1

2

To Bill Hillier, teacher, mentor, friend

3

No one has ever seen an empty place. The moment someone looks, it ceases to be empty – the looker, the looking and the place are all one. Without an

observer there is neither look nor place.

Juan José Saer1

1 SAER, Juan José. Ninguém Nada Nunca. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 1997.

4

Contents Presentation……………………. Preface..................................... Foreword..................................... Squares and plazas................... Natural x built up…………… Attributes of the skin…………. … foetus once again………….. Epilogue……………………..

5

PRESENTATION

This book inaugurates the activities of FRBH Edições press and is also the first pub-lication in its Coleção Bolso [Pocket Collection]. Set up as an individually-run small busi-ness, the press aims to publicize works on culture in general and, more specifically, reflec-tions on architectural configuration on any scale, from domestic to metropolitan space. This is the scope of the research undertaken by the group I coordinate – Dimensões mor-fológicas do processo de urbanização [Morphological dimensions of the process of urbaniza-tion], registered in the Brazilian Research Council-CNPq’s Diretório de Grupos de Pesquisa no Brasil [Directory of research groups in Brazil]. The initial motivation was to create a medium for publicizing the group’s intellectual production: dissertations, theses, conference papers and essays of various kinds. However, since our group is in close contact with vari-ous other research groups in Brazil and abroad, the press is also designed to be a vehicle available to them. We shall be honoured to meet their demand! The narrow range of vehi-cles for publicizing research in architecture, a scientific discipline rapidly becoming consoli-dated, will thus be widened.

The pocket format aims at making bibliographic output available at low cost, thus benefiting researchers, teachers and students in architecture and associated fields as well as the general public with an interest in such topics. They are small-format books, printed in black and white on cheap paper, but with good printing and binding quality, and a design that will mark out the press’s visual identity. Moreover, the books are to be supplemented by other media such as the Internet: we have created a web page (http://www.fredericodeholanda.com.br) the contents of which will supplement the printed matter with larger-dimension, colour illustrations, animations, films, audio presentations etc. The page already provides links to books previously published or organized by our group – and will do so with greater frequency, no doubt, as the new press gets into its stride.

The present text was written as a chapter of O arquiteto Oscar Niemeyer [The archi-tect Oscar Niemeyer], organized by Sylvia Ficher and Andrey Schlee. I am grateful for their permission to publish it separately as an independent book before it appears in the set to which it rightly belongs. Owing to greater availability of space, this version is longer than the original and contains more illustrations. Aiming at a wider reading public and with a view to enhancing our interaction with research groups abroad, it is presented in a bilingual English/Portuguese edition (the translation into English, including the epigraph and the poems by João Cabral de Melo Neto was made by Mark David Ridd, to whom I am ex-tremely grateful). This will improve conditions for disseminating ideas, in an exchange process that will, we trust, benefit all involved.

Brasilia, October 2nd, 2010. Frederico de Holanda

6

PREFACE

AIR LIGHT REASON TRUE

Unless I am mistaken, Stamo Papadaki was the first researcher to publish a mono-

graph on Oscar Niemeyer's work for an international readership. This was a few years after

the classic Brazil Builds2 had revealed to the wider world the prodigies of modern Brazilian

architecture. In the introduction to his The work of Oscar Niemeyer, the first of three books

he devoted to the architect, Papadaki3 echoes the consensus historiographers in Brazil had

already reached regarding the factors engendering his magnificent architectural oeuvre:

Niemeyer’s design approach was to be conditioned by the vestiges of

the colonial baroque and by the climatic and physical aspects of his country.

The luxuriant Baroque of Portugal, born among the austere Iberian contours,

never had such an appropriate setting as in the tropical and sub-tropical

backgrounds of many parts of Brazil. On the other hand, humidity and high

temperatures compel a generous use of space as much as landscapes, ranging

from fantastic to magnificent, make mandatory their incorporation into the

architectural scheme. Thus we see in Niemeyer’s buildings views carefully se-

lected and framed, breezes trapped and channeled, spaces with their own inte-

rior horizons, providing the inhabitant with more than a minimum of “suffi-

cient” living environment. […] And his wandering, baroque inspired lines,

becoming structural realities through the reinforced concrete frame, intermar-

ry with the sinuous of the small alluvial valleys and the enclosing high moun-

tains formation.” (PAPADAKI, 1950: pp. i-j)

