117

135 Fig.43.AlvarAalto,photographofParthenonpillars,Greece1933. ofthevillamaireaforitsredcolouringtoreflectthetrunksofthesurrounding trees. 118

136 Fig.44. Pinus(SylvestrisenclosingtheVillaMairea. Aaltovaluessteelforitsstructuralpossibilities,whilstdefacingitwithwhat modernistwouldcalldecorativeelements. 393 FromhisowndescriptionsRuskin wouldhavebeensympathetictoaalto streatment,asaninteriorelementhe thoughtsteelshouldbecovered,concealed.heproposedtheuseofsteelin architectureessentiallyasatensileelementinkeepingwithitsnatureasit contraststotraditionalbuildingmaterials;theyaretypicallycompressivein strength.atthispointinhiswritingruskinisyettophysicallyseetheextensive useofsteelinarchitecture,suchasthecrystalpalacein1851,buthedoeshave theforesightofitscomingandcautionsitsuse.bothruskinandaaltorecognize apsychologicalimperativetheythenidentifyasmoral,asiftheyfeelconvictedto protectman ssensitivitywithinhisbuiltenvironment.itisasensitivityignored atgreatcostbymuchofmodernism.aaltotypicallyresolveshisproblemwith thesteelcolumnsinarichmetaphoriclifethatischaracteristicofruskin s approachandviews. 393 RichardWeston,Alvar(Aalto.London:PhaidonPressLimited.1995.p.141. See:Weston sdiscussionsofporphyrios viewsonaaltoas neveramodernist. 119

137 Myconflictintheuseofmetalinfurniturefoundsomeresolutionusingthe relationshipof furnitureasjewelry.drawinguponundergraduatetrainingasa jeweleribegantoexploretherelationalaspectsofadornmentfoundinjewelry totestmetalinfurniture.metal,especiallypreciousmetalshavealonghistoryas personaladornment,wornclosetothebodyandontheskin.inproposingthe useofmetalfor furnitureasadornment wearethenchallengedtodiscernwhat isappropriateandwhatisnot,exploringtheparticularrelationshipofjewelryas adornment,itsrelationshipwithmantouseaalto sterms physiologicallyand psychologically. WhilstAalto sperspectiveisnotspecificallythesameasruskin s whenwebuild weshouldbuildforever, itisinclusiveinitsrelationalneedswhichisthecoreof RuskinandAalto sfocusthatbringswithitacontinuity. 394 Itprovideslifefor buildingsandproductsnowandintothefuture,afocusonbeingratherthan becoming. 395 Thoughfirstappearingasjest,onreflectionweseetheclaimsofthe FuturistMarinettitobeeerilyprophetic:...(we(set(up(the(art(of(the(becoming,(the(perishable,(the(transitory(and(the( expendable. 396 TheaimofbothRuskinandAaltowastocreatedeeplyendearingandenduring relationships,andtheirchoicesintheuseofmaterialsisattheheartofit.thisis inoppositionparticularlyforaaltoofthegrowingsetofbeliefsthatyesterday s productsandmaterialsandideaswereinferiortothefollowingdaysinaprocess ofbecomingpropoundingacycleofstyle,offashionandconsumergoods. Myuseofmetalintheunderstructureofthetablesisanattempttoapproachthe object,bringingtoitahistoryofjewelrymakingandtheartofpersonal adornment.professorhermanjünger,knownforhiscontributionto20 th century contemporaryjewelry,distinguishesinhistranslationfromhisnativegerman, thedifferencebetweenadornmentandornament.hedescribesthedifferenceas intrinsicversesextrinsicinitsrelationship. 397 Hedistinguishesbetweenadeeply activerelationasadornmentwithitsengaging,inherentdepthofbeautyandits opposite,abrittle,efflorescent,insubstantial,andultimatelydisconnected relationshipasornament.heidentifiesadeepinternalizationinadornment,in contrasttowhatmightbedescribedasapredominately intellectualandsocial 394 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p DavidHarvey,The(Condition(of(Postmodernity:(An(Enquiry(into(the(Origins(of( Cultural(Change.(Oxford,England,Cambridge,Mass:Blackwell,1989.p Banham,Reyner.Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.London: ArchitecturalPress,1962.p Note:JungerwasspeakinginformallyinaworkshoptutorialhegaveinPerth, WAITin

138 engagement ofornamentifiwecoulduseaalto sassociationfromhisabbé( Coignard s(sermonaddress. 398 Ruskinusesbothwordsinthesamesentencewithapparentdifferentmeanings, albeitsubtle.heprefacestheuseofthetwowordswith decoration andappears todescribe adornment astheactofjudiciouslyapplyingornament. 399 Inboth casesadornmentgives reliefwithoutinterruption tothe generaleffect,thatit isintegraltothewhole. 400 Lookingtonatureforamodel,Ruskinfindsutilitarian andnontutilitarianexamplesforlessonsintheuseofboth. Inusingmetalforfurnitureitiswithironythatoneofthemostcommontrees growingaroundnorsemanise.(salubris.itisnotedforitssinewy,metallic, polishedbronzebark,ofacopperyappearance.indiscoveringandnaminge.( Salubris,theGermanbotanistFerdinandVonMuellerfoundexamplesinthearea around1876.heidentifieswhathetermedits sanitaryimportance,itshealtht givingproperties observingthatthetreehadnumerousoilglandsinitsleavesto supporthisclaim. 401 Onecannothelpthinkthatthetreesunusuallyclean,sleek, hygienic moderntness ofappearancemighthavecontributedtohisconviction. AreadingofTeyssot(2013)fromhissection HygienicstoEugenics givesthe backgroundtotheseideas.teysottexplorestherapiddevelopmentofdarwinist thinkinganditsinfluenceonideasofarchitectureanddesign. 402 Fromthe anonymityoftheundiscovered(towesterneyes)toitsidentificationand description,e.(salubrishasbeengivenaprofoundtouchofbothincongruityand congruity. 398 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ruskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of(Europe( Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character.pps. 163, Ibid. 401 T.Aplin,ed.Eucalypts(of(Western(Australia.Vol.Bulletin4013.Perth,Western Australia:WesternAustralianDepartmentofAgriculture,1979.p Teyssot,A(Typology(of(Everyday(Constellations.pps.58T

