 |
 |
The Challenge
Design in Time
This competition was an invitation to design the experience of time through architecture. At a fundamental level, to design the transformation of an existing building means to confront the existence of architecture in time. Built over sixty years ago, the Cranbrook Academy of Art Museum and Library undeniably belongs to a “different” time. How was this “other” time relevant to “our” time?
If time was deposited or registered in architecture, then designers are asked to make proposals that take a critical position towards the parts of Cranbrook Academy of Art that are marked by relevant time, and those in which time was irrelevant. On the basis of this distinction, projects should express their philosophy for retaining or eliminating the various elements of the existing buildings. By extension, designs should visualize innovative strategies for depositing or building up our time in the architecture of Cranbrook.
The Cranbrook History
Cranbrook’s campus is synonymous with the promotion of avant-garde architecture. Since its founding in 1904 by George Booth, the Detroit publisher and philanthropist, the institution has invited generations of forward-thinking architects to build on its grounds. Eliel Saarinen, Rafael Moneo, Steven Holl, and Todd Williams and Billy Tsien are but a few of the world class architects who have left their indelible mark on the campus. Each of these architects was chosen because of their unique ability to relate to and enhance Cranbrook’s historic built environment without imitating it.
From its inception, Cranbrook was conceived as an experiment in education, which gave primacy to craft-making as an edifying endeavor essential to a well rounded individual. This philosophy was made extraordinarily popular in architecture during the 1940s and 1950s by Cranbrook professors such as Charles Eames and Eero Saarinen (Eliel’s son). The buildings on campus are an important part of the Cranbrook pedagogy. They are regularly used by teachers to explain architecture to students. The Cranbrook Schools, for instance, are seen as works in progress, upon which every class of graduating students adds their mark, with some artistic inscription or installation. This process of “reworking” the existing buildings is also a lesson in preservation design, which is the conscious redesign of our material heritage with the marks of our current time, and an expression of how we value that heritage. Competition participants should consider how their projects will be used to teach students about architecture, and how it will change in light of their emerging preservation design ideas.
Redesigning the Library and the Museum
In the past, Cranbrook’s building campaigns have involved expansion, with extensions to existing structures or the construction of new isolated buildings. The future of Saarinen’s Library and Museum present a different sort of architectural problem. The site constraints mean that the expansion of the library and the museum cannot proceed as entirely independent buildings. The transformation must therefore find opportunities for the library and the museum to share spaces, while retaining their individual identity.
Saarinen conceived the Library and the Museum as interrelated programs. Both share the function to provide inspiration to art, design and architecture students. It was not just the books, paintings and sculptures contained in the buildings that were meant to arouse creativity. The architectural “containers” were also meant to stir the imagination. To focus the attention of visitors on this idea, Saarinen created one building with three distinct parts: two enclosed volumes, the library and the museum, are related through a dramatic open air propylea, a symbolic allusion to monumental classical architecture. The library and the museum share the same architectural entrance, which offers the double reading of the structure as either one unified building or as two different entities.
The double architectural expression underscores an important shared program of the library and the museum. Both are institutions entrusted with the preservation of culturally significant artifacts. To carry out their mission, the library and the museum cannot simply “store” these treasures. Preservation involves giving visitors the opportunity to experience these objects in new an meaningful ways. The respective staffs of the Cranbrook Library and Museum would like visitors to experience the historic Saarinen buildings as part of their “collection” of culturally significant artifacts. Competition projects should consider how their architectural interventions will provide new ways to experience the Cranbrook Academy’s books, artworks, and historic buildings.
Changing Technology
The idea of the library and museum has evolved dramatically in recent years, but the physical transformation of these buildings has yet to be seriously interrogated. New technologies such as audio-guides and the internet have multiplied the ways visitors interact and learn from the collections. The adoption of these technologies responds to society’s changing attitudes towards cultural artifacts. How should these changing social attitudes be expressed in the transformation of the Cranbrook Library and Museum?
Visitors to libraries and museums today want to “participate” in the life of the museum. That is, they want to be more than simple spectators, and join in the creative interpretation of their culture.
This idea of blurring the boundary between creator and curator was not new to Cranbrook, where the collections were always meant to be reinterpreted by students into contemporary expressions. Perhaps because of this, the Cranbrook Academy of Art Museum and Library have now become popular destinations for outside visitors. While adapting to the pressures of increased visitation, Cranbrook must continue to serve the needs of its students and faculty. How can technology be appropriately integrated in the redesign of the Saarinen buildings to serve these internal and external constituencies? Competition participants should consider how digital technology may be used to enhance how these two types of visitors experience the books, art and architecture of Cranbrook.
Current social attitudes require that technology be “environmentally friendly.” Today, the Saarinen buildings, which were naturally cooled and ventilated, would be considered “green.” But current museological standards require that art be experienced under a constant temperature and humidity. How can new technologies be integrated to enhance the environmental responsiveness of the historic buildings without undermining Saarinen’s design intent and the learning experience it has to offer?