Papadaki remarks how the tropical climate and landscape, the baroque of Iberian

lineage and the sinuous contours wrought from reinforced concrete combined to produce a

novel unity which is the bedrock and touchstone of Niemeyer's work. His critical eye spots

2 GOODWIN, P.L. Brazil builds: architecture new and old, 1652-1942. (Photography by G.E. Kidder Smith) New York: The Museum of Modern Art, 1943. 190p. 3 Stamo Papadaki published three monograph studies on the architect: PAPADAKI, S. The work of Oscar Niemeyer. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation, 1950, p. 220; PAPADAKI, S. Oscar Niemeyer: works in progress. New York: Reinhold, 1956. 192p.; PAPADAKI, S. Oscar Niemeyer. New York: George Braziller, 1960. 127p.

7

how certain aspects of the buildings he had designed to date imbue them with singular

quality in the way they fulfill programmatic functional requirements: “Niemeyer is able to

conceive and justify the empirical space that creates distances, perspectives, islands of re-

pose, necessary for a normal intercourse of human beings under the same roof.” Papadaki is

sensitive enough to perceive how deftly Niemeyer handles the raw material of architecture –

space. He moulds it, under diverse conditions, to secure interaction between “human be-

ings.”

In Of glass and concrete, Frederico de Holanda delves into space as it is figured in

Niemeyer's architectures. He analyses the way internal and external space relate to each

other. Rather, he offers a critique of the manipulative gesture manifest in the architectural

envelope. Eschewing any attempt to grapple with the grandure and complexity of an oeuvre

in full development, this critical account is precious because it reveals the architect's mas-

tery in coming to terms with the prime function of architecture: forging environments for

man's use and enjoyment. It also argues that some of the more recent works are less effi-

cient in promoting a permanent, intense exchange of bodies and desires in the context of

today's cities.

According to Hillier,4 occupation and movement are the generic functions of archi-

tectural space. Any portion of space can be occupied for a variety of activities besides serv-

ing for the displacement of our bodies. Hence, occupation and movement are the necessary

means for forging relationships between people. Sharing the same place or establishing eye

contact in the same or in distinct environments are conditions mediated by the material

and spatial characteristics of architecture. Shared presence and awareness are, therefore,

essential socio-spatial mechanisms for framing our daily lives.

The relation between the continuous, open spaces that constitute urban space par

excellence and the discontinuous, closed spaces that comprise buildings determines the ex-

tent to which public places afford shared presence and shared awareness. Hence, it dictates

the way movement and occupation take place in our cities. Each building's envelope estab-

lishes relations of access and transparency between the two spheres (public and private)

regardless of the activities they are designed for or the symbolic attributes they have been

4 HILLIER, B. Space is the machine: a configurational theory of architecture. Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press, 1996.

8

assigned. All architecture thus performs the same role, irrespective of its value – as a good or

sign, in the author's own terms.

By taking this approach to Oscar Niemeyer's works, Holanda questions how much

his buildings serve to characterise the urban spaces in which they are set. His desacralization

or demystification, if you will, of iconic works of 20th-century architecture like the Minis-

try of Education & Public Health building in Rio de Janeiro (subsequently renamed the

Gustavo Capanema Palace), the Pampulha complex in Belo Horizonte, the Ibirapuera Park

in São Paulo, and the Cathedral in Brasilia – to name a few of the major works Holanda

examines – provides the reader with an analytical framework capable of penetrating beyond

the curves and volumes, the baroque inspiration and the sunny tropics.5

If the art of designing is the art of instilling order into human life, Holanda shows

us how, as his career develops, Niemeyer creates ever more modern urban environments,

progressively shutting off interior spaces and distributing doors and windows in such a way

as to minimise shared presence and shared awareness in the cities that host his buildings.

Niemeyer's work develops from an architecture “like building doors to open; or like fram-

ing the open,” to an architecture “where spans would open, he walled up dark to shut;

where glass, concrete sheer; till man re-pent,” in the words of João Cabral de Melo Neto's

concrete lament, and the consequences of this transition for the cities concerned are (and

will be) significant. The effects of this closed off building, this separating of bodies, this

emptying out of spaces, urban space in particular, are perceptible to yesteryear and today's

urbanites in their increasingly sealed-off, separate, humdrum lives. Holanda himself has

already vividly described the emergence of a particular form of modern urban design in his

classic study “The negative determination of the modern movement.”6 In this context, Os-

car Niemeyer's work is unexceptional. Indeed, like so many others, it makes but a modest

contribution – for its emergence stems from haphazard promotion of an array of individual

actions – to the consolidation of a specific form of city.