139 Fig.45.E.(Salubris,LakeCowan,Norseman. InWestern,Europeanhistory,therearechangesinthenatureoffurnitureasit movesfromthedisciplineofcarpentry,tojoinery,tointeriordesignandfine furnituremaking,tofurnituredesignandarchitecture.ineachphaseitis transformedinit sideasbetweenpractitionerandmaterial,thoughforthemost partwoodisthematerialofchoicefordomesticfurnituretilltheearly20 th century EdwardLucieTSmith,Furniture:(A(Concise(History.London:Thamesand Hudson.1979.Note:LucieTSmithprovidesabriefhistoryofthedevelopmentof furniture. 122

140 Development. Whilstmodelingtheinitialprototypeofthelowtable,theactualprocessof interpretationofthebotanicalsamplebecamethefocuswhentheprototypedid notmatchaestheticintent.asecondandcloserexaminationoftheumbel illustratedthatmymodeofinterpretationwasonethatretorganizedthefacts, essentiallytreatingtheminasimplified,reductionistapproachformanufacture whilstoverlookingthetruecharacterofthesample.thisidentifiesaconscious needfortruthfulness,ofquestioningandplayfulexperimentation;opennessisan essentialdispositionattheheartofthedesignconceptionanddevelopment relationship.anartisticwork,whilstsomewhatmysteriousinitspotential complexityandexecution,isselftevidentinthereadingandthisiswhatruskin andaaltoarguefor. 404 InaselfTevidentreading,nothingishidden,whatone thinksandwhatonedoesisforalltoseeinruskin sview,sustaininghis argumentfortruthfulnessintheapproachtodesign. 405 Fig.46.Eucalyptumbel. 404 GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto,(the(Mature(Years.Trans.TimothyBinham.New York:RizzoliInternationalPublications.1991.p Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.ChII. pps.29t

141 WhilstthenaturalsampleisroughlyquadTfoldinsymmetry,oncloserinspection ithascharacteristicsallofitsown,verycomplexinmeasurement,shapeandline ifoneweretodescribeitinprecisemeasurements.thesamplehasallthe qualitiesthataaltoelucidateswhendescribingtheaestheticofitalianhilltop townsin1924,thedivinelyinspiredmediationbetweenmanandnature: For(me('the(rising(town'(has(become(a(religion,(a(disease,(a(madness,(call(it( what(you(will:(the(city(of(hills,(that(curving,(living,(unpredictable(line(which( runs(in(dimensions(unknown(to(mathematicians,(is(for(me(the(incarnation(of( everything(that(forms(a(contrast(between(the(brutal(mechanicalness(and( religious(beauty(in(life.(it(is(an(everyday(yet(wonderful(form(of(art,(and(one( that(the(modern(age(denies;(indeed,(the(predominant(mentality(goes(to( great(lengths(to(avoid(it. 406 (( Fig.47.Detail.1 st sample,stemandlegjunction. 406 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

142 Thefirstprototypebecameamodelforinvestigatingandillustratingmodesof perceptionfromwhatmightbedefinedas Cartesian to natural ;Cartesian,in thatthestructurehasbeensimplifiedintoregularandpredictablecoordinates, itsmadeto fit aparticularmethodofrecording/describing.asanoutcomeit becomesawayoflooking. 407 Natureappearssymmetricbutitisasymmetrical, orimperfectlysymmetriccelebratingruskin s perfectionofimperfection. Choiceofmanufacturingprocessesandassemblyisvitalinexploringhowa varietyofcomplexoutcomesmightbeachievedwiththetable.asinnature,bya carefulstudy,eachmemberisuniquelydifferenttotheother.adetailed observationoftheparticularsineachplant,geologicalmaterialandthewider landscapeisanessentialreferenceforobservingandtranslatingthesesubtle complexities.thesubsequentobservationofthemexpandedthe experimentationwiththelowtablesfromtheinitialfocusonstructuraland materialexperimentation. Fig.48 Detail.2 nd sample,stemandlegjunction. 407 Loredana.Mascheroni,'Joris&Vico:JorisLaamanConverseswithVico Magistretti,FocusingonTwoDifferentWorldsThatAreUnitedbyIntelligence andirony.'domus,no p.86.see:vicomagistretti saccountof design asalanguagecommunicableoverthetelephone. IbelieveMagistretti saccount issimplisticbutheismakingacontrastthatcontainsatruth.) 125

143 Fig.49.Detail.3 rd sample,stemandlegjunction. Fig.50.Detail.4 th sample,stemandlegjunction. 126

144 Fig.51.Detail.5 th sample,junctionhandcarved. Fig.52.Detail.6 th sample,junction. 127

145 Fig.53.Detail.Clampingassemblywithgrubscrew. Carefullyresolvingthejunctioninordertoachieveaplayfulandjoyfuloutcome, thetransitionbetweenthelegsandthetrunkwasreassessedtoconsider industrialproduction.thejunctionismachinedinasymmetricconfiguration,yet eachlegprovidesintheprocessofassemblyanalmostinfinitevariabilityinthe length,angleandspatialrelationship,anoutcomeduetothecurvednatureofthe legs(springstainlesssteelisshippedinacoil).intheprocessofdecisiontmaking, thecomplexityofferedbythespatialrelationshipsbecomesanintenselyhuman judgment.iwasforcedtorefertotheoriginalbotanicalsampletodiscoverhow itworks. IntotalIexperimentedwithtendifferentjunctions,startingwithatwoTpiece clamptoasingletpiecewithinternalscrewtoholdthelegssecure.i experimentedwiththemassofthejunction,thesizeoftheshaftandlegs,andthe lineoftransitionbetweentheshaftandthejunction.amechanicaljunctionis necessary,asweldingsuchfinesectiondegradesthetemperandspringofthe steelrenderingitunusable.theoutcomeoftheresearchisanoriginal,variable andinventivesolutionwiththepotentialforlimitedindustrialproduction.the 128

