|
Yale Art and Architecture Building
continued
Rudolph defined the entrance to his building between two soaring concrete canyons on York Street, up a cascade of steps that lead to the second-floor entry doors. This is still the most dramatic way to arrive at Rudolph Hall.
Gwathmey created an entry on York meant to be shared by Rudolph Hall and Loria, but the hierarchy of entry is muddled. Should you explore the canyon or enter through the new, more friendly portal surrounded by glass? The Loria entrance delivers you to the new elevator core, which permits access throughout the two buildings. If you are a regular visitor you will know the entry you want, but first-time visitors will likely be confused.
Then there is the matter of Loria's public face. One would not wish upon their worst architect-enemy the job of designing next to Rudolph's landmark. It is an extremely tall order. The ungloved structural power of Rudolph's building sets an impossibly elemental tone for any normal addition to respond to — short of disastrous copying — not to mention the mixed feelings people have about it.
And the Loria Center is not just any old addition. It is an unsually humane and effective piece of building in its own right.
Yet Gwathmey's addition neither rises to meet Rudolph's power, nor bows clearly to acknowledge the older building's dominance. The Loria Center just looks alien — perhaps too conscious of its skins, vertical metal siding and smooth stone, to rest easily between Rudolph and the little Gothic confection farther north. Loria's status in the ensemble seems a bit ambiguous.
When I asked Gwathmey about the design, he said it would have been a mistake to replicate Rudolph. Agreed. Gwathmey's approach was to make his own building recessive through the use of dark gray zinc, and to give Loria its own identity at the corner by way of the limestone facade. The result is ambiguous at best.
Gwathmey is quick to add that Rudolph's building has always had its detractors, and that people's negative views of Loria will also change over time. Time will tell.
Certainly, the addition effects major change to the pure architectural tableau that three generations of design professionals have memorized since the publication of Ezra Stoller's classic photographs in 1964.
Meanwhile, the work of Rudolph's student in giving new life to his teacher's most important work of architecture is clearly a labor of love. Throughout the reinvigorated masterpiece, that spirit shows.
>>>
Michael J. Crosbie is editor-in-chief of Faith & Form, the chair of the University of Hartford’s Department of Architecture, and a contributing editor to ArchitectureWeek. More by Michael J. Crosbie
Discuss this article in the Architecture Forum...
|