5 Niemeyer himself has actually encouraged this type of critical approach: “It is not the right-angle that attracts me nor the straight, hard, unyielding line of man's creating. What attracts me is the flowing, sensual curve, the curves I encounter in my country's mountains, in the sinuous course of its rivers, in the waves of the sea, in the body of a beloved woman. Curves comprise the universe, Einstein's curved uni-verse.” (NIEMEYER, Oscar. Minha arquitetura: 1937-2005 [My architecture, 1937-2005]. Rio de Janei-ro: Editora Revan, 2005, p. 339.) 6 See HOLANDA. F. (org.) Arquitetura & urbanidade [Architecture & urbanity]. São Paulo: Pro Editores, 2003.

9

At the dawn of the 21st century and as the greatest Brazilian architect of last and

maybe of this century has turned a hundred, the desire to inaugurate a building that bear

his signature is the urge of politicians eager to put their personal stamp on the future. It

similarly delights intellectuals with a fondness for tardy manifestations of our seductive

modernism. It draws ordinary folks from every corner of the world, for his works are always

a source of interest for the ever larger legions of tourists – for ours is an age of fleeting

movement and the economy of leisure and spectacle. After all, a key ingredient in the recipe

for developments designed to renew the urban landscape is the unveiling of a magnificent

opus by the master of his craft.

For those itching to purchase e genuine ON-brand article, we recommend careful

reading of the arguments and analyses Frederico de Holanda has to proffer. Then perhaps

the next batch of commissions to alight at the emblematic penthouse on the Copacabana

seafront will be attended by certain caveats: we want the urban designer architect Oscar

Niemeyer who has so sagely bequeathed us buildings that foster full interaction between

spaces – interiors and exteriors, be they landscapes or urban surroundings – promoting de-

sirable friction between the beautiful bodies of the citizens of the world.

Long live the urban designer Oscar Niemeyer, “when he is more of an architect”!

Long live the sharp, discriminating quill of Frederico de Holanda!

Long live our architectures and cities to “unleash reason, light and air”!

Recife, November 26, 2010

Luiz Amorim Associate Professor Universidade Federal de Pernambuco Researcher (CNPq)

10

OSCAR NIEMEYER: OF GLASS AND CONCRETE

Fable of an architect

Architecture like building doors to open; or like framing the open;

building not to maroon or bind nor building secrets to conceal;

building doors open… onto doors; houses naught but doors and roof.

The architect reveals for man (open homes might heal the world)

doors-through-which, not doors against; by which to unleash reason, light and air.

2.

Till from fear of the untold free he spurned living in the open clear.

Where spans would open, he walled up dark to shut; where glass, concrete sheer;

till man re-pent: in chapel-womb, pampers of the nave, foetus once again.

João Cabral de Melo Neto7

Foreword

This text examines relations between internal and external space in Oscar Nie-

meyer’s architecture. How does his architecture treat these relations? Can one identify a

dominant mode? Have transformations taken place with the passage of time? What impli-

cations ensue from this aspect of his work?8

7 MELO NETO, João Cabral de. Poesias completas (1940-1965). Rio de Janeiro: Editora Sabiá, 1968, p. 20-21. [Fábula de um arquiteto A arquitetura como construir portas, / de abrir; ou como construir o aberto; / construir, não como ilhar e prender, / nem construir como fechar secretos; / construir portas abertas, em portas; / casas exclusivamente portas e tecto. / O arquiteto: o que abre para o homem / (tudo se sanearia desde casas abertas) / portas por-onde, jamais portas-contra; / por onde, livres: ar luz razão certa. // 2. / Até que, tantos livres o amedrontando, / renegou dar a viver no claro e aberto. / Onde vãos de abrir, êle foi amurando / opacos de fechar; onde vidro, concreto; / até refechar o homem: na capela útero, / com confortos de matriz, outra vez feto.] (The original spelling in the Portuguese has been maintained.) 8 I would like to acknowledge support in researching the present paper in the form of a Research Produc-tivity Grant from the Brazilian National Council for Scientific & Technological Development (CNPq).