146 resultisreliantuponacarefulandsensitivereferencetothenaturalmodel, locus,materialsandfinishesinrelationshiptoa whole. Fig.54.Lowtable,stainlesssteel,redash. ForthetopsofthetablesIhaveexploredbothroundandoutTofTroundshapes, shapesthatappearroundbutarenot.asnotedearlier,theyinvolvefarmore complexdecisiontmakinganddiscernmentinthedesignexperienceandlikewise intheconsequentreadingoftheworkthansymmetric ideal types theytake timewhilstalsoexposingthemannerinwhichwereadourenvironment.ruskin 129

147 usestheexpression raisedbyfeeling rather thancorrectedbyrule. 408 There appearsarbitrariness,complexity,evenchaosinthedecisiontmaking,ortouse Aalto sobservations,it(contains dimensionsunknowntomathematicians, ora mathematical/technicalanalysis,thoughitisarelativelysimpleform. 409 Itisnot anarbitraryposition,orchance,itsimplysatisfiesorconnectswithadeep sensibility.aaltodescribesitlooselyasa religiousbeauty,orbyextensionone spirituallydiscerned,rememberingthathisreferencewastheworkofmedieval artists,buildersandplannersthathehasseeninitaly.beingabletodiscernor connectwiththatsensibilityisalsodependantonone sstateofheartandfocus; it sneveragiven.itisanontology;awayofknowing,seeingandexperiencing theworldthatwearelookingat. Fig.55.Lowtableinstainless,acetal,acryliccoatedRFR. 408 Ruskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of(Europe( Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character.p Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

148 Fig.56.Lowtableinstainlesssteel,ebonizedeucalypt,acryliccoatedRFR. Fig.57.Eucalyptumbel,LakeCowan,Norseman. 131

149 Figs.58,59.Prototype,smalltable,stainlesssteel,Victorianash,acryliccoatedRPR.Detail. 132

150 Fig.60. Eucalyptumbel. Fig.61Prototype,stainless,hooppine,acryliccoatedRFR. 133

151 Fig.62. Detail.Feet. Fig.63. Detail.FiveTlegassembly. 134

152 Sofa. InthisproposalforasofathereferencechosenisanaerialphotographofLake Cowan,mychoiceofsite.ThetownofNorsemanislocatedonthesouthernside, atthewesternendofthelake.thelakeisinexcessof90kilometerslong,upto 25kilometerswideandincludesanumberof islands withinit.thefamed westerlywindscreateashadowtothewesternsideoftheislandswherea concentrationofquartzsand,andsalttbleachedorganicdebriscollectforminga halo particularlywhenseenfromabove.thisreferenceisessentiallygeological thoughithasfloraresidingontheislands.itisfromtheseaerialphotographs thatibegantomodelprototypeforms. Fig.64.Googlesatelliteimage,IslandsonLakeCowan,Norseman. 135

153 Fig.65. Googleimagewithoverlaidimageofmodel. 136

154 Fig.66.Model.Sofa,stone,stainlessandgessooverMDF. WhilstRuskinfamouslyadvocated,asnoted, Anarchitectshouldliveaslittlein citiesasapainter.sendhimtoourhills,andlethimstudytherewhatnature understands. 410 NoonetomyknowledgehasconnectedAalto s imaginary mountain sketchesasthebasisfortheconceptionofmanyofhisbuildingsto Ruskin sinjunction.therearesecondarygeological/landscapereferencestobe foundinaalto swork;theyappeartopographicalinoriginbuthavewider referencesandiwillengagethemhere,asitisappropriatetothisproject. 410 Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.((Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p

155 Fig.67.JohnRuskin,MountPilatus(1854). Fig.68.AlvarAalto, imaginarymountainsketch conceptualizingtheviipurilibrary. ThegeologicalreferencesthroughoutAalto sworkaremostoftenamixtureof profiles,flowing,erodedandfracturedlinesashisearlyreferencetothe medievalpaintermantegnaillustrates.thesamecanbeseenintheworkof 138

156 Mantegna scontemporary,fraangelico,buthewithasofteredge. 411 Theyboth haveamixtureofcartographic,topologicalcontouringandtreatmentofthe landscapeanapproachthatwasfamiliartobothpainters.aaltowritesofhis experienceasachildwhenhedrewathisfather scartographic whitetable whereeccentricprofilingofcontourlineswereameansof describing/documentingthelandscape. 412 Weseetheconnectionparticularlyto Mantegnaashedirectlyreferstohim,thoughAaltowasalsofamiliarwithFra Angelico,referringtohimtoillustrateadifferentidea. 413 Fig.69. Mantegna; AgonyintheGarden (1458T60). 411 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p Ibid.p

157 Fig.70. FraAngelico,SermonontheMount(1437T45). 140

158 Fig.71. FraAngelico,TheTemptationofChrist(1450). 141

159 FraAngelicoalsopaintsthelandscapeabstractedwithcontourlines,butthe linesasrelatingtothefoldsinafabric.weseeanalmostliteralrenditionof AntonioVasari sanalogyof natureasthebeautifulfabricoftheworld. 414 Both MantegnaandFraAngelicoworkedinaperiodwherefabricinformsafocusin thepaintings.itisapossibilitythataaltopicksthisupandworkswithit especiallyinhissavoyvase.infraangelico spainting TheTemptationofChrist, thehillsmimicthefoldsanddrapeofclothingdepictedalsointhepicture,while theshoresofthelakeprovideaprofilesomuchlikeaalto svaseitwouldbe possibletohideitinthispainting.aalto,inanimpudentmanner,suggeststhat hisvaseisdrawnfromapairofeskimowoman sleatherbreeches.hereone imaginestheimitablefoldsoftheleather,orfabricandatanothertimeaprofile ofalakeedge.bothcanbeseeninfraangelico spainting. AcloserlookaroundAalto senvironmentrevealsnumerous,repeatingexamples thathewouldhavebeenexposedto.asectionfromabirchtreeorthepatternon theceilingofthefinnishartsandcraftsbuildingofhvtraskallthesame aestheticsensibility,inthiscaseofafolding,wavyline.ifaaltoistruetohisabbé Coignard ssermonitisthejoyofdiscoveringthislinethatiteratesasanintimate experienceofdiscovery.thespanisharchitectmiguelfisacobservedwhenaalto wasvisitingspain,hispersonalinterestwasnotinthearchitecturehewas shownbutthe detailthatcouldenrichhisthematicforms:theabstractpattern formedbytheraysofthesunonacurtain VasariandBull,The(Lives(of(the(Artists:(A(Selection.p GöranSchildt,Alvar(Aalto;(His(Life,Trans.NicholasMayow,TimothyBinham. Jyväskylä:AlvarAaltoMuseum,2007.p

