Jørn Utzon and the Sydney Opera House
I have never been particularly interested in architecture. I remember when Andrew would ask me "What's the architecture like?" (in particular about Cambridge I think) and I would reply "I don't know, it's a building".
The architecture tour started at the Museum of Sydney, which we had not yet come across in our travels. However, it looks interesting so we may go back one weekend. The tour involved more talking than I expected and less walking, which was not what I had had in mind; we walked directly from the Museum to the Opera House, which was not very far at all. This, however, turned out to be a good thing.
The tour was fascinating from the start. I don't think I had ever realised that architects have great visions before they start building somewhere. I had always considered building as either functional or decorative. According to our tour guide (an architect himself) the Opera House is a combination of
1. a representation of the topography of Sydney (the edges of the land go very sharply i.e. orthogonally into the water); this is represented by the orthogonal steps
2. the billowing clouds above; this is represented by the white domes.
However, even better than this (from my slightly more functional perspective) is that in order to make this building realise his artistic aims, Utzon applied all kinds of cleverness: all the functional bits that are needed in buildings but are better hidden have been put in the steps, he came up with a very effective way of creating the white domes and he designed the inside of the Opera House to be acoustically close to perfect (this was an amazing achievement, however for reasons I shall come on to Utzon's design for the interiors was not implemented).
The reason that the Opera House was built at all was interesting: the premier of Australia was dying, and as his legacy organised a competition for a building, without budget and without timescales. Only a politician who does not need to be re-elected can propose something so crazy.
And it didn't last: the Labour party lost power in Sydney in 1965; this was unprecedented and they were not expecting it. The incoming Liberal party seized on the (unfinished) Opera House as an example of all that was wrong with the Labour party: over budget, over timescales, employing foreign workers and designed for the elite (it's for Opera). I won't go into all the aspects of the talk, there were too many and all too interesting (even our tour guide ran out of time to say all the things he wanted to) but suffice to say in traditional bureaucratic style (not, so it would seem confined to the left as commonly believed) they constructively dismissed Utzon and finished the Opera house with local architects.
So, the base and domes are Utzon, but the great glass windows and the interior are the subsequent designers. You can see the difference. What's more, the acoustics that were put in place were absolutely useless and there is no evidence that leaving Utzon alone would have cost any more money (even for the better result it would have achieved).
Throughout the Utzon debate architects have been split, but a recent enhancement to the house was awarded to a pro-Utzon architect. He took the job only if he could then offer it to Utzon and in order to get Utzon involved (Utzon was understandably reluctant) offered him a bribe of being able to write a document explaining the overall site design. The enhancement (to my mind) has turned out to be an amazing success (although a very small piece of the house); one thing that I found throughout the talk is that Utzon is clearly an architectural genius (or appears so to a novice such as myself - maybe a lot of architects can produce amazing buildings).
I can't find a picture that demonstrates the brilliance of the extension, "The Colonnade" (what an omission from the Opera House website!) so I shall endeavor to explain.
Windows (and doors) have been put into one of the walls of what is used as a foyer. (The windows were not originally there as it was not supposed to be a foyer; this came about as a result of lack of space.) The walls of the windows are angled sharply inwards and the glass has been placed on the outside. From the outside it does not make exciting viewing. But from the inside it looks as if squares have been cut in the wall and frame the view. The views from the windows look like pictures. If you're ever in Sydney, go and take a look.
Utzon's document describing the design is here.
I have never been particularly interested in architecture. I remember when Andrew would ask me "What's the architecture like?" (in particular about Cambridge I think) and I would reply "I don't know, it's a building".
The architecture tour started at the Museum of Sydney, which we had not yet come across in our travels. However, it looks interesting so we may go back one weekend. The tour involved more talking than I expected and less walking, which was not what I had had in mind; we walked directly from the Museum to the Opera House, which was not very far at all. This, however, turned out to be a good thing.
The tour was fascinating from the start. I don't think I had ever realised that architects have great visions before they start building somewhere. I had always considered building as either functional or decorative. According to our tour guide (an architect himself) the Opera House is a combination of
1. a representation of the topography of Sydney (the edges of the land go very sharply i.e. orthogonally into the water); this is represented by the orthogonal steps
2. the billowing clouds above; this is represented by the white domes.
However, even better than this (from my slightly more functional perspective) is that in order to make this building realise his artistic aims, Utzon applied all kinds of cleverness: all the functional bits that are needed in buildings but are better hidden have been put in the steps, he came up with a very effective way of creating the white domes and he designed the inside of the Opera House to be acoustically close to perfect (this was an amazing achievement, however for reasons I shall come on to Utzon's design for the interiors was not implemented).
The reason that the Opera House was built at all was interesting: the premier of Australia was dying, and as his legacy organised a competition for a building, without budget and without timescales. Only a politician who does not need to be re-elected can propose something so crazy.
And it didn't last: the Labour party lost power in Sydney in 1965; this was unprecedented and they were not expecting it. The incoming Liberal party seized on the (unfinished) Opera House as an example of all that was wrong with the Labour party: over budget, over timescales, employing foreign workers and designed for the elite (it's for Opera). I won't go into all the aspects of the talk, there were too many and all too interesting (even our tour guide ran out of time to say all the things he wanted to) but suffice to say in traditional bureaucratic style (not, so it would seem confined to the left as commonly believed) they constructively dismissed Utzon and finished the Opera house with local architects.
So, the base and domes are Utzon, but the great glass windows and the interior are the subsequent designers. You can see the difference. What's more, the acoustics that were put in place were absolutely useless and there is no evidence that leaving Utzon alone would have cost any more money (even for the better result it would have achieved).
Throughout the Utzon debate architects have been split, but a recent enhancement to the house was awarded to a pro-Utzon architect. He took the job only if he could then offer it to Utzon and in order to get Utzon involved (Utzon was understandably reluctant) offered him a bribe of being able to write a document explaining the overall site design. The enhancement (to my mind) has turned out to be an amazing success (although a very small piece of the house); one thing that I found throughout the talk is that Utzon is clearly an architectural genius (or appears so to a novice such as myself - maybe a lot of architects can produce amazing buildings).
I can't find a picture that demonstrates the brilliance of the extension, "The Colonnade" (what an omission from the Opera House website!) so I shall endeavor to explain.
Windows (and doors) have been put into one of the walls of what is used as a foyer. (The windows were not originally there as it was not supposed to be a foyer; this came about as a result of lack of space.) The walls of the windows are angled sharply inwards and the glass has been placed on the outside. From the outside it does not make exciting viewing. But from the inside it looks as if squares have been cut in the wall and frame the view. The views from the windows look like pictures. If you're ever in Sydney, go and take a look.
Utzon's document describing the design is here.
posted by Zoe at 10:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home