11

Naturally, the concepts underpinning analysis will determine the approach to the

questions posed herein. What follows is a preliminary description of the theoretical tenets

informing the subsequent analysis of Niemeyer’s work, ideas taken up and developed

throughout the text. I thus indicate the relevant aspects to be considered, explain the rea-

sons for choosing them, and suggest what might be gained by adopting this particular ana-

lytical framework.

Notions of internal and external space are the bedrock of elementary architectural

design: delimiting a portion of space from within the general space of Nature by introduc-

ing a “filter ” – the envelope consisting of floor, walls, roof and a variety of other compo-

nents (e.g. Niemeyer’s curved concrete surfaces) – or simply by blocking off the entrance to

a cave. The envelope filters attributes of natural space, creating transformed space to suit

both practical purposes (architecture thus acquiring material use value as a good) and ex-

pressive ends (architecture as ideal use value, as a sign).9 The terms good and sign encapsu-

late the two broadest ways in which architecture performs its role.10

Architecture as an artefact comprises the following components: 1) the spatial enve-

lope or “skin” which, by its closings off and openings, opacities and transparencies defines

2) internal space, whose attributes are determined by the nature of the skin (light, sounds,

temperature, smells, diverse possibilities of movement and visibility), distinguished from 3)

the external space to which internal space relates according to the attributes of the skin (any

orifices or transparencies).11

9 “Signs” are manifest when an artefact is imbued with a design beyond the merely utilitarian. (No culture has been content to treat its artefacts – whatever they may be – simply as useful objects.) In architecture, when buildings or sets of constructions cease to be mere shelters against the elements or constructions organised around the activities they serve, they acquire the status of language expressing collective val-ues. They become signs by which a culture recognises itself, objects seeking to attain beauty. (PULS, Maurício. Arquitetura e filosofia. [Architecture and philosophy] São Paulo: ANNABLUME, 2006, p. 27-8.) 10 Elsewhere I have divided architecture’s “performance aspects” into eight categories: functional, bio-climatic, economic, sociological, topoceptive, affective, symbolic and aesthetic. The first four categories relate to architecture’s role as a good and the latter four to its role as a sign, though the frontiers between categories are fairly fluid. These “performance aspects” underpin the present analysis although it is the attributes of the work that are to the fore here, and these can relate (as they generally do) to several kinds of performance. (For definitions of these aspects see HOLANDA, Frederico de. “Arquitetura sociológica” [Sociological architecture]. XII Encontro Nacional da ANPUR - Anais em CD-ROM. Belém: ANPUR, 2007; “topoceptive” is a neologism coined by KOHLSDORF, Maria E. A apreensão da forma da cidade [Apprehending the city’s form]. Brasília: Editora da Universidade de Brasília, 1996, describing potential for orientation and visual identity in architecture). 11 The idea is inspired by but is not entirely coincidental with Hillier & Hanson’s “elementary cell”. (HILLIER, Bill, HANSON, Julienne. The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).

12

Various solutions articulate internal and external space by means of the skin. They

can, though, be reduced to a parsimonious syntax consisting of two main forms or analyti-

cal categories: 1) closing / opening to the movement of people, and 2) opacity / transpar-

ency to view. The first category (closing / opening) relates to the physical relation between

places, to the possibility of moving directly between inside and outside. This is an essentially

practical, instrumental aspect, one of accessibility, denoting architecture as a good. (“Clos-

ing” is used lato sensu here: the absence of doors interrupting façades or any other artifice

employed to keep interior separate from exterior, e.g. staircases leading to a piano nobile,12

water surrounds, motes, differences of level surmounted by ramps etc.). The second cate-

gory (opacity / transparency) relates to visual perception of inside and outside, to the possi-

bility of being aware of what is on the other side of a plane or barrier, to the faculty of see-

ing through the skin. This, by way of contrast, is an essentially expressive aspect, denoting

architecture as a sign.13

Be it simple or elaborate, the skin is manipulated to provide relative ease of access to

the interior or exterior and relative visibility of the inside or outside. That is all that matters

to us here. From a fairly simple field of variability spring abundant architectural solutions

much akin to the virtually limitless possibilities of use for a finite lexis in literature.