160 Fig.72.AlvarAalto,Savoyvase.(1936) 143

161 Fig.73.SectionthroughaFinnishbirchtree. Fig.74.ImagefromtheceilingatHvitrask. 144

162 Thegeologicalreferenceforthesofaisnotafracturedandworngeologyasone see sinamantegnaorafraangelico,butasoftlywornformtheresultofthe actionofwaterandmovement,ofgentleabrasionanderosionthoughithasthe softoutlineofafraangelicoshore. Usingthepebbleinthemodelforthesofabringsbotharelationshiptothe landscaperecordedintheaerialphotograph,whilstalsoofferingacomplexity andsubtletyofshapeandlineinthreedimensions,onethatisdifficultto conceivewithoutareference.thisisbornoutbythefactthatindocumentingits subtletyonthedrawingboard,againithastakencarefuleffortandlearningto seethegivenform.thisisnotapreconceivedorgeneralizedform.thestone itselfwaschosenforitssuitabilitytofunction,itstexturaldetailandfinebut subtlecolouring;italsofitswiththecharacteristicsoftheaerialphotograph whenviewedfromabove.thetextureand fabric assuggestedbytheorganic florainthephotographisoverlaidonageologicalbase,itisacharacteristicof landscapethatfloraisoftengeologicallyspecificcreatingarelationshipbetween thetwo. Ruskincarefullyexaminestheworksheappearstodetest.Hispassionanduseof polemicappearprejudicial,hewassimplynotindifferenttopluralismasanorm. Weseeinhisintroductiontoaparagraphonpebblesandhisidentificationof theirforminhistory: ( Often(in(association(with(this(horrible(design(we(find,(in(the(Greek(works,( one(which(is(as(beautiful(as(this(is(painful(e(that(egg(and(dart(molding,( whose(perfection,(in(its(place(and(way,(has(never(been(surpassed.( And(why(is(this?(Simply(because(the(form(of(which(it(is(chiefly(composed(is( one(not(only(familiar(to(us(in(the(soft(housing(of(the(birds(nest,(but(happens( to(be(that(of(nearly(every(pebble(that(rolls(and(murmurs(under(the(surf(of( the(sea,(on(all(it's(endless(shores.((and(that(with(a(peculiar(accuracy;(for(the( mass(which(bears(the(light(in(this(molding(is(not(good(greek(work,(as(in(the( frieze(of(the(erechtheum,(merely(the(shape(of(an(egg.(it(is(flattened(on(the( upper(surface,(with(a(delicacy(and(keen(sense(of(variety(in(the(curve(which( is(impossible(too(highly(to(praise,(attaining(exactly(that(flattened,(imperfect( oval,(which(in(nine(cases(out(of(ten,(will(be(the(form(of(the(pebble(lifted(at( random(from(the(rolled(beach.(leave(out(this(flatness,(and(the(molding(is( vulgar(instantly. 416 ( Thesteelbaseframeinthemodelforthesofawasinitiallyemployedasamatter ofexpediencyinsupportingandconnectingthebasetothebackinits development.asamechanistictlikeelementittroubledme,thoughthereisan elementofsurpriseinitsuse.itprovidedatemporarysolutionandprovedtobe 416 Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.pps. 107,

163 amoreeffectivesolutionthananyotheriexplored.itbotheredmeastowhyit workedatall whatwastheconnectiontomyenvironmentthatgaveitvalidity? IthasthekindofdelineationoflineatajunctionfoundinaMantegnaoraFra Angelicopaintingbutequallyithasthequalitiesofthesilver,mirroredTlike reflectionofthemirageanditsintersectionbetweenthesaltlakeandtherising geology.itisbothalineofcontrast,alineofunityandalinethatisolatesand floatstheformfromitsbase. ( Fig.75.ReferenceislandonLakeCowanwithmirage. 146

164 Sofaconstruction. Thechoiceofconstructionmethodandmaterialsforthesofarecognizesmyown ongoingdifficultywiththeuseofsyntheticfoam.beingadominanttechnology, alternativestofoamappearedtobenontviablebothforthecostandtherequired skillbeingdifficulttofind.it sareminderoftheconditionsthatfacedaugust PugininhisattemptstoreviveMedievalGothicarchitectureintheearly19 th century.puginwasforcedtorevivetheskillsneeded,whichinturnhadits impactonbothruskinandmorriswiththecreationofthephenomenaofthe ArtsandCraftsmovement.Whilstnotproposingtoreviveacraft,theadvantage ofusingnaturalmaterialssuchasspringsandhorsehairasaconstruction methodologyisforitsdurabilityanditsnontuseofenvironmentaltoxinssuchas thosefoundinfiretretardantfoams.asasustainable,thoughapparently redundanttechnology,itisworthinvestigatingtoreassessthevalueofthe materialandhowitcanbepotentiallyused.thehorsehairisorganic,awaste productwithausefullifeofoveronehundredyearscoveringatleasttwo generationsofusers.thedecisiontousehorsehairandspringswasultimately influencedbyaclientwhotookaninterestinthemodel.whilstdesignersand manufacturersarecotdriversinthevaluesthatoperateinmanufacture,the clientorconsumerasweseeinotherareassuchasfoodproductionhas increasinginfluence.althoughmorrislamentedthefactthattheswinishlyrich werehisclientstheydidgivesupporttohisdriveforbetter,valuetbased products.foraalto Cheaperisaphilosophicalpitfall,andaverydangerousone. Atthesametimeitisafalseassumptionthatexpenseequatestogooddesign. 417 Aaltoseesluxuryhousingas moral ifusedasa testingground forarchitects. 418 Technologiessuchasspringsandhorsehairarelaborintensiveandhence 417 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p Ibid.p

