Modified modernism

I share the feelings of our present era that much of Seattle's architecture in the 1950's and 1960's was unfortunate, and represents something of a blight on our landscape. It seems boxy and overly utilitarian, making excessive use of steel and glass. As I discussed earlier, in a post discussing buildings on the University campus, when architects of that period did depart from strict modernism in an attempt to keep a new building from clashing too severely with its neighbors, the results were generally unsuccessful.

But the UW School of Architecture has prepared a very nice documentary film, whose premiere I attended last night, entitled Modern Views, A Conversation on Northwestern Architecture. The film reminds us, first, that Seattle, and the Pacific Northwest in general, were very isolated from the rest of the country during those years, and that, second, their isolation permitted a distinct architectural idiom to arise in this area, much as Australia's isolation permitted totally unique species of animals to evolve on that continent.

Some of the buildings, especially residences designed by the better architects during the '50s and '60s, appear surprisingly attractive and successful, even by today's standards.

The Northwest style grew out of the modernist school as it developed in Europe and the United States before and after World War II, a school that became the dominant approach to architecture in the '50s and '60s. In this country, it is best represented by buildings designed by such architects as Walter Gropius, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe, and Philip Johnson -- buildings that eschewed ornamentation and emphasized pure functionality as an esthetic goal.

Architects educated in this tradition on the East Coast who migrated to the Northwest, however, found themselves influenced by local conditions and by the availability of local materials -- mountains, forests, frequent rain, and extensive coastlines on the one hand, and easy access to inexpensive wood products on the other. They also were influenced by the art of the Northwest Indians and the artistic traditions of Asia. Architects like Paul Thiry, Pietro Belluschi, and John Yeon softened and adapted the modernist style to make extensive use of wood, both structurally and decoratively, and to build structures that would complement rather than overwhelm the existing natural and urban environments.

The film interviewed a number of the architects from that school in their old age, as well as UW scholars of architecture, and exhibited a large number of buildings, both commercial and residential, designed by that school. The interviews confirmed my impression, from professional contacts as a lawyer, that architects, in general, tend to be funny and enjoyable -- as well as sensitive and intelligent -- folks to be around.

In Seattle itself, our typical residences tend to date from an earlier period -- mock Tudors, craftsman bungalows, and other styles popular in the 1920s and 1930s -- but there are also a number of very attractive houses, found mostly in more expensive hillside areas, that are built in the Northwestern modernist vernacular. They are often squarish and somewhat boxy in appearance, but their interiors are open to daylight and to scenic views from the outside; hillside houses have been designed to snuggle into the hillside, with a portion of the house often resting above ground on stilts, so as to cause minimal disruption to the natural surroundings. Practical demands -- dealing with Seattle rains -- often required that the characteristic flat, asphalt roofs of the modernist style give way to moderately pitched, shingled roofs, a modification that enhances the appearance of many of the modernist houses built in this area during that period

Not having an architectural background myself, I found that some of the discussions in the film went over my head. But Modern Views is a beautifully designed film of historic importance. It reminds those of us living here in the "Northwest Corner" of our unique architectural heritage.