Border cases exemplify the typology. The Great Pyramids of Giza illustrate extremes

of both kinds of variability: totally opaque masses and absolutely closed volumes, access to

the interior (tomb) being located well above ground level, marked by use of the same mate-

rial employed in the envelope (stone) to seal up the opening. Opacity and closing are

maximised (more recent works by Niemeyer illustrate something very similar). The oppo-

site can be seen in, for instance, Burle Marx’s Flamengo Park (Rio de Janeiro), discounting,

for the sake of reasoning, the barriers the road system creates. It is, indeed, a space trans-

formed by filters/skins demarcating distinct places within the park, all radically open and

transparent in themselves. Mineral elements (hard surfaces, sand, pebbles) and vegetal ele-

12 The first floor reserved for the “noble” functions of public buildings or manor houses – sugar plantation estate houses in the Brazilian northeast, their equivalents on coffee plantation estates in the south, aristo-cratic villas in Italy etc. The ground floor, meanwhile, is reserved for support services, servants’ quarters and so forth in such cases. 13 “Essentially” in both cases because the way in which “closing/opening” varies can also constitute a sign (as with castles in the Loire Valley), and forms of “opacity/transparency” can equally be instrumen-tal, e.g. vigilance in Jeremy Bentham’s “panopticon” (studied by FOUCAULT, Michel. [American edi-tion] Discipline & punish: the birth of the prison. (Trans. Alan Sheridan) New York: Vintage Books, 1995; [Brazilian edition] Vigiar e punir – nascimento da prisão. Petrópolis: Vozes, 1977.).

13

ments (covers, shrubs or trees) lend the different points their distinctive character. The en-

velopes are minimal but none the less real. Urban parks have neither walls nor roof. This is

the opposite pole, one of maximised transparency and openness. (Much reduced in inten-

sity, the “superblocks” in Brasilia possess features similar to those of an urban park – not

surprisingly, Lucio Costa dubbed his urban design a “park city”.) Despite this, the place is

artefactual. Light and shade, temperature, wind and noise have all been manipulated to

achieve certain practical or expressive effects, it being of little import that the components

have been borrowed from nature. Vegetation and occasional equipment serve as filters dis-

tinguishing one spot from another: although one can move (maximised opening) and see

(maximised transparency) in almost any direction, some areas are more or less accessible,

more or less visible, distinctions issuing from the skin between them. Besides favouring the

perception of a structured whole and the consequent establishment of a clear image in our

minds, differentiation helps us chose to stay in certain locations or follow certain paths be-

cause they are more comfortable, more sensorially stimulating, more attractive or simply

because they suit our individual preferences.

Between these extremes lies a very varied repertoire comprising diverse cultural re-

alities or artistic outlooks.14 In his “Glass House”, for instance, Philip Johnson maximises

the transparency of domestic space open to the outside thus creating a “flat”, generic light

inside the house. Richard Meyer does something similar in his Douglas House. By way of

contrast, such luminosity is unthinkable in a Japanese home where the interplay of opacity

and transparency and translucent paper panels mediate subtly between inside and out, pro-

pitiating elaborate differentiations of light and shadow that provide a “tepid cosiness”15.

(Meyer’s Douglas House surely invites affection but does “cosiness” feature on the list?...)

Richard Neutra uses beautiful columns and “spider-leg” pergolas to mark out virtual planes,

creating transitional spaces between interior and exterior where light, temperature and

sound are distinct from both inside and outside. Luiz Barragán, meanwhile, combines

openness and opacity: doors opening directly onto the street yet houses built with heavy

masonry walls, lighting in the rooms frequently zenithal or indirect, quite the opposite of

14 E.g. on the scale of sets of buildings (villages, towns, cities, metropolises) there is a connection be-tween closing/opening and social inequality (HOLANDA, Frederico de. O espaço de exceção [Space in a state of exception. Brasilia: Editora Universidade de Brasília, 2002). 15 “... feeling of tepid cosiness (...) we Japanese feel ill at ease in the presence of bright objects...” (TANIZAKI, Junichiro. In praise of shadows. (Trans. T.J. Harper & E.G. Seidensticker) New York: Vin-tage, 2001. Brazilian edition: Em louvor da sombra. São Paulo: Companhia das Letras, 2007.)