165 expensiveinthefirstinstance,butnotasaproductthathascontinuity.itcomes backtoruskin sargumentthatwhenwebuildweshouldbuildforever,andall thatinvolves.inthisexample,thesofacontravenesamodernistideasofthe temporal,thebecoming. Figs.76,77.ZigTzagspringstoformundersidewithdetailoftieTdowns. 148

166 Figs.78,79.Coilspringassemblytopofseatwith6Twayties. 149

167 Fig.80.Istlayerofhorsehaircoveredwithhessianonunderside. Fig.81.2 nd layerofhorsehairshowingties,holdingthehairinplace. 150

168 Fig.82.2 nd layerpriortofeltandcalicocover. Fig.83.Detailofhorsehairandties. 151

169 Fig.84.Seatpriortofinalfabric,calicoovercottonfeltandhair. Fig.85.Steelframeforbaseandback. 152

170 Figs.86,87.CoilandzigTzagspringsforlumbarsupportandshape. 153

171 Fig.88.Firstlayerofhessianoverspringassembly. 154

172 Fig.89.Sofa,withhandwoven,feltedwoolandsilkfabrics. 155

173 Thefabricstocoverthesofa,theirstructureandcolouringwerespecially designedandhandtwovenbyjenniferrobertson,referringtotheaerial photographandthepebbleasareference.againsuchreferencingbrings particulars,richinsubtledetail.handfeltingofbothfabricstoimprovetheir robustnessandarticulatetheirsurfacegavebothanartistic,handtfinish.mary Little,anotedinternationalartistinupholsteredfurniture,developedthecutting patternsandappliedthefinalfabricsinfluencingthefinish.notpersonally havingthenecessaryskillsorexperiencemyself,herinput,whilstconsulting, determinedthefinalresult.boththefabricanditsapplicationtookthework fromanindustrialtypetoonewithartisticoutcomesandaconsistencyinthe wholework.suchinvestigativeactivityhasalwaysthepossibilityofinforming industriallyproducedworks. Creatinganawarenessofthepotentialofneglectedtechnologieslostina Darwinianracetoproducemoreforlesscost,moreprofitforlesswork,mustbe centraltoadesignerthatengagesacreaturalview.theexperiencehasbeen beneficial,bothindevelopingnewwaysofusingthetechnologybutalsohowthe technologymightbefurtherdeveloped.thisparticularlyasitrelatestoecology, healthandthevalueofsacrificewhilstalsocultivatingtheenduringnatureof beautyandpermanence,versesthetransitoryinaproduct.theitaliantheorist anddesignerclinocastellispokeinapubliclectureaboutthenatureof inertia anditsrelationshiptooutcome. 419 Lesstheinertiarequiredtodevelopand manufactureaproduct,thelessthecommitmenttoseeitendure.hecomparesa cheapwatchdrivenbyaquartzmechanismwithaswiss,handmademechanical watch.bothhavethesimilarlevelsofprecisionandfunctionbutcostand disposabilityarenotthesame.sacrificeisavaluethatwillmeanthedifference. Itwouldbeofsomevaluetolookformanufacturersstillusingspringsandhair,if thereareany,toexplorethepossibilitieswithinacontemporarycontext.asa proposalandawork,thesofahasmuchtodemonstrateasapieceoffurniturein thecurrentmarket.whatitprovesmightbesomethingimyself,orothersmay engage,astheworkofanytheoristorpractitioner,likeruskinoraaltohas shown. Thelifeofthesofainafinalanalysiswilldependuponthecommitmentofthe ownertoserviceitintothefuture.itwouldhopefullyreflectitsvaluetothe owneroutofthefullnessofisfunctionandrelationalopportunities. 419 ClinoCastelli.LecturegiventostudentsataDomusAcademyworkshop, RMIT.Melbourne

174 Fig.90.Sofa, S E(2009T2017)wood,stainlesssteel, steelsprings,hair,jute,hemp,cottonwadding,handtwovenwoolandsilkfabrics. 157

175 Cutlery. Thisproposalforcutlerylookstoahistoricalengagementofeatingutensils.A studyoftheeuropeanhistoryoftheartofcutleryrevealsthememoryimparted totheobjectdrawingupontypologieswithreferences,social,spiritual,material andfunctionalconcernsthroughouthistory.itraisesthequestiondoesruskin s LampofMemory preemptdarwinianandantithistoricistideasofhistoryinhis aphorism27, Architectureistobemadehistoricalandpreservedassuch? Ifit weretruethenruskinsees stability and perfection inmemoryanimatedbya metaphoricalorhistoricalmeaning, notstyle. 420 Colquhounidentifiesthe contradictionsinmodernismwhenhesaysthatthe Notionofmodernity explainableonlyinpartbyhistoricism,yetmodernityclearlyrejectshistoricism orisantihistoricist. 421 AaltosharesRuskin svaluingofhistory,particularlyasit relatestolocationandcultureashavingcontinuity.itisanhonest,living, dynamicconnectionandrelation,notaboutdogma,orideals. Fig.91.Eucalyptleafwithsaltencrustation.LakeCowan. 420 Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.(Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p.178, Colquhoun,Modernity(and(the(Classical(Tradition.Introduction. 158

176 Fig.92.Eucalyptleafwithsaltencrustation.LakeCowan. Thegenericterms leafshape, taperingleafshape, leafshapepoint areterms usedinthedescriptionsofbladesinhistoricalworksofcutlery Roy,Strong,Masterpieces(of(Cutlery(and(the(Art(of(Eating.London:Victoria andalbertmuseum.1979.pps.3,4,7,8. 159

177 Fig.93.Varioustypologiesinsampleeucalyptandhakealeaves. ThecutleryproposalhasleavesofnativefloraTevenlitterasitssource;theyare ordinarilyseen seriesoflinestouseruskin swords. 423 Ontheonehandthey challengetheideasofthenew,versestheubiquitoustyettunseeninournatural environment.acontradictionhasbeenwroughtinourfocusonthemachine. Ruskininhisaphorism15of TheLampofTruth intheseven(lamps(admitsthat whilsttheinternalformofgeologyhasacrystalline straightline structure,itis notordinarilyseenandthereforenotconsideredtobebeautifulinthesameway aswhatisseenintheeverydayworld Ruskin,The(Seven(Lamps(of(Architecture.((Introduction(by(Andrew(Saint.p Ibid.p

178 Figs.94,95.Typologiesinsampleeucalyptleaves. 161

179 Fig.96.Variousleafformssomeshowingmodificationsfollowinginsectattack. Hewriteswithaqualification: It(will(evidently(follow,(upon(our(application(of(this(test(of(natural( resemblance,(that(we(shall(at(once(conclude(that(all(perfectly(beautiful(forms( must(be(composed(of(curves;(since(there(is(hardly(any(common(natural(form( in(which(it(is(possible(to(discover(a(straight(line.(nevertheless,(architecture,( having(necessarily(to(deal(with(straight(lines(essential(to(its(purposes(in(many( instances(and(to(the(expression(of(its(power(in(others,(must(frequently(be( content(with(the(measure(of(beauty(which(is(consistent(with(such(primal( forms;(and(we(may(presume(that(utmost(measure(of(beauty(to(have(been( attained(when(the(arrangement(of(such(lines(are(consistent(with(the(most( frequent(natural(groupings(of(them(we(can(discover( ( ( Inmodernismthestraightlinebecomesthelineofthemachine,theefficientline, theuniversalline.thelanguageofthenew,contemporarymachine,thedigital machine,isnowintheformofsegmentsofastraightlinedrivenbyalgebraic equations algorithmsfullofsomewhatdubiouscurves. 426 Thisisnotthe unknownline toaalto s mathematicians, stillitisaprocessandtoolthat challengesustopotentiallybend,toserveusifwecandiscoverwhathis 425 Ibid.p RichardCoyne,Technoromanticism.Cambridge,Mass.:MIT,1999.p

180 unknown lineiswhilstitisalsometaphoric. Thoughadmittingthenecessityofastraightlineinarchitecture,itisstilla violationofnatureforbothruskinandaaltoandanyopportunitytoexplorethe possibilitiesofnaturewastakenbyaalto. 427 Inafascinating observation/proposalbyruskininhisdesignofflatroofshesuggeststhata combinationofstraightlines,theirrelationshipsdeterminedbyaseriesof imaginedcurvesofferedbythelandscapemightfindasensitiveconnection. 428 Fig.97.JohnRuskin,Poetry(of(Architecture Linesfoundineucalyptleaves,inthiscaseselectedindividualleaves,likeAalto s snowflakesorblossomsrepresentsacontrary,boththeideaofstandardization, andtheparticular.ruskinandaalto splayfulapproachisjoyfulwithadelightful senseofdiscoveryandflexibility. Material. Cutleryhasenduredamonoculturewhenitcomestothechoiceofmaterialfor itsmanufacture,particularlygiventhesignificanttechnologicaland manufacturingdevelopments.itisofinteresttoseethatstainlesssteelhas becomeauniversalstandard.blairidentifiesthedishwasherasthesourceof this,butitisnotaltogethertoblame. 429 Acknowledgingtherichmaterialculture ofcutleryinpretmodernism,itisnotablethatutilitarian/functional/economic values,evenlazinesseffectivelyrobbeditofitsmaterialhistory. 427 Saito,ĀRuto(No(JūTaku(/(Saito(Yutaka(=(Aalto:(10(Selected(Houses.p Ruskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of(Europe( Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character.p Strong,Masterpieces(of(Cutlery(and(the(Art(of(Eating.p.xiii. 163

181 Fig.98.Prototypesinstainlesssteelwithsilverferules. ItisfromtheseinitialexperimentswiththecutlerythatIfeltforcedtodiverge,to experimentwithalternativesandretengageitshistory. Aalto suseoftermslike materialism, humanism and functionalism, areeasily slottedintoacontemporaryoragivenhistoricalparadigm.acarefulstudyof Aalto swritingsontheotherhandshowsthathehadaverypersonal understandinganduseoftheterms,eveninhisowncontext.inthebook accompanyinganexhibitionofaalto sworkatthemuseumofmodernartin 1998,subtitled Between(Humanism(and(Materialism thefocusoftheessaysare essentiallymaterialistic,andthoughtheyseektoaddressaalto sideas,oneisleft 164