14

Neutra’s “dematerialised” architecture. The colonial terraced houses in a Brazilian town

(Pirenópolis, Goiás State, for example – Fig. 1)16 combine the transparency of the windows

giving directly onto the pavement, providing mutual visibility between dwellers and pass-

ers-by (encouraging idle chat, perhaps even flirting), with an invitation to drop in suggested

by front doors frequently left open. With the Ibirapuera Park marquee (Fig. 2), Niemeyer

attains slightly more filtered space than in Burle Marx’s Flamengo Park: in addition to the

mineral paving and the vegetation the marquee winds through to connect the buildings,

there is the cover altering light and temperature. The Moorish balconies of Brazilian colo-

nial architecture promote duplicitous views: those inside can see those outside but not the

reverse. The Mayas in Pre-Columbian America built pyramids (prospective tombs) topped

by temples (Fig. 3). The stairways on the sides of the pyramids are an artifice linking the

surrounding area (public space) to the entrance to the temple (sacred space) yet keeping

interior strictly separate from exterior. The steps leading up to entrances of palaces and

manor houses and the corresponding piano nobiles serve the selfsame function: they are

artifices for separation, albeit milder ones (Fig. 4). That, too, is the purpose of fences or

walls surrounding the progressively more concealed spaces of buildings or urban areas, e.g.

the Palace of Versailles or Historical Peking where concentric walls distinguish Outer City,

Inner City, Imperial City and Forbidden City (Fig. 5). The strategy adopted for opacity or

closing off marks one period out from its predecessor: blind walls (opaque, closed) distin-

guish modern cities from pre-modern ones. The special transit areas of expressways carrying

the constant flow of motor vehicles onto which no buildings open, contrast starkly with

spaces for staying put that feature traditional streets. And let us not claim, like Le Cor-

busier, that the modern city emulates Venice where streets for pedestrians are separate from

waterways for gondolas and steamers: both are intensely and consistently “fed” by doors

and windows. The opposite holds in modern urban design.

16 The illustrations of the book are available in larger-dimension and colour in http://www.fredericodeholanda.com.br. For other publications about Oscar Niemeyer’s ouvre, with good colour illustrations, see for example: ANDREAS, Paul, FLAGGE, Ingeborg. Oscar Niemeyer – a legend of modernism; NIEMEYER, Oscar. Minha arquitetura – 1937-2005.

15

Fig. 1. Openness and transparency in terraced colonial houses, Pirenópolis (Goiás State,

Brazil).17

Fig. 2. Ibirapuera Park, São Paulo. Marquee.

17 The illustrations in the book in printed form are black and white. The colors explore the possibility of this medium.

16

Fig. 3. Maya pyramid, Tikal, Guatemala.

Fig. 4. Manor house and chapel at Engenho Poço Comprido (Pernambuco State, Brazil).

17

Fig. 5. Peking. Imperial City. Walls and moat.

The examples provided illustrate this text’s analytical categories (closing/opening,

opacity/transparency) and the attributes by which they are accomplished (access by monu-

mental stairways or doors opening directly onto the street, transparent glass skins or opaque

walls etc.). I have thus far simply described a field of variability without going into the mer-

its of particular degrees of closing/opening or opacity/transparency. This is reserved for the

main section of the paper where the practical or expressive reasons sustaining positive or

negative assessment of these attributes are fleshed out. Rather than being extensive, analysis

of Niemeyer’s work focuses on the attributes that explain its qualities or defects from the

present standpoint, i.e. internal vs. external space relations.

Let us return to the questions posed at the outset. Does Oscar Niemeyer’s architec-

ture consistently explore a particular range of variation on the closing/opening and opac-

ity/transparency scales? Are perceptible variations related to a particular phase of his work,

to architectural themes, to the built up or natural surroundings or to any other aspects?

How do the architect’s choices affect people vis-à-vis the various performance aspects of his

architecture, be they practical (architecture as a good) or expressive (architecture as a sign)?

In answering these questions I shall not adopt a broad-sweeping or especially chronological

approach to Niemeyer’s vast oeuvre. Instead, I shall tackle the issues that seem most perti-

18

nent to me, concentrating on the work I am acquainted with in loco. Likewise, as one might

expect of an objective examination of reality, I shall focus on the work itself, not on what

the architect himself or others have to say about it (commentaries are cited merely to illus-

trate interesting circumstances of each design).