182 withadeepsensethattheyfallshort. 430 FromthebeginningofhiscareerAaltois clearlynohumanistormaterialistinthemodernsense,butthatishowheis generallyreadinanefforttomakehimfitthecontemporaryparadigm. PresumptionisapitfallinapproachingAaltoratherthanbeingtowhatAaltois saying. KarlFleigworkedinAalto sofficeasanassistantbetween1953and1958.he interviewedaaltoforaswisspublicationin1970wherehedigsdeeperinto Aalto sinductionofformfromfunctionalrequirements,notingthatwithaalto thattherewassomethingmoregoingoninhisprocess. 431 Aalto sresponsewas: Yes(that s(true( (but(whether(the(functional(forms(are(right(depends(on(what( you(mean(by(functional(requirements(and(how(deeply(you(analyze(human(life.( The(three(forms(of(art,(architecture,(painting,(and(sculpture(are(linked(to(one( another(in(that(they(are(all(manifestations(of(the(human(spirit(based(on( material. ( QuestionedoverhisuseoftheGreekword materia, Aaltoresponded; thatitis primarymatterassubstanceyetthewordmateriameansmore,forittranslates purelymaterialactivityintorelatedmentalprocess. Inbringinginmaterialasa thirdpartytotheformandfunctiondebatehedoesnotdirectlyanswerthe questionbutisconsistentinpresentingaprofoundviewofrelationships.for him,materialsthemselvesbringauniqueexperienceintheirinherentnatureas material,withtheinvitationofaphysicalandpsychologicalinterfaceengaging thehumanspirit.aaltocallsita confrontation toresolveasthoughitwerea deepmoralandspiritualdilemma,thoughaliberatingone. FunctionalformsarenotinAalto sviewsimpleutilitarianoutcomestheyareof deepandcomplexreadingofhumanlife,andourengagementwithour environmentofmateriality.aaltoisabletolinkarchitecture,drawingand sculpturethroughmateria(asaunifyingprocess.thisisillustratedinsome outstandingoutcomesworkingfrompencilandinksketchestobuilding,or drawingtoarchitecture.hesaysthat Thelinksinmaterialeaveopenevery opportunityforharmonioussynthesis. Itwouldbeinterestingheretocompare writingandmaking,anddrawingandmakingasitwouldexemplifyadifference inlinksandnontlinksofmateria.fromadesignerandmakersviewthelink betweendrawingandmakingismorenaturalthanthatofwritingandmaking. Aalto smateriahasrootsintheartsandcraftsmovement;materialsforaalto arenotsimplyfitforfunction.hegoesontospeakofhiscontemporarycontext andchallengesintheuseofmaterials: 430 KennethFrampton,Between(Humanism(and(Materialism.Note:itisageneral observationofthecontributingwriterstothebookthattheydonotrecognize norengagewithaalto sownuseoftheterms. 431 Schildt,Alvar(Aalto(in(His(Own(Words.p

183 Every(year(new(synthetic(materials(are(produced(in(semiEindustrial(and( industrial(sectors.( Matter, (however,(requires(time,(and(not(all(new(materials( are(mature(enough(yet(for(human(being(to(make(full(use(of(them.(( Modern(architecture(does(not(mean(the(use(of(immature(materials;(the(main( thing(is(to(refine(materials(in(a(more(human(direction. 432 FromRuskin swriting truthtomaterials couldbesimplyinterpretedasusing materialsinanhonestway,confirmingtheirinherentcharacteristicstechnically andaesthetically.yetlikeaaltothereisanotherdimensiontomaterialsandthat istheirrelational,onemightsayadornmentaspect,andthatisnotoutofkeeping withruskin sideas. Ruskinsimilarlyexpoundsa confrontation. Itisnothoweveraviolentnor subtleattemptatcontrolbutarelationalapproachofhandandheartsayingthat men:.are(continually(trying(to(produce(art(by(the(trick(or(habit(of(fingers,( without(using(their(fancy(or(sensibility.(this(also(is(hopeless.(without( mingling(of(heartepassion(with(handpower,(no(art(is(possible.(the(highest(art( unites(both(in(their(intensest(degrees:(the(action(of(the(hand(at(its(finest,(with( that(of(the(heart(at(it's(fullest.(hence(it(follows(that(the(upmost(power(of(art( can(only(be(given(in(a(material(capable(of(receiving(and(retaining(the( influence(of(the(subtlest(touch(of(the(human(hand.(that(hand(is(the(most( perfect(agent(of(material(power(existing(in(the(material(universe;(and(the(full( subtlety(can(only(be(shown(when(the(material(it(works(on,(or(with,(is(entirely( yielding. 433 ( 432 Ibid.p JohnRuskin,On(Art(and(Life,'ThenatureofGothic'firstpublishedinThe( Stones(of(VeniceVol 'TheWorkofIron,inNature,ArtandPolicy'firstpublishedinThe(Two(Paths 1859.London:PenguinBooks.2004.p

184 Fig.99.Hollowtablewareinmonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel. Thechoiceofmonelmetal,analloyofcopperandnickelforthefinal manufactureofthehollowhandlesofthecutlery,providesbothrigidityand durabilitywithawallthicknessof0.7mm.thetotalweightofeachpiecebrings anairylightnesswithadeliberate,precisesenseofhandlinginuse.whilstgiving asofterandwarmerfeelthanstainless,monelisresponsivetocolouringbyheat oxidizationasshowninfig.102.thealloyiselectrolyticallycompatiblewith stainlessandsilver,dealingwithpotentialcorrosionproblemsinthe dishwasher.theuseofbothmonelandsilverisanoptionthatexploresthe possibilityofmaterialityassociatedwithpatinathatdevelopswithuse,arecord 167

185 ofrelationship.itisacharacteristicthatbothaaltoandruskinlovedabout materials,theirpatina,theirabilitytorecordandexpresslifeasifitwereaspen onpaperforapoet,oracanvasandpaintforapainter.patinaandmaterial,asa thingofbeautyisajoyforeverforbothmen,thepotentialforthesensorial, humantouchandencounterimpartedtoawork. 434 Whenwebuildweshould buildforever isanecessaryrelation. MuchhasbeenmadeofAalto sinterestinpatinaasanantitmodernstatement. RadfordandOksalaintheirarticleAlvar(Aalto(and(the(Expression(of(Discontinuity (2007)andGeorgeBairdinAlvar(Aalto(1970)touchonthis. 435 Schildt disapprovinglyreferstoitas pessimism. 436 RadfordandOksalaspeakofAalto s architectureas discontinuity and decay; Bairdspeaksaboutthearchitectureof ruins.alltheseconceptsarenotrepresentationalassurvivingworksofaalto, particularlyinfinland,arewelllovedandcaredfor.bairdidentifiesaalto s interestas heroic lookingbacktogreeceandrome,thoughruskin sthe(stones( of(veniceandaalto s greatloveofvenice itselfareclosertohome.itwas Ruskin sargumentsaboutthebeautyofpatinathathaschangedthemannerin whichbuildingsareappreciated,preservedandrestored.patinaforbothruskin andaaltoiscontrary;itisaboutthepermanenceofbeauty. 434 ReynerBanham,Theory(and(Design(in(the(First(Machine(Age.London: ArchitecturalPress,1962.p.108.Note:TheFuturistmanifestoof1910andtheir rejectionofpatinaasamoderniststatement,ultimatelydeterminingtheirchoice ofmaterials. 435 AntonyRadfordandTarkkoOksala,'AlvarAaltoandtheExpressionof Discontinuity.'(The(Journal(of(Architecture.(Volume12.Issue3.June2007.George BairdandYukioFutagawa,Alvar(Aalto.London:ThamesandHudson,1970.pps. 11T Schildt,The(Decisive(Years.p

186 Fig.100.Hollowtablewareinmonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel. Thecutleryreinforcesthereferencetotheleafinitshandling,itslightnessand senseofetherealityyetpurposemuchlikeascalpel.thebulbousreturnonthe endsofthehandlesdefiesasenseofawkwardnessandcontradictiontofitwell inthehand.theshapesofthehandlesandbladesgiveasymbolicreferenceto whatmightbeservedasameal.nameshavebeengiventotheindividualshapes; sprout,tuber,legume,leaf,carne,rhizome,citrus,berry,nut,egg,fruit,bulb, squashandcrustacea,thougheachformrelatestoaparticularleafandindividual speciesofeucalypt. 169

187 Givenaselectionofshapesofbothbladeandhandleonehasachoicetomatch whatisbeingserved,tointeractinamoredynamicexperienceofeating. Fig.101.Hollowtablewareinmonel,finesilverandstainlesssteel. 170

188 ThereisasenseofRuskin s grotesque intheformsofthecutlery,something RuskinobservesasanessentialelementofGothic.Itwaschallengetouse inelegantformsgiventhenatureoftheselectionofleavesihadcollected. ThoughthegrotesqueanditsessentialpartinGothicart,hewritesverylittle aboutitinthestones(of(venice,thoughhepartnersitwith witandhumor inhis earlierworkofthe(poetry(of(architecture. 437 BulleninWheelerandWhiteley (1992)drawsattentiontothefactthatVictorHugoandRuskinpointedtothe vitalityandenergy ofthegrotesqueasanimportantideaintheaestheticsof EuropeanRomanticism.Itwasviewedasevidenceofthe lifeandlibertyofevery workmanwhostruckstone, incontrasttothe coldperfectionofclassicism. 438 It isanexpressionofplay,asiseeplayintheworkofthecreator.itisachallenge toappreciatethebeautyofthewholeofcreationwithitsvariedaestheticworks. Theblades forthecutlery,includingtheforkandspoonendsarecutfrom spring,stainlesssteelsheet.pressingorlasercutting,grindingandformingare allconventionalproductiontechniquesusedinthemaking.thejunction betweenthehandleandthebladeshadbeenastumblingblock,theproposition ofthesilverferruleprovidesanadditionalmateriality,thesilverwillpatinain timethoughtheferruledidnotsatisfymyintentwithoutknowingwhatmyreal solutionwas.whilstfinishingthesetpieces,asparehandlewasavailablethati proceededtoplaywith,itwasherethatifoundapossibilitythatissimplerto manufacture,removingtheferrule,andsatisfiestheintentforanalternativeand inventivesolutiontothejunction.thesolutionworksbynotchingintothesideof thebladestangtokeepthelineofthehandleandbladeasone,whilst overlappingontheflatwhereitdoesnotdisrupttheline.chemicalbondingthe tangintothebladeisasimpleprocess,fillingthehollowhandleswithresinisan optionwithoutaddingsubstantialweighttothepieces.tigweldedhandles,as withconventionalhollowmanufacturerequireshandfinishing,albeitwitha machineinterface.itdoesprovidearareopportunitygiventhesubtletyofthe linesofthecutlerytobringthetouchandskillofthehandthatruskinarguesfor. 437 Ruskin,The(Poetry(of(Architecture;(the(Architecture(of(the(Nations(of(Europe( Considered(in(Its(Association(with(Natural(Scenery(and(National(Character.p WheelerandWhiteley,eds.,The(Lamp(of(Memory:(Ruskin,(Tradition,(and( Architecture.p.61.Ruskin,John,10.193T4. 171

189 Fig.102.Hollowtableware,heatoxidizedmonelandstainlesssteel. Utilizingavisualresourceofthatwhichismostordinaryseen eucalyptleaves, bringsfourththatwhichhasbothprecedenthistorically,engagesitscontext,yet isinventive,elegantinitsuseandparticular.ithasprospectsforfurther developmentandmanufacturewithitsconventionaluseofprocessesand techniquesthoughchallengingthewaywemayuseandexperiencecutleryina fuller,relationalsense. Thecutleryproposalsaredevelopedwithasensitivitytoplace,historyofthe objects,environment,howtheworksmightbeusedandthepossibilitiesfor manufacture,alldevelopedwithinacontinuityofvalues.acontinuumispresent intheworksalso,intheiradaptivenaturetoplace,materials,technologyand processesforinventiveandoriginaloutcomes. 172

190 Conclusion. Fig.103.JohnRuskin.AustralianOpal(19 th &20 th centuries). FormepersonallythelegacyofRuskinandAaltohasbeencriticalin understandingwhereifitwithinaparadigmofcontinuity;anaffirmationofthe essentialnatureofmypracticeanditsvalueswithinarichlegacyofacreatural view,andnotassomeironicallysuggestinthecurrentpluralisticcontextas idiosyncratic. Asanexampletoexploreofanyonetakingacreaturalviewintomodernism AlvarAaltohasbeenexemplaryindemonstratingcharacteristicsofwhatthat mightlooklike. 439 ThechoiceofAaltowasbasedoncorrespondencesinhis 439 Note:Thereareothers,suchastheCatalanModernistsAntonioGaudi(1852T 1926)andJosepMariaJujol(1879T1949),importantfiguresontheedgeofearly modernism.pevsnerinpioneers(in(modern(design(1936)strangelyincludes GaudibutexcludesAalto. 173